agentleFS
BrandedTamarasu-glitchBrandedTamarasu-glitch/ForgeFlow/.agents/skills/quick/SKILL.md

quick

Skill1 starsChanged 45 days agoMITView on GitHub

Run a lightweight Forgeflow routing workflow that picks a small set of relevant agents for a task.

18 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use plant-seed, next and 2 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • notqueSkill

    plant-seed

    Capture forward-looking idea as a seed for future feature design.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • VercelSkill

    next

    Next.js renderer for json-render that turns JSON specs into full Next.js applications with routes, layouts, SSR, and metadata. Use when working with @json-render/next, building Next.js apps from JSON specs, or creating AI-generated multi-page applications.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • SentrySkill

    review

    Fixture review skill.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    tdd

    Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration tests.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

10 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 15 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 8

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Use this skill when the user wants a fast forgeflow-assisted response without the full lifecycle.

    line 15
  2. Very specific:

    Read the task and determine which Forgeflow agents are relevant.

    line 18
  3. Distinctive:

    Prefer the minimum useful set of agents.

    line 19
  4. Distinctive:

    If one clearly dominates, spawn only that agent.

    line 20
  5. Distinctive:

    Do not fan out broadly unless the task genuinely needs it.

    line 25
  6. Distinctive:

    Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.

    line 31
  7. Distinctive:

    Never use a long word where a short one will do.

    line 32
  8. Distinctive:

    If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.

    line 33
  9. Distinctive:

    Never use the passive where you can use the active.

    line 34
  10. Distinctive:

    Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

    line 35

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 15 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md
<!-- forgeflow-capability-selection:start -->

Automatic capability selection

Resolve select-capabilities.js from the checkout scripts/forgeflow, a host-supplied plugin root, or the installed ForgeFlow runtime for this host. Run node <helper-dir>/select-capabilities.js --guide and follow the shared selection procedure with phase the actual task phase (usually implement or review) and the current objective, criteria and affected scope. Reuse the same result across alias handoffs and pass it through existing context construction; do not reset reassessment limits. Missing runtime support is an explicit limitation, not a reason to invent selection results. Preserve current workflow read-only and isolation boundaries. Planned capabilities are not executable and selection grants no new authority.

<!-- forgeflow-capability-selection:end -->

At workflow entry, run node <helper-dir>/open-session-dashboard.js --root <project-root> --workflow quick when available. Resolve <helper-dir> from the checkout's scripts/forgeflow first, then ${CODEX_HOME:-$HOME/.codex}/forgeflow/scripts/forgeflow. The helper starts or reuses agent-chat and reports known workflow phases on each entry; it uses CODEX_THREAD_ID, CLAUDE_SESSION_ID, or FORGEFLOW_SESSION_ID to open the local dashboard once per session. If the host supplies a session id separately, pass --session <host-session-id>; never invent a new id per invocation. Headless runs and FORGEFLOW_DASHBOARD_AUTO_OPEN=off skip the launch. A missing helper or unavailable browser must not block the workflow. Report actual phase transitions, significant progress, waiting, and the final result with node <runtime-root>/services/agent-chat/client.js activity <state> "<short label>" (<runtime-root> is the checkout or installed forgeflow directory). Use complete only when work and required checks have finished; report failed for failures, and never invent progress to keep Ember moving.

Use this skill when the user wants a fast forgeflow-assisted response without the full lifecycle.

Workflow:

  1. Read the task and determine which Forgeflow agents are relevant.
  2. Prefer the minimum useful set of agents.
  3. If one clearly dominates, spawn only that agent.
  4. Otherwise spawn the small relevant set, gather outputs, and summarize.

Rules:

  • Bias toward speed and relevance.
  • Do not fan out broadly unless the task genuinely needs it.

Writing for CLI output

Apply George Orwell's six rules to progress updates, agent reports, and final summaries:

  1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
  2. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
  3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it out.
  4. Never use the passive where you can use the active.
  5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or a jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.
  6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.

Lead with the result or next action and its effect on the user's task. Match their technical background and requested detail. Explain an unfamiliar term when needed; retain precise terms for specialist reports. Use a calm, conversational voice and natural contractions. These rules take precedence over persona style and sample prose.

Use connected, short paragraphs with natural sentence variation. Use lists for steps or comparisons and headings when they help navigation. Cut repeated openings, stock transitions, rhetorical questions, forced praise, persona banter, and em dashes in prose. Warmth comes from noticing the user's actual concern and helping them act.

Progress updates should explain a finding, decision, blocker, or what the next check will resolve. Avoid narrating each tool call or repeating the plan. Ask only for information or authorization needed to proceed; explain why it matters. Final replies should stand alone: state what changed, why, what was checked, and any remaining action. Scale the detail to the task. Summarize routine checks; include tool names, versions, and internal counts only when they affect the reader's next decision. Keep validation gaps explicit.

Replace vague benefits with observable behavior. Use a brief example when it clarifies the change; label hypothetical examples. Never invent measurements, personal experiences, user reactions, test results, or approvals to make writing vivid. Keep uncertainty and failures explicit.

Preserve exact commands, code, paths, identifiers, error text, schema keys, verdict labels, and required evidence. Keep required report sections and machine-readable formats; apply style changes only to their prose. JSON-only outputs stay JSON-only. Before sending, check for awkward rhythm, repetition, unsupported claims, and whether the reader can tell what happens next. Clarity and faithful evidence are the goal; detector scores are not a quality gate.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.