sop
Skill1 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Prints the complete SOP flowchart. Triggers when: user asks to see the SOP, asks 'where are we?', asks 'what's next?', or says '/sop'. Always available.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- patforna/core-skillstheir own version, first seen Jul 1, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- patforna/core-skills★ 0same 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 repository30 other files it gives its agents.
- claude.mdCLAUDE.md
- biz-thinkSkill
- biz-validateSkill
- brand-buildSkill
- community-engageSkill
- content-createSkill
- content-distributeSkill
- copy-craftSkill
- data-decideSkill
- finance-opsSkill
- growth-trackSkill
- infra-opsSkill
- issue-createSkill
- legal-guardSkill
- post-mergeSkill
- pre-codeSkill
- pre-commitSkill
- pre-prSkill
- product-evalSkill
- project-initSkill
- retroSkill
- roadmap-steerSkill
- sales-closeSkill
- search-evalSkill
- self-reviewSkill
- staging-verifySkill
- support-opsSkill
- test-gateSkill
- ux-auditSkill
- work-breakdownSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
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
- Distinctive: line 186
After printing, tell the user where you think they currently are (if you can infer it from context), and suggest what they might want to do …
≈ “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.
Files
SoloForge SOP — Internal Process Reference
This is a transparency tool. The agent follows this flow internally — the user doesn't need to memorize it. Print it when the user asks "where are we?" or wants to understand what the agent is doing.
Mark the current position with ➤ if you can infer it from context.
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
PHASE 1: DISCOVER — Find what to build
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Step 1.1 │ biz-think (Phase -1)
│ You say: "幫我找產品機會"
│ Agent: browses Reddit/Twitter/PH for pain signals
│ Report: 3-5 opportunities with data + competitor analysis
│ You: pick one / reject all
│
↓
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
PHASE 2: VALIDATE — Confirm it's worth building
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Step 2.1 │ biz-think (Phase 0-5)
│ You say: "評估這個方向"
│ Agent: acid test, anti-patterns, revenue model, distribution
│ Report: "Acid test [PASS/FAIL]. Recommend: [build/pivot/kill]"
│ You: build → go to Phase 3
│ pivot → go to Step 2.2
│ kill → back to Step 1.1
│
↓ (if pivot or fail)
Step 2.2 │ biz-validate
│ You say: "驗證假設"
│ Agent: hypothesis → experiment → learn loop (max 5 rounds)
│ Report: "Validation [PASS/FAIL]. Evidence: [summary]"
│ You: validated → Phase 3
│ kill → back to Step 1.1
│
↓ (optional)
Step 2.3 │ brand-build
│ You say: "幫我定品牌"
│ Agent: positioning statement, voice, Build in Public strategy
│ Report: "Positioning: [one sentence]. Voice: [3 adjectives]"
│
↓
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
PHASE 3: PLAN — Break it down
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Step 3.1 │ project-init (new project only)
│ You say: "初始化專案"
│ Agent: git setup, CI/CD, staging env, CLAUDE.md
│ Report: "Project [name] initialized. Git ✅ CI ✅ Staging ✅"
│
↓
Step 3.2 │ work-breakdown
│ You say: "拆解這個產品"
│ Agent: read codebase → atomic issues → commit plans → test plans
│ Report: "Milestone [name], [N] issues, test env needs: [list]"
│ You: confirm / adjust issue list
│
↓
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
PHASE 4: BUILD — Code it (per issue, inner loop is autonomous)
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
You say: "做 Issue #N" or "build the milestone"
Agent runs the following automatically for each issue:
Step 4.1 │ issue-create
│ Agent: create issue with AC, commit plan, test plan
│ (skip if already created by work-breakdown)
│
Step 4.2 │ pre-code
│ Agent: issue check, branch check, scope boundaries, platform config
│
Step 4.3 │ [write code]
│ Agent: implement according to commit plan
│
Step 4.4 │ self-review
│ Agent: read diff, correctness, design, security, scope, output verification
│
Step 4.5 │ test-gate
│ Agent: verify unit + integration + E2E tests exist and pass
│
Step 4.6 │ pre-commit
│ Agent: atomic commit check, conventional format, no debug/secrets
│
Step 4.7 │ pre-pr
│ Agent: PR size check, links issue, targets dev
│ If UI changes → ux-audit before merge
│
Step 4.8 │ [merge to dev]
│
Step 4.9 │ post-merge (partial)
│ Agent: verify fix works, check AC boxes, close issue, delete branch
│ Report: "Issue #N done. [N/total] complete. Changes: [summary]"
│
│ Repeat 4.1-4.9 for each issue until milestone complete
│
↓
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
PHASE 5: VERIFY — Deploy + test
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Step 5.1 │ staging-verify
│ You say: "準備發布"
│ Agent: delta analysis, env vars check, platform config, structural check
│ Report: "Structural check [PASS/FAIL]. Config: [complete/gaps]"
│ If fail → fix gaps → re-run Step 5.1
│
↓
Step 5.2 │ [merge dev → main]
│ Agent: create PR, merge to main, wait for deploy
│
↓
Step 5.3 │ post-merge (production testing)
│ Agent: Playwright tests on production URL (full user journey)
│ Report: "Production test: [N] bugs found. Please test [URL]."
│
↓
Step 5.4 │ [You test]
│ You: test the product yourself at production URL
│ You: report bugs / feedback
│ Agent: creates issues for all bugs → back to Phase 4 if needed
│
↓ (when you're satisfied)
Step 5.5 │ product-eval (optional)
│ You say: "評估產品品質"
│ Agent: Nielsen heuristics, cognitive walkthrough, FTUE, HEART
│ Report: "Score: [N]/100. Grade: [letter]. Top issues: [list]"
│
↓
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
PHASE 6: SHIP — Release + retrospective
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
Step 6.1 │ post-merge (release)
│ You say: "發布"
│ Agent: create GitHub release with semantic versioning
│ Report: "v[X.Y.Z] released. [link]"
│
↓
Step 6.2 │ retro
│ Agent: analyze git metrics, identify improvements
│ Report: "Retro: [metrics]. Action items: [list]"
│
↓
Step 6.3 │ roadmap-steer
│ You say: "下一步做什麼"
│ Agent: RICE scoring, prioritize next feature
│ Report: "Next feature: [name]. RICE: [score]"
│ You: approve → back to Step 3.2
│
↓ (cycle repeats)
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
AVAILABLE ANYTIME (you can invoke these at any point)
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
"幫我寫文案" → copy-craft "幫我寫內容" → content-create
"幫我看定價" → finance-ops "幫我看法律" → legal-guard
"幫我看品牌" → brand-build "幫我做社群" → community-engage
"幫我看數據" → data-decide "幫我做銷售" → sales-close
"幫我看基礎設施" → infra-ops "幫我看客服" → support-ops
"幫我發佈內容" → content-distribute "幫我看增長" → growth-track
"幫我排優先級" → roadmap-steer "幫我看搜尋結果" → search-eval
"流程圖" / "/sop" → this flowchartNext Steps
After printing, tell the user where you think they currently are (if you can infer it from context), and suggest what they might want to do next.
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
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.

