ops-change
Skill2 starsChanged 4 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use this when working on ops-change changes in this repository scaffold.
In this repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- bugfixSkill
- cli-toolSkill
- dependency-upgradeSkill
- featureSkill
- library-packageSkill
- refactorSkill
- test-hardeningSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 18
Read the matching checklist.
- Distinctive: line 24
Do not invent product-specific technology choices.
- Distinctive: line 25
Do not generate fake credentials or secrets.
- Very specific: line 26
Do not treat generated/cache/build output as source truth.
- Distinctive: line 36
Use stable validation names only.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
ops-change
Read First
- AGENTS.md
- VALIDATION.md
- CHECKLIST.md
- .agents/context-map.md
Procedure
- Identify the source of truth.
- Read the matching checklist.
- Make the smallest change that preserves ownership boundaries.
- Validate with the stable validation names from VALIDATION.md.
Never
- Do not invent product-specific technology choices.
- Do not generate fake credentials or secrets.
- Do not treat generated/cache/build output as source truth.
Checklist
- Source of truth confirmed.
- Failure mode checklist reviewed.
- Validation plan stated.
Validation
Use stable validation names only. If a runner command is unconfigured, report it as skipped with reason.
Final Report
List files changed, validations run, validations skipped, skip reasons, and remaining risk.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

