agentleFS
Sign inStart free
Curious-KeeperCurious-Keeper/skills/laziness-protocol/SKILL.md

laziness-protocol

Skill1 starsChanged 57 days agoMITView on GitHub

Bias toward deletion and the smallest change that solves the problem. Use when refactoring, evaluating diff size, or tempted to add an abstraction, a layer, or a new signal threaded through existing types.

2 other projects use a version of this, 2 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Prefer deletion: When asked to refactor or improve, look for removals before additions.

    line 11
  2. Distinctive:

    Consolidate decisions: Do not repeat the same choice in several places.

    line 13
  3. Distinctive:

    Question the threading: If a task asks you to pass a new signal through types, schemas, pipelines, or similar layers, stop and look for a …

    line 15
  4. Distinctive:

    Sweat the small leaks: Remove tiny pass-throughs, representation leaks, and duplicated choices before they spread.

    line 16
  5. Distinctive:

    The test: If a human developer would find the code exhausting to maintain, it is a bad solution.

    line 18

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Laziness Protocol

Aim for the most result with the least code and complexity.

  • Prefer deletion. When asked to refactor or improve, look for removals before additions.
  • Maintain a flat call hierarchy. Avoid deep call chains. A deep module, a lot of behavior behind a small interface, is not a deep call chain, and nothing here argues against one. If answering a question requires tracing through more than 3 files or layers, flatten it.
  • Consolidate decisions. Do not repeat the same choice in several places. Put it behind a single source of truth and pass the result as a simple flag.
  • Minimize the diff. Make the smallest change that solves the problem. Fewer lines beat "elegant" boilerplate.
  • Question the threading. If a task asks you to pass a new signal through types, schemas, pipelines, or similar layers, stop and look for a more direct path.
  • Sweat the small leaks. Remove tiny pass-throughs, representation leaks, and duplicated choices before they spread. Small leaks compound into permanent coordination costs.

The test: If a human developer would find the code exhausting to maintain, it is a bad solution.

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.

Check your setup, free