agentleFS
DarthJonathanDarthJonathan/guac-skills/skills/show-me-your-work/SKILL.md

show-me-your-work

Skill0 starsChanged 19 days agoMITView on GitHub

Keep a reviewable decision trail for long-running or unattended work: a TSV log with one row per decision (what, why, evidence, result). Local by default; commit it when a reviewer needs the trail to trust the result. Use for $show-me-your-work, autonomous or multi-phase runs, or work a human reviews after stepping away.

67 other projects use a version of this, 58 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 4 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 4

    Common

    Most of the 64 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Read the Codex runtime adapter once per session before using this skill.

    line 6
  2. Common:

    Keep one canonical log.

    line 10
  3. Common:

    Write each entry the way you'd tell a teammate what you did.

    line 37
  4. Common:

    Commit it only when the work is ambitious enough that a reviewer needs the trail to trust the result.

    line 49
  5. Common:

    Prefer evidence produced by committed scripts over hand-made one-offs (the encode-lessons-in-structure principle skill).

    line 54
  6. Distinctive:

    Check that every row maps to a real decision or action.

    line 60
  7. Distinctive:

    Check that each row's evidence resolves and shows what the row claims.

    line 61
  8. Very specific:

    Read top to bottom, follow the evidence pointers, spot-check.

    line 79

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 64 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

Read the Codex runtime adapter once per session before using this skill. Its tool, model, history, and authorization mappings apply to all linked instructions.

Show me your work

Keep one canonical log.

The format

A single TSV file, one row per decision. Cells stay single-line. Evidence is a pointer, not prose.

Copy references/decision-log-template.tsv (the header row) to start a clean log. Columns:

  • ts. ISO8601 timestamp.
  • phase. The phase or workstream.
  • decision. What was chosen or done, one line.
  • why. The reason in plain words. If a principle drove it, say it plainly, not as a jargon tag.
  • evidence. A link or path that proves it: commit SHA, PR number, file:line, or an artifact, trace, or screenshot path. Never a paragraph.
  • result. The outcome or predicate state: tests green, reverted, pixel-diff 0, INCONCLUSIVE, open.

An example, plain-spoken so a reviewer reads it at a glance.

ts	phase	decision	why	evidence	result
2026-05-24T09:02:00Z	frame	counted the work first, about 100 components and roughly 75 hours	wanted to know the size before starting a long run	commit 3a9f1c2	found 5 things to sort out before starting
2026-05-24T09:40:00Z	harness	took screenshots of the old version before changing anything	so we can compare old against new and catch any visual change	scripts/snapshot.sh, baseline/	saved 120 reference screenshots
2026-05-24T11:15:00Z	widget	moved the widget styles over without changing how it looks	keep the change small and the result identical	commit 7c21e0a, pixel-diff 0	looks identical, tests pass
2026-05-24T12:30:00Z	widget	threw out a helper's work because its screenshots were blank	checked the real files instead of trusting its summary	worktree reset	reverted, tightened the instructions for next time

Logging a row

Write each entry the way you'd tell a teammate what you did. Plain words, concrete actions, no AI speak or abstract jargon (the unslop skill applies to log text too).

Use the helper scripts/log.sh <logfile> <phase> <decision> <why> <evidence> <result>. It stamps ts, writes the header on first use, strips stray tabs/newlines, and prefixes any cell starting with =, +, -, or @ with a single quote. A bare printf appending a row works too, but mind those same bytes if cells come from generated or user-supplied text.

Log decision points and checkpoints, not every action: a fork chosen, a unit completed with its verification result, a pivot or revert with its trigger, a blocker surfaced, a gate fixed. For loop runs, one row per iteration. Skip the trivial and self-evident.

A run is one agent conversation, including its later turns and any summary of it. A pickup, a replacement agent, or a new chat starts a new run. When a run adds to a log that already has rows, its first row has phase start, and so does its first row after another run's start row. So a run that comes back to a log in a later turn first reads the log's last rows to see whether another run wrote since. A start row names the ts range of the rows before it that this run did not write, and its evidence names this run, such as its agent id. Use phase start for nothing else.

Where it lives

By default the log is a working artifact, not committed. Keep it at decisions.tsv in the work dir, or .audit/<task-slug>.tsv when several efforts run at once, and leave it out of git.

Commit it only when the work is ambitious enough that a reviewer needs the trail to trust the result.

Rules

  • Append-only. A wrong call gets a new row that supersedes it. Never edit or delete history.
  • Prefer evidence produced by committed scripts over hand-made one-offs (the encode-lessons-in-structure principle skill).

Audit the log against the transcript

At the end of the run, before handing back, check the log told the truth. Use the current conversation, a scoped Codex chat read, or an explicitly supplied transcript for this run. Do not scan private session stores. Label a digest and any gaps when full tool history is unavailable. Walk this run's rows against what actually happened. Each stretch of them begins at one of this run's start rows, or at the first row if this run created the log, and ends at the next start row of another run:

  • Check that every row maps to a real decision or action.
  • Check that each row's evidence resolves and shows what the row claims.
  • A fork, pivot, or abandoned approach that shaped the work but isn't logged is a gap. Add it.

Correct the log, not the story. The audit never edits or removes a row, even an invented one. When a row records neither a real decision nor a real action, or its claim or evidence is wrong, add a row that supersedes it with what actually happened and a pointer that resolves. This audit does not check rows outside this run's stretches. If this run's own work shows one of them is wrong, supersede it like any wrong call.

Cross-model review of the trail

Before handing back, use a permitted independent reviewer when available. Use a different model only when the user selected a supported one. The reviewer reads the trail and the available scoped evidence, then flags what deserves attention. With no independent reviewer, audit directly and label the independent review as unavailable. Do not invent a reviewer, model, or transcript.

  • Decisions logged with weak or absent evidence.
  • Verification steps skipped or claimed without proof in the transcript.
  • Choices that look risky in hindsight (premature, scope-creeping, papering over a symptom).
  • Gaps the user would otherwise miss on a casual skim.

Report material flags with pointers to specific rows or moments. Name the reviewer and model only when actually used. State whether review was independent, a same-model separate session, or a direct audit. No flags is valid when supported by the review; it does not turn an unavailable review into a pass.

Reviewing the trail

Read top to bottom, follow the evidence pointers, spot-check. GitHub renders a committed TSV as a table. column -s$'\t' -t decisions.tsv renders it in a terminal.

Composing this skill

Other skills route their audit trail here instead of inventing one. Reference it by name and let it own the format. Don't restate the columns.

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.