mvp-design
Skill22 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when designing new modules from scratch, creating minimal viable prototypes, or establishing architectural decisions before implementation
In this repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- code-analysisSkill
- code-generatorSkill
- contributingSkill
- daily-logSkill
- devflowSkill
- git-workflowSkill
- hexo-blog-updateSkill
- kimicode-vision-bridgeSkill
- knowledge-base-cacheSkill
- layered-first-principles-teachingSkill
- msvc-buildSkill
- paper-first-principlesSkill
- requirement-clarificationSkill
- research-to-practiceSkill
- taskmaster-skillSkill
- ue5-umgSkill
- unity-mcpSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
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 17
Use this skill when you need to:
- Distinctive: line 19
Create a minimal viable prototype (MVP) for rapid iteration
- Distinctive: line 64
Document "why" for each major choice
- Distinctive: line 140
Document "why" not "how"
- Distinctive: line 141
Keep scope minimal (5-6 files)
- Distinctive: line 143
Use clear, consistent naming
≈ “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
MVP Design Skill
Overview
This skill guides the design of minimal, production-ready code prototypes with clear architecture and self-documenting code, emphasizing design decisions over implementation details.
Design minimal, production-ready code prototypes with clear architecture and self-documenting code.
When to Use
Use this skill when you need to:
- Design a new module or subsystem from scratch
- Create a minimal viable prototype (MVP) for rapid iteration
- Establish coding patterns and architectural decisions
- Plan implementation before writing actual code
- Design replacement systems alongside existing ones
Core Principles
1. Code as Documentation
- Code itself is readable - clear naming, simple structure
- Minimal comments - code explains itself
- Self-documenting functions - verb-based naming, obvious parameters
2. Documentation as Design
- No code in documentation - code lives in the project
- Document "why", not "how" - architectural decisions and rationale
- Focus on design patterns - data flow, component interaction
- Interface contracts - what goes in, what comes out
3. Minimal Viable Scope
- 5-6 files maximum - forces focus on essentials
- 500 lines of code - small enough to complete quickly
- Core functionality only - defer edge cases to later phases
4. Architectural Alignment
- Use existing infrastructure - leverage project's patterns
- Follow established conventions - naming, structure, serialization
- Zero-intrusive design - parallel development, not replacement
Workflow
Phase 1: Architecture Definition
- Identify Core Data Structure
- What is the fundamental entity?
- Example: MissionInstance (id, kind, status, progress, target)
- Define Primary Operations
- What actions can be performed?
- Example: Participate, AddProgress, AcceptReward
- Map Infrastructure Dependencies
- What existing systems to leverage?
- Example: Tinker serialization, SharedTable config, NetMessage
- Establish Design Decisions
- Document "why" for each major choice
- Example: "Use Save/Load methods for Tinker compatibility"
Phase 2: Component Design
- List Required Files
- Header + Implementation pairs
- Configuration files
- Maximum 6 files
- Define Component Responsibilities
- What each file does
- How components interact
- Design Data Flow
- Input → Processing → Output
- Serialization path
- Database interaction
- Specify Interface Contracts
- Function signatures
- Input/output types
- Error handling approach
Phase 3: Documentation Production
Structure:
# [ModuleName] MVP Design
## 1. Core Architecture
[Architecture diagram showing components and relationships]
## 2. File Inventory
| File | Path | Responsibility |
## 3. Key Design Decisions
[Document "why" for each major decision]
## 4. Implementation Checklist
[Phase-by-phase checklist]
## 5. Integration Points
[How it connects to existing systems]
## 6. Testing Strategy
[How to verify it works]Design Decisions Template
For each major decision, document:
### Decision: [Name]
**Choice**: [What was decided]
**Alternatives Considered**:
- Option A: [Description] → Rejected because [reason]
- Option B: [Description] → Rejected because [reason]
**Rationale**:
- [Why this choice]
- [Benefits]
- [Trade-offs]
**Impact**:
- [How it affects other components]
- [Future considerations]Best Practices
✅ Do
- Focus on architecture and design
- Document "why" not "how"
- Keep scope minimal (5-6 files)
- Align with existing patterns
- Use clear, consistent naming
❌ Don't
- Include actual code in documentation
- Over-engineer for edge cases
- Ignore existing conventions
- Skip design rationale
- Expand scope mid-design
Example Output Structure
# PlayerMissionSystem MVP Design
## 1. Core Architecture
[MissionInstance] → [PlayerMissionSystem] → [DatabaseMethod] ↓ [MissionConfigData]
## 2. File Inventory
| File | Path | Responsibility |
|------|------|----------------|
| MissionDefines.h | WorldServer/ | Enums and utilities |
| MissionInstance.h | WorldServer/ | Data structure with Save/Load |
| PlayerMissionSystem.h/cpp | WorldServer/ | Core system implementation |
## 3. Key Design Decisions
### Decision: Use Tinker Save/Load
**Choice**: MissionInstance uses Tinker Save/Load methods
**Alternatives**:
- RTS_PACK → Rejected: bitwise copy too restrictive
- Manual serialization → Rejected: error-prone
**Rationale**:
- Type-safe, extensible
- Consistent with project direction
- Easy to add fields later
## 4. Implementation Checklist
### Phase 1: Data Structures
- [ ] MissionInstance with Save/Load
- [ ] MissionConfigData table structure
### Phase 2: Core System
- [ ] PlayerMissionSystem class
- [ ] Participate, AddProgress, AcceptReward methods
### Phase 3: Integration
- [ ] DatabaseMethod additions
- [ ] Player.h integration
## 5. Integration Points
- Uses: Tinker serialization, SharedTable, NetMessage
- Extends: PlayerSubsystem pattern
- Database: player_mission table
## 6. Testing Strategy
- Unit: MissionInstance Save/Load roundtrip
- Integration: Login → Load → Update → VerifyIntegration with Other Skills
- code-analysis: Understand existing patterns before designing
- code-generator: Generate implementation from design docs
- knowledge-base-cache: Store design patterns for reuse
Version History
- v1.0 (2026-02-10) - Initial release
- Code-as-documentation principles
- 3-phase workflow
- Design decision template
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.

