Keyboard shortcuts

Press ← or → to navigate between chapters

Press S or / to search in the book

Press ? to show this help

Press Esc to hide this help

Use Cases and Examples

SwissArmyHammer adapts to various development workflows. Here are practical scenarios showing how to use it effectively.

Individual Developer

Personal Prompt Library

Create reusable prompts for consistent code quality:

# Set up personal collection
mkdir -p ~/.swissarmyhammer/prompts

# Code review checklist
cat > ~/.swissarmyhammer/prompts/self-review.md << 'EOF'
---
title: Self Code Review
description: Personal code review checklist
arguments:
  - name: language
    description: Programming language
    required: true
  - name: feature
    description: Feature being developed
    required: true
---

# Self Review: {{feature}} ({{language}})

Review this {{feature}} implementation:

## Quality Check
- [ ] Code follows language conventions
- [ ] Functions are documented
- [ ] Error handling is comprehensive
- [ ] Tests cover main scenarios

## Security Review
- [ ] Input validation implemented
- [ ] No hardcoded secrets
- [ ] Authentication/authorization proper

Please analyze my {{feature}} code and provide specific feedback.
EOF

# Use in Claude Code
/self-review language="rust" feature="authentication"

Development Workflow

Automate your development process:

---
name: feature-workflow
description: Complete feature development process
initial_state: plan
---

### plan
Plan feature implementation
**Actions**: prompt planning, memo documentation
**Next**: implement

### implement  
Write feature code
**Actions**: issue creation, branch switching
**Next**: review

### review
Self-review implementation  
**Actions**: self-review prompt, test execution
**Transitions**: If issues → implement, If good → complete

Small Team (3-5 developers)

Team Standards

Shared prompts in project repository:

# Team code review standard
mkdir -p .swissarmyhammer/prompts
cat > .swissarmyhammer/prompts/team-review.md << 'EOF'
---
title: Team Code Review
description: Standardized review process
arguments:
  - name: author
    required: true
  - name: urgency
    choices: ["low", "medium", "high", "critical"]
    default: "medium"
---

# Code Review - {{author}}

**Priority**: {{urgency | upcase}}

## Team Checklist
- [ ] Follows linting rules
- [ ] Unit tests included
- [ ] Documentation updated
- [ ] No security issues

{% if urgency == "critical" %}
## CRITICAL REVIEW
Focus on correctness and no regressions.
{% endif %}

Provide specific feedback on each item.
EOF

Pull Request Workflow

---
name: pr-workflow
description: Team PR process
initial_state: create_pr
---

### create_pr
Create pull request
**Actions**: git push, PR creation, reviewer assignment
**Next**: ci_checks

### ci_checks  
Run automated checks
**Transitions**: Pass → review, Fail → fix_tests

### review
Team code review
**Actions**: team-review prompt execution
**Transitions**: Approved → merge, Changes needed → fix_feedback

Large Team/Enterprise

Compliance Review

Enterprise-grade architecture review:

---
title: Enterprise Architecture Review
description: Compliance and security review
arguments:
  - name: system_name
    required: true
  - name: compliance_level
    choices: ["standard", "regulated", "highly-regulated"]
    default: "standard"
---

# Architecture Review: {{system_name}}

**Compliance**: {{compliance_level | title}}

## Security Requirements
{% if compliance_level == "highly-regulated" %}
- [ ] End-to-end encryption
- [ ] Multi-factor authentication
- [ ] Zero-trust architecture
{% else %}
- [ ] Basic authentication
- [ ] HTTPS enforcement
- [ ] Input validation
{% endif %}

## Data Protection
- [ ] PII handling procedures
- [ ] Data retention policies
- [ ] Backup and recovery tested

Release Workflow

---
name: enterprise-release  
description: Enterprise release process
initial_state: architecture_review
---

### architecture_review
Enterprise architecture review
**Actions**: compliance review, security scan
**Transitions**: Pass → approvals, Fail → remediation

### approvals
Required stakeholder approvals
**Actions**: business approval, security approval, compliance approval
**Next**: production_deploy

### production_deploy
Deploy with monitoring
**Actions**: deployment, health checks, notification

Industry-Specific Examples

Financial Services

---
title: Financial Compliance Review
description: Financial regulatory compliance
arguments:
  - name: regulation
    choices: ["PCI-DSS", "SOX", "GDPR"]
    required: true
---

# {{regulation}} Compliance Review

{% case regulation %}
{% when "PCI-DSS" %}
## Payment Card Industry Requirements
- [ ] Cardholder data encryption
- [ ] Network segmentation
- [ ] Access controls
{% when "SOX" %}
## Sarbanes-Oxley Requirements  
- [ ] Internal controls documented
- [ ] Change management enforced
- [ ] Data integrity controls
{% endcase %}

Please assess compliance and provide remediation steps.

Healthcare (HIPAA)

---
title: HIPAA Compliance Review
description: Healthcare data protection review
arguments:
  - name: phi_types
    description: Types of PHI handled
    type: array
    required: true
---

# HIPAA Compliance Review

**PHI Types**: {{phi_types | join: ", "}}

## Technical Safeguards
- [ ] Unique user identification
- [ ] Access controls implemented
- [ ] Audit logs comprehensive
- [ ] Transmission security

## Physical Safeguards
- [ ] Facility access controls
- [ ] Workstation security
- [ ] Device controls

Provide detailed compliance assessment.

Open Source Project

Project Health Assessment

---
title: OSS Project Health
description: Open source project assessment
arguments:
  - name: project_name
    required: true
  - name: contributors
    type: number
    required: true
---

# Project Health: {{project_name}}

**Contributors**: {{contributors}}

## Community Health
- [ ] Contributor onboarding documented
- [ ] Code of conduct present
- [ ] Good first issues available

{% if contributors > 20 %}
## Large Project Requirements
- [ ] Governance structure defined
- [ ] Decision-making transparent
- [ ] Regular maintainer meetings
{% else %}
## Small Project Requirements
- [ ] Primary maintainer identified
- [ ] Basic contribution workflow
- [ ] Backup maintainer designated
{% endif %}

## Technical Health
- [ ] Automated testing (>80% coverage)
- [ ] CI/CD configured
- [ ] Security scanning enabled

Assess current state and provide improvement recommendations.

Release Process

---
name: oss-release
description: Open source release workflow
initial_state: health_check
---

### health_check
Assess project health
**Actions**: health assessment, community metrics
**Next**: version_prep

### version_prep
Prepare version bump
**Actions**: changelog generation, version update
**Next**: testing

### testing
Comprehensive test suite
**Actions**: test matrix, integration tests, security scan
**Next**: community_review

### community_review
Community feedback period
**Actions**: release PR, announcement, 48-hour wait
**Next**: release

### release
Publish release
**Actions**: artifact building, package publishing, announcement

Development Team Scenarios

Code Review Automation

# Automated code review workflow
sah flow run code-review-workflow \
  --var author="john.doe" \
  --var files="src/auth.rs,src/db.rs" \
  --var priority="high"

Issue Resolution

# Complete issue workflow
sah issue create "Fix login timeout"
sah issue work ISSUE-456
# ... implement fix ...
sah flow run fix-validation
sah issue complete ISSUE-456

Documentation Generation

# Generate project documentation
sah prompt test docs/project \
  --var project_name="MyApp" \
  --var language="rust"

# Run documentation review workflow
sah flow run doc-review-workflow

These examples show SwissArmyHammer’s flexibility across different team sizes, industries, and use cases while maintaining consistency and quality.