pull▌
odysseus0/symphony · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
Do not ask for input unless there is no safe, reversible alternative. Prefer
- ›making a best-effort decision, documenting the rationale, and proceeding.
Pull
Workflow
- Verify git status is clean or commit/stash changes before merging.
- Ensure rerere is enabled locally:
git config rerere.enabled truegit config rerere.autoupdate true
- Confirm remotes and branches:
- Ensure the
originremote exists. - Ensure the current branch is the one to receive the merge.
- Ensure the
- Fetch latest refs:
git fetch origin
- Sync the remote feature branch first:
git pull --ff-only origin $(git branch --show-current)- This pulls branch updates made remotely (for example, a GitHub auto-commit)
before merging
origin/main.
- Merge in order:
- Prefer
git -c merge.conflictstyle=zdiff3 merge origin/mainfor clearer conflict context.
- Prefer
- If conflicts appear, resolve them (see conflict guidance below), then:
git add <files>git commit(orgit merge --continueif the merge is paused)
- Verify with project checks (follow repo policy in
AGENTS.md). - Summarize the merge:
- Call out the most challenging conflicts/files and how they were resolved.
- Note any assumptions or follow-ups.
Conflict Resolution Guidance (Best Practices)
- Inspect context before editing:
- Use
git statusto list conflicted files. - Use
git difforgit diff --mergeto see conflict hunks. - Use
git diff :1:path/to/file :2:path/to/fileandgit diff :1:path/to/file :3:path/to/fileto compare base vs ours/theirs for a file-level view of intent. - With
merge.conflictstyle=zdiff3, conflict markers include:<<<<<<<ours,|||||||base,=======split,>>>>>>>theirs.- Matching lines near the start/end are trimmed out of the conflict region, so focus on the differing core.
- Summarize the intent of both changes, decide the semantically correct
outcome, then edit:
- State what each side is trying to achieve (bug fix, refactor, rename, behavior change).
- Identify the shared goal, if any, and whether one side supersedes the other.
- Decide the final behavior first; only then craft the code to match that decision.
- Prefer preserving invariants, API contracts, and user-visible behavior unless the conflict clearly indicates a deliberate change.
- Open files and understand intent on both sides before choosing a resolution.
- Use
- Prefer minimal, intention-preserving edits:
- Keep behavior consistent with the branch’s purpose.
- Avoid accidental deletions or silent behavior changes.
- Resolve one file at a time and rerun tests after each logical batch.
- Use
ours/theirsonly when you are certain one side should win entirely. - For complex conflicts, search for related files or definitions to align with the rest of the codebase.
- For generated files, resolve non-generated conflicts first, then regenerate:
- Prefer resolving source files and handwritten logic before touching generated artifacts.
- Run the CLI/tooling command that produced the generated file to recreate it cleanly, then stage the regenerated output.
- For import conflicts where intent is unclear, accept both sides first:
- Keep all candidate imports temporarily, finish the merge, then run lint/type checks to remove unused or incorrect imports safely.
- After resolving, ensure no conflict markers remain:
git diff --check
- When unsure, note assumptions and ask for confirmation before finalizing the merge.
When To Ask The User (Keep To A Minimum)
Do not ask for input unless there is no safe, reversible alternative. Prefer making a best-effort decision, documenting the rationale, and proceeding.
Ask the user only when:
- The correct resolution depends on product intent or behavior not inferable from code, tests, or nearby documentation.
- The conflict crosses a user-visible contract, API surface, or migration where choosing incorrectly could break external consumers.
- A conflict requires selecting between two mutually exclusive designs with equivalent technical merit and no clear local signal.
- The merge introduces data loss, schema changes, or irreversible side effects without an obvious safe default.
- The branch is not the intended target, or the remote/branch names do not exist and cannot be determined locally.
Otherwise, proceed with the merge, explain the decision briefly in notes, and leave a clear, reviewable commit history.
How to use pull on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add pull
Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
The skills CLI fetches pull from GitHub repository odysseus0/symphony and configures it for Cursor.
Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Reload or restart Cursor to activate pull. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /pull) or your agent's skill management interface.
Security & Verification Notice
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use Cases▌
User Story & Requirements Generation
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Competitive Analysis
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Roadmap Prioritization
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Stakeholder Communication
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
- ›Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
- ›Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
- ›Stakeholder contact information and communication channels
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Installation Steps
- 1.Install product management skill
- 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
- 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
- 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
- 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
- 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
- 7.Share effective prompts with product team
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
- ⚠Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
- ⚠Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
- ⚠Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
- ⚠Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
- +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
- +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
- +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
- +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
- +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition
✗ Don't
- −Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
- −Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
- −Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
- −Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
- −Don't ignore company-specific context and culture
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
- ★Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
- ★Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
- ★Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
Learning Path▌
- 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
- 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
- 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
- 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
Ratings
4.5★★★★★30 reviews- ★★★★★Pratham Ware· Dec 20, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: pull is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Anika Gonzalez· Dec 20, 2024
pull fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Chaitanya Patil· Dec 12, 2024
Useful defaults in pull — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- ★★★★★Yusuf Agarwal· Dec 8, 2024
We added pull from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Layla Chen· Nov 27, 2024
pull reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Henry Bhatia· Nov 11, 2024
Registry listing for pull matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Piyush G· Nov 3, 2024
pull is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- ★★★★★Shikha Mishra· Oct 22, 2024
Keeps context tight: pull is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Sakura Zhang· Oct 18, 2024
Registry listing for pull matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Mia Reddy· Oct 2, 2024
pull reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
showing 1-10 of 30