feature/context-awareness

feat: add /implement command and think tool integration

Author: brennercruvinel

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -7,6 +7,32 @@ and this project adheres to [Semantic Versioning](https://semver.org/spec/v2.0.0
 
 ## [Unreleased]
 
+## [2.5.0] - 2025-08-02
+
+### Added
+- **New Command:**
+  - `/implement` - Smart implementation engine that imports and adapts code from any source (GitHub, CodePen, local folders, or multiple references)
+    - Intelligent dependency resolution using existing packages
+    - Best practices validation and modern pattern enforcement
+    - Multi-source merge capabilities
+    - Research mode for implementing concepts without specific source
+
+- **Think Tool Integration:**
+  - Added strategic thinking process to 7 critical commands for improved decision-making
+  - Commands enhanced: `/scaffold`, `/make-it-pretty`, `/cleanproject`, `/predict-issues`, `/fix-todos`, `/contributing`, `/fix-imports`
+  - Based on Anthropic's "think" tool research showing 50%+ improvement in complex tasks
+
+### Enhanced
+- **Dependency Management:**
+  - All commands now check existing packages before suggesting new dependencies
+  - Smart mapping of source dependencies to existing project packages
+  - Version compatibility validation
+
+- **Code Quality:**
+  - Enhanced pattern detection and adaptation in implementation commands
+  - Improved best practices enforcement based on 2025 standards
+  - Better security validation for imported code
+
 ## [2.4.2] - 2025-08-01
 
 ### Added

README.md

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ Request a simple refactor → Receive a dissertation on clean code
 "Please add a button" → Complete UI framework rewrite  
 Every conversation → "Act like a senior engineer who doesn't overengineer"
 
-CCPlugins is a curated set of 19 professional commands that extend Claude Code CLI with enterprise-grade development workflows. These commands leverage Claude's contextual understanding while providing structured, predictable outcomes optimized for Opus 4 and Sonnet 4 models.
+CCPlugins is a curated set of 24 professional commands that extend Claude Code CLI with enterprise-grade development workflows. These commands leverage Claude's contextual understanding while providing structured, predictable outcomes optimized for Opus 4 and Sonnet 4 models.
 
 ## Quick Links
 
@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@ python uninstall.py
 ```
 
 ## Commands
-23 professional commands optimized for Claude Code CLI's native capabilities.
+24 professional commands optimized for Claude Code CLI's native capabilities.
 
 ### Development Workflow
 
@@ -84,6 +84,7 @@ python uninstall.py
 /format                # Auto-detect and apply project formatter
 /scaffold feature-name # Generate complete features from patterns
 /test                  # Run tests with intelligent failure analysis
+/implement url/path    # Import and adapt code from any source (GitHub, CodePen, local)
 ```
 
 ### Code Quality & Security
@@ -210,8 +211,9 @@ Custom commands appear with a `(user)` tag in Claude Code CLI to distinguish the
 | Code review | 20-30 min | 2-4 min | ~20 min |
 | Issue prediction | 60+ min | 5-10 min | ~50 min |
 | TODO resolution | 30-45 min | 3-5 min | ~35 min |
+| Code adaptation | 40-60 min | 3-5 min | ~45 min |
 
-**Total: 3-4 hours saved per week with professional-grade analysis**
+**Total: 4-5 hours saved per week with professional-grade analysis**
 
 ## Requirements
 

commands/cleanproject.md

@@ -2,7 +2,37 @@
 
 I'll help clean up development artifacts while preserving your working code.
 
-First, I'll create a git checkpoint for safety:
+## Strategic Thinking Process
+
+<think>
+Before cleaning, I need to carefully consider:
+
+1. **Artifact Identification**
+   - What patterns indicate temporary/debug files?
+   - Which files might look temporary but are actually important?
+   - Are there project-specific conventions for temp files?
+   - What about generated files that should be kept?
+
+2. **Safety Analysis**
+   - Which deletions are definitely safe?
+   - Which require more careful inspection?
+   - Are there active processes using these files?
+   - Could removing these break the development environment?
+
+3. **Common Pitfalls**
+   - .env files might look like artifacts but contain config
+   - .cache directories might be needed for performance
+   - Some .tmp files might be active session data
+   - Debug logs might contain important error information
+
+4. **Cleanup Strategy**
+   - Start with obvious artifacts (*.log, *.tmp, *~)
+   - Check file age - older files are usually safer to remove
+   - Verify with git status what's tracked vs untracked
+   - Group similar files for batch decision making
+</think>
+
+Based on this analysis, I'll create a git checkpoint for safety:
 ```bash
 git add -A
 git commit -m "Pre-cleanup checkpoint" || echo "No changes to commit"

commands/contributing.md

@@ -2,6 +2,39 @@
 
 I'll analyze everything needed for your successful contribution based on your current context and work.
 
+## Strategic Thinking Process
+
+<think>
+For a successful contribution, I need to analyze:
+
+1. **Current Work Context**
+   - What has been done in this session?
+   - Are we mid-implementation or post-completion?
+   - What type of changes were made (feature, fix, refactor)?
+   - Is the work ready for contribution?
+
+2. **Project Type & Standards**
+   - Is this open source, company, or personal project?
+   - What are the contribution guidelines?
+   - Are there specific workflows to follow?
+   - What quality gates exist (tests, lint, reviews)?
+
+3. **Contribution Strategy**
+   - Should this be one PR or multiple?
+   - Which issues does this work address?
+   - What documentation needs updating?
+   - Who should review this?
+
+4. **Pre-flight Checklist**
+   - Do all tests pass?
+   - Is the code properly formatted?
+   - Are there any lint warnings?
+   - Is documentation updated?
+   - Are commits well-organized?
+</think>
+
+Based on this framework, I'll begin by detecting your context:
+
 **Context Detection First:**
 Let me understand what situation you're in:
 

commands/fix-imports.md

@@ -2,7 +2,37 @@
 
 I'll help fix import statements that broke after moving or renaming files.
 
-I'll use native tools to analyze your project systematically:
+## Strategic Thinking Process
+
+<think>
+To fix imports effectively, I need to consider:
+
+1. **Import Analysis**
+   - What type of imports are broken (relative, absolute, aliased)?
+   - Were files moved, renamed, or deleted?
+   - Are there multiple possible matches for the import?
+   - Could the import be from external packages?
+
+2. **Resolution Strategy**
+   - Search for exact filename matches first
+   - Check for similar names (might be typos)
+   - Look for the exported symbols in other files
+   - Consider if the import should be removed entirely
+
+3. **Project Import Patterns**
+   - Does the project use path aliases (@/, ~/, etc)?
+   - Are there barrel exports (index files)?
+   - What's the convention for internal vs external imports?
+   - Are there any import sorting rules?
+
+4. **Safety Considerations**
+   - Could fixing this import break other imports?
+   - Are there circular dependency risks?
+   - Should I update all instances at once?
+   - Do test files need different handling?
+</think>
+
+Based on this analysis, I'll use native tools to analyze your project systematically:
 - **Glob tool** to find files with import patterns
 - **Grep tool** to search for broken import references
 - **Read tool** to analyze import syntax and context

commands/fix-todos.md

@@ -2,6 +2,38 @@
 
 I'll find and intelligently fix TODO comments in your codebase with contextual understanding.
 
+## Strategic Thinking Process
+
+<think>
+Before implementing any TODO, I must analyze:
+
+1. **TODO Context Understanding**
+   - What is the TODO actually asking for?
+   - Why was it left as a TODO (complexity, time, uncertainty)?
+   - What's the surrounding code trying to accomplish?
+   - Are there similar implementations elsewhere I can reference?
+
+2. **Implementation Options**
+   - What are the possible ways to implement this?
+   - Which approach best fits the existing architecture?
+   - What are the trade-offs of each approach?
+   - Which solution is most maintainable?
+
+3. **Risk Assessment**
+   - Could this fix break existing functionality?
+   - Are there hidden dependencies?
+   - Will this change require updates elsewhere?
+   - Do I need additional error handling?
+
+4. **Quality Criteria**
+   - Does my solution follow project patterns?
+   - Is it tested or testable?
+   - Will it handle edge cases?
+   - Is the code self-documenting?
+</think>
+
+Based on this thinking framework, I'll proceed with:
+
 **Phase 1: Discovery & Analysis**
 Using native tools to find and understand TODOs:
 - **Grep** to locate all TODO/FIXME/HACK markers