agentleFS
DizzyMiiDizzyMii/fable-skills/skills/fable-native-code/SKILL.md

fable-native-code

Skill55 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when writing or editing code in an existing codebase — before adding comments, docstrings, try/catch blocks, validation, logging, or TODOs the surrounding file doesn't have, and before explaining your style choices in the reply.

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions1 project uses a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 1

    1. imMamdouhaboammar/get-fable★ 639% same

    Wrote their own version · 0

    None found.

    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 repository5 other files it gives its agents.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    No defensive bloat: no try/catch around code that works, no validating invariants the types or callers already guarantee, no logging, …

    line 24
  2. Distinctive:

    Clean exit: no debug prints, no commented-out code, no TODO crumbs you created.

    line 33
  3. Distinctive:

    Names come from the codebase's existing vocabulary: Don't coin a second name for an existing concept.

    line 35
  4. Very specific:

    No header comment (the signature says it), no max < 0 guard (the callers guarantee it, like mergeWindows trusts its sorted-input invariant) …

    line 79

≈ “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

Native Code

Overview

Your diff should read like the file's longtime owner wrote it. The file has a style — naming, error handling, comment density, formatting. Write in it. Your personal preferences are not improvements; they're an accent.

Rules

  1. Match the file: naming, error-handling idiom, comment density, formatting, import organization. If the file has one comment per 200 lines, your addition almost certainly has zero.
  2. Comments state only constraints the code cannot show — invariants, gotchas, why-not-the-obvious-way. Never what the next line does, never narration of your change ("now correctly handles X"), never justification aimed at a reviewer. Test: after the PR merges, is this comment information or noise?
  3. No defensive bloat: no try/catch around code that works, no validating invariants the types or callers already guarantee, no logging, config, or flags nobody asked for. If the contract is worth enforcing, that's a test or a boundary assertion — its own change.
  4. Don't narrate your restraint. The urge to explain what you didn't add ("note: I deliberately left out the doc comment because…") is the same urge that adds it — displaced into the reply. The justification a senior dev never writes in code, they also never write in chat. Deliver the code; mention style only if the user asks.
  5. Clean exit: no debug prints, no commented-out code, no TODO crumbs you created.
  6. Names come from the codebase's existing vocabulary. Don't coin a second name for an existing concept.

Contrast

Task: add clampWindow to a terse Go file whose only comment in 200 lines marks a sorting invariant; callers guarantee max >= 0.

Foreign (your habits, not the file's):

// clampWindow clamps start and end into the valid range [0, max] and
// normalizes inverted windows. Returns (start, start) when end < start.
func clampWindow(start, end, max int) (int, int) {
    if max < 0 {
        return 0, 0 // defensive: should never happen
    }
    ...
}

Native (what the file's owner would write):

func clampWindow(start, end, max int) (int, int) {
    if start < 0 {
        start = 0
    }
    if start > max {
        start = max
    }
    if end < 0 {
        end = 0
    }
    if end > max {
        end = max
    }
    if end < start {
        return start, start
    }
    return start, end
}

No header comment (the signature says it), no max < 0 guard (the callers guarantee it, like mergeWindows trusts its sorted-input invariant) — and no paragraph in the reply explaining either omission.

Rationalizations

ThoughtReality
"A doc comment helps the next reader"The next reader has the signature and twelve obvious lines. The file's owner trusted them; trust them too.
"Extra validation can't hurt"A guard for an impossible state is dead code that suggests the state is possible. Swallowed errors are the most expensive bugs to find.
"My last reviewer praised my documentation habits"In a codebase whose style wants documentation. This file's style is the spec now.
"I'll explain in chat what I left out of the code"Observed verbatim in baseline: a multi-paragraph "note on what I deliberately left out" after "output only the code." Restraint that announces itself isn't restraint.
"I'll leave a TODO for the edge case"Handle it, or surface it in your report. TODOs are where edge cases go to be forgotten.

Provenance: baseline Opus 4.8 wrote the native version above, then narrated its restraint anyway (rule 4 exists because of it). fable-skills test logs, 2026-06-10.

Red Flags — delete before committing

  • A comment that describes the line below it
  • "deliberately", "note that I", "for safety" — in code or in your reply
  • try/catch whose catch block only logs or re-raises
  • A guard for a state the caller contract excludes
  • Your addition is the only part of the file with comments

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.