create-skill-from-book
Skill4 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
WHEN/WHERE/WHO: [Scheduling: Architects or agents wanting to translate passive technical reference books or engineering standards into executable agent skills.] HOW: [Structural: Use this COMPLEX SKILL to extract actionable workflows, choose the correct tier, format them into the Hybrid 5W1H + SSL structure, and refine the generated skill through an evidence-backed validation gate.] WHY: [Scheduling: Asking an agent to read a 500-page book every chat session is too slow and context-heavy. Codifying textbooks into structured procedural steps ensures strict standard compliance automatically.]
In this repository61 other files it gives its agents.
- activate-personalSkill
- analyze-with-tactics-questionnairesSkill
- apply-agile-testing-quadrantsSkill
- apply-architectural-tacticsSkill
- apply-attribute-driven-designSkill
- apply-fundamentals-of-data-visualizationSkill
- apply-oopsi-modelSkill
- apply-screenplay-patternSkill
- apply-specification-by-exampleSkill
- blog-topic-discoverSkill
- build-agent-memory-systemsSkill
- build-business-objectives-modelSkill
- build-data-dictionarySkill
- build-feature-treeSkill
- comment-alive-test-driven-developmentSkill
- conduct-event-stormingSkill
- create-ecosystem-mapSkill
- create-living-documentationSkill
- CREATING-SKILL-TEMPLATESkill
- define-architectural-driversSkill
- define-bounded-contextsSkill
- define-ubiquitous-languageSkill
- design-agentic-screenplay-modelSkill
- design-agent-perception-layersSkill
- design-agent-planningSkill
- design-agent-reward-functionsSkill
- design-agents-using-patternsSkill
- design-architecture-viewpointsSkill
- design-autonomous-ai-interfacesSkill
- design-ddd-aggregatesSkill
- design-tool-use-sandboxingSkill
- document-architectural-decisionsSkill
- document-legacy-codebaseSkill
- doc-with-usage-exampleSkill
- draft-srs-documentSkill
- elicit-requirements-modelsSkill
- evolve-skill-with-wikiSkill
- extract-business-rulesSkill
- facilitate-example-mappingSkill
- facilitate-user-story-mappingSkill
- implement-agent-observabilitySkill
- implement-agent-reflectionSkill
- improve-existing-skillSkill
- improve-user-storySkill
- managing-ai-projectsSkill
- orchestrate-multi-agent-collaborationSkill
- prioritize-requirementsSkill
- review-c4-modelSkill
- review-data-engineeringSkill
- save-as-skillSkill
- scaffold-cmake-cxx-sanitize-gtest-envSkill
- skill-commonSkill
- task-commit-triggerSkill
- test-case-with-demoSkill
- test-case-with-readmeSkill
- test-driven-developmentSkill
- UnitTesting-convert2CaTDDSkill
- update-my-resumeSkill
- update-spec-contextSkill
- validate-requirements-criteriaSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
30 rules. About 0 are common, 20 are distinctive, and 10 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈20
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
10
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 13
When this skill is activated, first load skill-common and apply the shared conventions it defines: canonical section order, frontmatter …
- Very specific: line 23
Do not use for documenting one-off debugging sessions, capturing simple git command shortcuts, or summarizing meeting notes.
- Distinctive: line 52
Stop Rule: If the source material is ambiguous, the domain constraints are missing, or two consecutive revisions fail the same acceptance …
- Very specific: line 55
RULE 1: Token Efficiency: Ensure the generated SKILL.md remains under 500 lines.
- Very specific: line 56
Absolute Realism: Do not hallucinate tools, compilers, or libraries.
- Distinctive: line 57
Embedded Rigor: When the target domain is embedded or systems programming, the skill must explicitly cover physical limits (timing, memory, …
- Distinctive: line 58
Actionable Steps: Do not use vague language like "keep code clean" or "optimize performance." Use concrete directives like "Verify that …
- Distinctive: line 60
Independent Acceptance Gate: Do not treat the first complete draft as accepted only because all files exist.
- Distinctive: line 65
Read the reference textbook, PDF chapters, or standard documents provided in the workspace.
- Distinctive: line 71
If the source text is too broad, split it into a bounded extraction target such as one chapter, one pattern family, or one operational …
- Distinctive: line 87
Create the target skill directory under the workspace.
- Very specific: line 88
Write the SKILL.md using the explicit Hybrid 5W1H + SSL structure defined in the chosen template tier (Scheduling, Structural, Logical).
- Distinctive: line 90
Add the template's Optimization Readiness section and fill it with concrete failure signals, evidence, safe mutation boundaries, acceptance …
- Distinctive: line 91
Always include the "One More Thing" section instructing future agents to stop and ask the user if instructions are unclear or conflicting.
- Distinctive: line 94
Write a README.md inside the new skill directory to explain to future users (and agents) what the skill is, its folder structure, and …
- Very specific: line 95
Write a README_ZH.md that mirrors the skill's scope and trigger guidance in Chinese.
- Very specific: line 96
If the textbook contains highly detailed, chapter-specific checklists or rules, do not clutter SKILL.md.
- Distinctive: line 97
Place any extraction traces, rejected naming options, or extended rule inventories in supporting files rather than bloating the main skill.
- Distinctive: line 100
Run the validation gate on the draft: check that all internal markdown links are valid and clickable, the tier matches the workflow depth, …
- Very specific: line 101
Read the drafted SKILL.md and check for web-stack drift (e.g., references to JavaScript, Node.js, Web APIs, or cloud platforms in an …
- Distinctive: line 103
If validation fails, revise only the sections that caused the failure and rerun the same validation gate.
- Distinctive: line 104
Stop after two failed revision cycles on the same issue and ask the user for missing context rather than continuing uncontrolled rewrites.
- Very specific: line 124
Verify that the skill directory contains SKILL.md, README.md, and README_ZH.md.
- Very specific: line 125
Verify that the frontmatter is present and uses the multi-line description: > format required by the template.
- Very specific: line 126
Verify that the SKILL.md has the required sections matching the selected template tier, including ## Optimization Readiness.
- Distinctive: line 127
Verify that there are zero references to hallucinated libraries or tools.
- Distinctive: line 128
Verify that all markdown links within the skill package are valid.
- Distinctive: line 129
Verify that the generated skill can be executed from natural language alone and does not depend on diagrams or direct access to the …
- Distinctive: line 130
Verify that the validation log records the chosen tier, the acceptance gate results, and any rejected drafting choices.
- Distinctive: line 135
If the reference material is missing, or if the safety-critical integrity levels (ASIL, SIL) are unspecified, stop and ask the user for …
≈ “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
Create Skill from Book
Common Contract (Load First)
When this skill is activated, first load skill-common and apply the shared conventions it defines: canonical section order, frontmatter rules, anti-pattern guidance, and the Review In Mind loop in review-in-mind. This skill adds only domain-specific rules below.
Who
Architects, principal developers, or coding agents who want to translate passive technical reference books or standards into executable, repeatable, and verified agent skills (SKILL.md packages).
What
Ingest chapters or sections of a technical book, identify the core engineering guidelines (especially embedded, real-time, concurrency, or safety-critical rules), and codify them into a self-contained skill directory.
When
- Triggered by requests like: "create a skill from [Book/Chapter]", "codify [Standard] into a skill", "extract design guidelines from [Reference] into a skill", or "save these textbook rules as a skill".
- Do not use for documenting one-off debugging sessions, capturing simple git command shortcuts, or summarizing meeting notes. Use
save-as-skillor standard project documentation instead.
Where
- Input materials can be local PDFs, text files, markdown summaries, or online documentation.
- The output belongs in a new skill directory in the workspace (e.g.,
[skill-name]/SKILL.mdand related folders).
Why
- Textbooks contain deep engineering knowledge, but asking an agent to read a 500-page book in every chat session is too slow and context-heavy.
- By translating theory into structured, code-like procedural steps, we ensure coding agents conform to strict architectures, safety limits, and best practices automatically.
Inputs
- Reference Material (required): The specific book, chapter, PDF path, or URL containing the design methodology or standard.
- Target Domain Context (optional): Constraints specific to the target architecture (e.g., STM32, ARM Cortex-M, FreeRTOS, Linux kernel, ISO 26262 ASIL-D, MISRA C compliance).
Output (Logical Evidence)
- Skill Directory: A new workspace directory containing:
SKILL.mdconforming to the selected template tier (SIMPLE, COMPLICATED, or COMPLEX) in the Hybrid 5W1H + SSL framework.README.mdandREADME_ZH.mdintroducing the skill, its scope, and how to trigger it.details/containing Level-3 detailed checklists or cheat sheets to keep the main file under 500 lines.
- Validation Log: Evidence showing the generated skill works, has valid internal file links, and does not contain generic web-stack assumptions.
- Optimization Notes: A short record of the selected tier, failure signals for the new skill, what evidence was used to shape it, and any rejected drafting choices that should not be repeated blindly.
Optimization Readiness
- Failure Signals: The drafted skill contains vague directives, mismatched tier depth, weak trigger boundaries, non-actionable validation, domain drift, or instructions that cannot be executed from natural language alone.
- Evidence To Collect: Source excerpts, repeated chapter patterns, domain constraints, candidate trigger phrases, validation checks, and any review findings discovered during drafting.
- Safe Mutation Boundaries: Revise frontmatter wording, section structure, checklist phrasing, validation steps, and supporting detail files without changing the source material's core intent.
- Acceptance Criteria: Accept the generated skill only if it matches the chosen tier's control depth, includes the required template sections, contains actionable validation, preserves domain realism, and is readable without the original book open.
- Rejected Revision Handling: Record discarded naming choices, rejected trigger phrases, and failed structural ideas in the validation log or supporting notes so the same low-quality draft is not recreated later.
- Transfer Check: Confirm that the drafted skill can guide at least one nearby use case beyond the exact chapter excerpt used for extraction.
- Stop Rule: If the source material is ambiguous, the domain constraints are missing, or two consecutive revisions fail the same acceptance check, stop and ask the user for clarification instead of widening the draft blindly.
Constraints (Logical Boundaries)
- RULE 1: Token Efficiency. Ensure the generated
SKILL.mdremains under 500 lines. Move verbose reference material intodetails/. - Absolute Realism: Do not hallucinate tools, compilers, or libraries. Every command or tool recommended in the skill must be standard and validated (e.g.,
cppcheck,gcc-arm-none-eabi, or specific static analyzers). - Embedded Rigor: When the target domain is embedded or systems programming, the skill must explicitly cover physical limits (timing, memory, interrupts, power states) and avoid cloud/web terminology.
- Actionable Steps: Do not use vague language like "keep code clean" or "optimize performance." Use concrete directives like "Verify that WCET is under X ms by using oscilloscope tests or profiling hooks."
- Tier Honesty: Choose the output tier by workflow depth and control structure, not by how important the topic sounds or how much text was extracted.
- Independent Acceptance Gate: Do not treat the first complete draft as accepted only because all files exist. The generated skill must pass the validation gate defined below.
How (Structural Workflow)
Phase 1: Ingest & Domain Mapping
- Read the reference textbook, PDF chapters, or standard documents provided in the workspace.
- Map the textbook content to the target engineering domain:
- Embedded / Real-time: Focus on hardware constraints, register management, interrupt safety, concurrency primitives (mutexes/semaphores), RTOS tasks, and static memory bounds.
- Safety-Critical / Compliance: Focus on standards compliance (MISRA C, ISO 26262, IEC 61508, AUTOSAR), fail-safe modes, defensive coding, and boundary validation.
- General Systems: Focus on modular design, interface segregation, scalability, and error handling.
- Identify and discard passive narrative, historical anecdotes, and general explanations. Filter for actionable design patterns, rules, checklists, and testing procedures.
- If the source text is too broad, split it into a bounded extraction target such as one chapter, one pattern family, or one operational theme before drafting the skill.
Phase 2: Extract Rules & Proceduralize
- Review the detailed guidelines in extraction-guidelines.
- Translate the textbook's passive theory into imperative directives (using verbs like Verify, Configure, Implement, Check).
- Identify the Constraints: What must not happen under this methodology? (e.g., "Do not use dynamic allocation after initialization", "Do not write nested interrupts without priority configuration").
- Define the Verification Procedures: How does the agent verify that the generated code conforms to the book's guidelines? (e.g., checking compiler warning flags, static analysis steps, unit test coverage targets).
- Identify Common Rationalizations: Formulate typical excuses the agent might use to bypass these constraints (e.g., "Skipped safety-critical checks because hardware was not simulated") and detail the strict counter-rebuttal.
- Identify Red Flags: Define warning signs that indicate the skill's instructions are being violated (e.g., using
mallocin real-time loops, or unhandled priority inversions). - Extract candidate failure signals, acceptance criteria, and transfer checks for the future skill so the draft is optimization-ready from the first version.
Phase 3: Choose Tier & Draft SKILL.md
- Choose the template tier from SKILL-TEMPLATE:
- SIMPLE: A single straight-line checklist (e.g., a MISRA C helper for pointers).
- COMPLICATED: Multi-step workflows requiring inputs, outputs, and clear constraints (e.g., configuring an RTOS task pool).
- COMPLEX: Branching workflows, review loops, multi-phase control logic, or multiple supporting artifacts (e.g., design viewpoints, architectural tactics, or book-derived meta-skills).
- Create the target skill directory under the workspace.
- Write the
SKILL.mdusing the explicit Hybrid 5W1H + SSL structure defined in the chosen template tier (Scheduling, Structural, Logical). - Include the frontmatter at the top of
SKILL.md, using the multi-line block scalar format fordescription(WHEN/WHERE/WHO,HOW,WHY). - Add the template's Optimization Readiness section and fill it with concrete failure signals, evidence, safe mutation boundaries, acceptance criteria, rejection handling, and a stop rule derived from the source material.
- Always include the "One More Thing" section instructing future agents to stop and ask the user if instructions are unclear or conflicting.
Phase 4: Create Supporting README and Details
- Write a
README.mdinside the new skill directory to explain to future users (and agents) what the skill is, its folder structure, and trigger phrases. - Write a
README_ZH.mdthat mirrors the skill's scope and trigger guidance in Chinese. - If the textbook contains highly detailed, chapter-specific checklists or rules, do not clutter
SKILL.md. Move them to separate markdown files in adetails/directory and link to them using standard relative markdown links (e.g., a link pointing todetails/checklist-name.md). - Place any extraction traces, rejected naming options, or extended rule inventories in supporting files rather than bloating the main skill.
Phase 5: Self-Verify & Refine
- Run the validation gate on the draft: check that all internal markdown links are valid and clickable, the tier matches the workflow depth, the optimization-readiness section is present, and the validation steps are actionable.
- Read the drafted
SKILL.mdand check for web-stack drift (e.g., references to JavaScript, Node.js, Web APIs, or cloud platforms in an embedded RTOS skill). Correct them immediately. - Compare the draft against the extracted source evidence. If a rule cannot be traced back to the source material or domain constraints, remove or rewrite it.
- If validation fails, revise only the sections that caused the failure and rerun the same validation gate.
- Stop after two failed revision cycles on the same issue and ask the user for missing context rather than continuing uncontrolled rewrites.
Resources
- extraction-guidelines - Deep-dive guidelines on extracting procedural checklists for embedded/systems architectures.
- SKILL-TEMPLATE - The workspace templates for SIMPLE, COMPLICATED, and COMPLEX skills.
Review In Mind (ReviewInMindGenie)
Execute the common review loop in review-in-mind before delivering.
Review lens for this skill:
- Are guidelines faithful to the book and traceable to specific sections, not paraphrased inventions?
- Does the generated skill include the full required structure (frontmatter, 5W1H, Optimization Readiness, Constraints, How, Validation, Review In Mind)?
- Are safety-critical or normative rules marked as MUST and separated from recommendations?
Validation
- Verify that the skill directory contains
SKILL.md,README.md, andREADME_ZH.md. - Verify that the frontmatter is present and uses the multi-line
description: >format required by the template. - Verify that the
SKILL.mdhas the required sections matching the selected template tier, including## Optimization Readiness. - Verify that there are zero references to hallucinated libraries or tools.
- Verify that all markdown links within the skill package are valid.
- Verify that the generated skill can be executed from natural language alone and does not depend on diagrams or direct access to the original book during normal use.
- Verify that the validation log records the chosen tier, the acceptance gate results, and any rejected drafting choices.
One More Thing
If the reference material is missing, or if the safety-critical integrity levels (ASIL, SIL) are unspecified, stop and ask the user for clarification before drafting the skill.
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.

