lsp-safe-edit
Über
Diese Fähigkeit wendet Code-Änderungen sicher an, indem sie zunächst eine Vorschau der Änderungen anzeigt und LSP-Diagnosen vergleicht, bevor sie auf die Festplatte schreibt. Sie führt Änderungen nur aus, wenn sie keine neuen Fehler einführt, und zeigt schnelle Lösungen an, wenn Probleme auftreten. Entwickler sollten sie für risikofreies Refactoring und Datei-übergreifende Änderungen mit integrierter Validierung verwenden.
Schnellinstallation
Claude Code
Empfohlennpx skills add blackwell-systems/agent-lsp -a claude-code/plugin add https://github.com/blackwell-systems/agent-lspgit clone https://github.com/blackwell-systems/agent-lsp.git ~/.claude/skills/lsp-safe-editKopieren Sie diesen Befehl und fügen Sie ihn in Claude Code ein, um diese Fähigkeit zu installieren
Dokumentation
Requires the agent-lsp MCP server.
lsp-safe-edit
Wrap any code edit with a before/after diagnostic comparison. Speculatively previews the change in-memory before touching disk, then diffs errors introduced vs. resolved after applying. If errors appear, surfaces code actions to fix them.
Prerequisites
LSP must be running for the target workspace. If not yet initialized, call
mcp__lsp__start_lsp with the workspace root before proceeding.
Auto-init note: agent-lsp supports workspace auto-inference from file paths.
Explicit start_lsp is only needed when switching workspace roots.
Input
- target file(s): One or more files to be edited (absolute paths).
- description of change: What you intend to edit and why.
Workflow
Step 1 — Open target file(s)
Call mcp__lsp__open_document for each file that will be edited:
mcp__lsp__open_document(file_path: "/abs/path/to/file.go", language_id: "go")
Step 2 — Capture baseline diagnostics (BEFORE)
Call mcp__lsp__get_diagnostics for each target file. Store as BEFORE.
For multi-file edits, collect diagnostics for all files involved.
BEFORE = mcp__lsp__get_diagnostics(file_path: "/abs/path/to/file.go")
If the server returns an empty list immediately after open, wait briefly and retry — LSP analysis is async.
Step 3 — Speculative preview (preview_edit)
Before touching disk, call mcp__lsp__preview_edit to preview the
error delta of the intended change:
mcp__lsp__preview_edit(
file_path: "/abs/path/to/file.go",
start_line: <N>,
start_column: <col>,
end_line: <N>,
end_column: <col>,
new_text: "<replacement text>"
)
Returns net_delta (new errors introduced minus errors resolved) without
writing to disk.
Decision:
net_delta | Action |
|---|---|
| ≤ 0 | Proceed — edit improves or does not worsen error state |
| > 0 | Pause. Report introduced errors to user and ask: "Proceed anyway? [y/n]" |
If net_delta > 0 and user says "n", stop. Do not apply the edit.
Multi-file edits: preview_edit covers one file at a time. For
edits spanning multiple files, run it for each file independently and sum the
deltas. If any file shows net_delta > 0, pause before continuing.
When to skip Step 3: If the intended change is a new file (Write), there is no existing file to simulate against. Skip to Step 4.
Step 3b — Refactor preview with simulate_chain (renames and signature changes)
Use this step instead of or after Step 3 when the change is a rename, signature change, or any edit with dependent follow-on edits (e.g., updating all call sites after adding a parameter).
simulate_chain applies a sequence of speculative edits in-memory and reports
whether the cumulative change is safe — without touching disk:
mcp__lsp__simulate_chain({
"workspace_root": "/abs/path/to/workspace",
"language": "go",
"edits": [
{
"file_path": "/abs/path/to/file.go",
"start_line": <N>, "start_column": <col>,
"end_line": <N>, "end_column": <col>,
"new_text": "<replacement>"
},
// additional dependent edits (e.g. call site updates) ...
]
})
Returns:
cumulative_delta— net error change across all stepssafe_to_apply_through_step— how many steps are safe to apply in sequence
Decision:
cumulative_delta | safe_to_apply_through_step | Action |
|---|---|---|
| ≤ 0 | = total steps | All steps safe. Proceed to Step 4. |
| ≤ 0 | < total steps | Safe up to that step. Review remaining steps. |
| > 0 | any | Net regression. Report to user before proceeding. |
When to use Step 3b:
- Renaming an exported symbol and updating its call sites
- Adding/removing a parameter and updating all callers
- Any multi-file refactor where edits are order-dependent
When to skip Step 3b:
- Simple in-place edits with no dependent follow-on edits (Step 3 is sufficient)
- New file creation (no existing text to simulate against)
Step 4 — Apply the edit to disk
Apply the change using the Edit or Write tool:
- Use
Editfor targeted replacements in an existing file. - Use
Writeonly when creating a new file or doing a full rewrite.
Edit(file_path: "/abs/path/to/file.go", old_string: "...", new_string: "...")
For multi-file edits, apply each file's changes before collecting post-edit diagnostics (Step 5). If any individual edit fails, stop and report before applying remaining files.
Step 5 — Capture post-edit diagnostics (AFTER)
Call mcp__lsp__get_diagnostics again for each edited file. Store as AFTER.
AFTER = mcp__lsp__get_diagnostics(file_path: "/abs/path/to/file.go")
For multi-file edits, collect diagnostics for all files and merge the results.
Step 6 — Compute the diagnostic diff
Compare BEFORE and AFTER:
- Introduced = diagnostics in AFTER not in BEFORE (new problems).
- Resolved = diagnostics in BEFORE not in AFTER (fixed problems).
Match by (file, line, message) tuple to handle line-number shifts. Treat
error and warning severity separately.
Step 7 — Surface code actions if errors were introduced
If any new error-severity diagnostics appear, call mcp__lsp__suggest_fixes
at each error location to surface quick fixes:
mcp__lsp__suggest_fixes(
file_path: "<file>",
start_line: <error line>,
start_column: 1,
end_line: <error line>,
end_column: 999
)
Report available code actions to the user:
Errors introduced (2):
file.go:34 — undefined: MyType
→ Code action: Import "mypackage" (quickfix)
file.go:51 — cannot use int as string
→ No code actions available
Apply code actions? [y/n/select]
If the user accepts, apply the code action's WorkspaceEdit via
mcp__lsp__apply_edit, then re-collect diagnostics and re-diff.
Step 8 — Format (optional)
If the diagnostic diff is clean (net change ≤ 0), offer to format the edited file via the language server:
mcp__lsp__format_document({ "file_path": "/abs/path/to/file" })
Returns TextEdit[]. If non-empty, apply immediately:
mcp__lsp__apply_edit({ "workspace_edit": <TextEdit[]> })
Skip if the user did not ask for formatting, or if there are unresolved errors (fix errors before formatting).
Step 9 — Report using DiagnosticDiffFormat
Output the final summary:
## Edit Summary
Files changed: N
Errors introduced: A → Errors resolved: B (net: A-B)
Warnings introduced: C → Warnings resolved: D
### Introduced errors
- file.go:34 — undefined: MyType
### Resolved errors
- file.go:12 — unused variable: x
Decision Guide
| Net change | Action |
|---|---|
| 0 | Safe. No new errors. |
| Negative | Net improvement — errors resolved. Safe. |
| Positive (after code actions) | Do NOT commit. Offer to revert. |
When net change > 0 after code actions:
- Show the full list of remaining introduced errors.
- Offer to revert using the original
old_stringin a follow-upEditcall. - Wait for user decision before proceeding.
Do not commit or stage files when net change > 0.
Multi-file workflow
For edits spanning multiple files (e.g., changing a function signature and all its call sites):
- Open all files in Step 1.
- Collect BEFORE diagnostics for all files.
- Simulate each file independently in Step 3 — sum
net_deltavalues. - Apply edits file by file in Step 4 — stop on first failure.
- Collect AFTER diagnostics for all files and merge.
- Check code actions on any file showing new errors.
Report the combined diagnostic diff across all files in the final summary.
GitHub Repository
Verwandte Skills
executing-plans
DesignVerwenden Sie die Fähigkeit "executing-plans", wenn Sie einen vollständigen Implementierungsplan zur Ausführung in kontrollierten Batches mit Überprüfungspunkten vorliegen haben. Sie lädt den Plan und überprüft ihn kritisch, führt dann Aufgaben in kleinen Batches (standardmäßig 3 Aufgaben) aus und meldet den Fortschritt zwischen jedem Batch zur Überprüfung durch den Architekten. Dies gewährleistet eine systematische Implementierung mit integrierten Qualitätskontrollpunkten.
requesting-code-review
DesignDiese Fähigkeit sendet einen Unteragenten für Code-Review, um Codeänderungen anhand der Anforderungen zu analysieren, bevor fortgefahren wird. Sie sollte nach dem Abschließen von Aufgaben, der Implementierung größerer Funktionen oder vor dem Zusammenführen in den Hauptzweig verwendet werden. Die Überprüfung hilft dabei, Probleme frühzeitig zu erkennen, indem die aktuelle Implementierung mit dem ursprünglichen Plan verglichen wird.
connect-mcp-server
DesignDiese Fähigkeit bietet Entwicklern eine umfassende Anleitung, um MCP-Server über HTTP-, stdio- oder SSE-Transports mit Claude Code zu verbinden. Sie behandelt Installation, Konfiguration, Authentifizierung und Sicherheit für die Integration externer Dienste wie GitHub, Notion und benutzerdefinierter APIs. Nutzen Sie sie beim Einrichten von MCP-Integrationen, bei der Konfiguration externer Tools oder bei der Arbeit mit Claude's Model Context Protocol.
web-cli-teleport
DesignDiese Fähigkeit unterstützt Entwickler bei der Wahl zwischen Claude Code Web- und CLI-Schnittstellen basierend auf Aufgabenanalysen und ermöglicht nahtloses Session-Teleporting zwischen diesen Umgebungen. Sie optimiert den Workflow, indem sie den Sitzungsstatus und Kontext beim Wechsel zwischen Web, CLI oder Mobilgeräten verwaltet. Nutzen Sie sie für komplexe Projekte, die in verschiedenen Phasen unterschiedliche Werkzeuge erfordern.
