agentleFS
Sign inStart free
DataArtDataArt/artisyn-implementation-harness/.claude/skills/war/SKILL.md

war

Skill9 starsChanged 47 days agoMITView on GitHub

Well-Architected Review (/war [design|implementation] [VERSION]). Prompts design vs implementation if ambiguous, then follows the matching reference exactly. @architect assesses against the configured AWS Well-Architected Framework pillars.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions1 project uses a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 1

    1. human-pages-ai/ai-skills★ 2same name

    How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.

  • In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.

The file

Create a free account to mount
Files
SKILL.md

The developer wants to run a Well-Architected Review. Here is their input:

$ARGUMENTS

⚠️ Follow every step in order. Do not skip, summarize, or improvise. If you are unsure, ask before deviating.

Route

Parse $ARGUMENTS into an optional leading stage word and the remaining version/pillar input:

  • design {input} or a leading d → follow references/01-design.md exactly
  • implementation {input} or a leading impl/i/code → follow references/02-implementation.md exactly
  • A version only (e.g. MVP, V1), or no argument → present the options below and ask which audit to run

Present:

"Which audit would you like to run?

  • A — Design audit (/war design): reviews Target Architecture documents against WAF pillars. Use this to validate the design before implementation begins, or to assess an existing design version.
  • B — Implementation audit (/war implementation): reviews the codebase against the Target Architecture. Use this to find gaps between design intent and what was built.

(A / B / both)"

Stop and wait. Then follow the selected reference exactly (both, in sequence, if "both").

Compatibility: /war-design, /war-implementation are retired as separate skills — use /war design|implementation [VERSION] instead.

Companion

For a delivery gap view across all three dimensions (designed / implemented / documented):

/where-we-are

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