spec-kit-generate-tasks
Skill6 starsChanged 2 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Decompose an approved technical plan (plan.md) into an executable, user-story-organized task list (tasks.md) — Setup, Foundational, one phase per user story in priority order with a mandatory closure checkpoint, then Polish. Enforces the Safe Deferral rule from spec-kit-generate-plan and traceability to spec.md/plan.md; when a task-decomposer agent is requested, generates compatible definitions for both Kiro CLI and Claude Code.
In this repository22 other files it gives its agents.
- backend-api-standardsSkill
- brain-orchestratorSkill
- brand-guidelinesSkill
- code-architecture-explainerSkill
- code-documentationSkill
- create-pull-requestSkill
- frontend-architectureSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- gh-stackSkill
- git-commitsSkill
- latex-academic-reportsSkill
- pre-pr-reviewSkill
- project-intelligenceSkill
- project-setupSkill
- spec-kit-amend-artifactsSkill
- spec-kit-analyze-consistencySkill
- spec-kit-establish-constitutionSkill
- spec-kit-execute-tasksSkill
- spec-kit-generate-planSkill
- spec-kit-generate-specSkill
- spec-kit-sync-artifactsSkill
- verify-before-implementSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
34 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 30 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
30
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 27
Always consider the complete user message and any files or attachments available in the current conversation, even when $ARGUMENTS appears …
- Distinctive: line 39
Every story's closing checkpoint is the mechanism that enforces "cierre de ciclos": a story only counts as done when it is functional and …
- Very specific: line 42
Every task traces back to an operation in plan.md and a requirement/acceptance criterion in spec.md.
- Very specific: line 47
Do not invent facts: Never fabricate a file path, an existing helper, or a test framework convention not already verified in plan.md's …
- Very specific: line 50
Preserve plan intent: Do not reinterpret, split, or merge a PL-O## operation in a way that changes what plan.md decided.
- Very specific: line 55
Surface conflicts: If decomposing an operation reveals it doesn't actually match spec.md/plan.md cleanly, report the mismatch — do not …
- Distinctive: line 63
No hollow tasks.md: Every task states a concrete action, a file (verified or explicitly proposed), a dependency (or "ninguna"), and an …
- Very specific: line 68
Keep scope controlled: No task introduces work absent from plan.md/spec.md.
- Very specific: line 70
The Closure Rule is mandatory, not optional polish: Every user-story phase — and Setup/Foundational when it gates the whole feature — ends …
- Very specific: line 74
Safe Deferral consistency is enforced during decomposition: If plan.md's Safe Deferral table marks an operation Dormant for a later story, …
- Very specific: line 82
Generate portable agent pairs: If this workflow creates a task-decomposer (or other support agent), it must generate and validate both a …
- Very specific: line 138
If logging is off (RUN_LOG: off), continue normally.
- Very specific: line 144
If the user gave an explicit plan.md path or feature directory, use it.
- Very specific: line 146
If neither resolves to a readable plan.md, stop and ask:
- Very specific: line 151
Read plan.md, spec.md, and checklists/plan-quality.md completely.
- Very specific: line 155
If plan-quality.md's STATUS is READY, proceed.
- Very specific: line 156
If it is DRAFT — NEEDS CLARIFICATION, stop and ask the user to either resolve the blocking items in spec-kit-generate-plan first, or …
- Very specific: line 160
If spec.md's own STATUS is not READY either, surface both — a plan built on a draft spec compounds the risk of a draft plan.
- Very specific: line 171
If .speckit/specs/<feature-dir>/state.json does not exist, or has no artifacts.tasks entry yet, this is the first task list for this plan — …
- Very specific: line 178
If spec-kit-sync-artifacts reports a match, plan.md hasn't changed since the last task generation — proceed normally.
- Very specific: line 180
If it reports drift, this skill does the classification spec-kit-sync-artifacts leaves to the consuming skill: identify which …
- Very specific: line 196
Read every R-US## in spec.md's Actors and Scenarios, with its Priority (P1/P2/P3).
- Distinctive: line 209
If the existing project structure and dependencies already satisfy everything Technical Context/Project Structure need — a small feature …
- Distinctive: line 316
Before validating the checklist:
- Very specific: line 318
Every task cites at least one R-FR##/R-AC## and the PL-O## it decomposes — except a [SONDA], which cites the PL-D##/RS-## it probes.
- Very specific: line 320
Every PL-O## in plan.md appears in at least one task, in the story plan.md assigned it to.
- Very specific: line 321
Every user-story phase has exactly one active [CIERRE] task covering all of that story's R-AC##.
- Very specific: line 323
Every PL-D## with evidence level assumption has a [SONDA] that precedes every task citing it.
- Very specific: line 324
Every Validación follows Rule 15.
- Very specific: line 325
No task in a story earlier than a Dormant-deferred operation's target story invokes that operation's code path (Non-Negotiable Rule 11).
- Very specific: line 331
Create checklists/tasks-quality.md from the template in references/tasks-quality-checklist.md.
- Very specific: line 338
When plan.md changed materially since the last tasks.md (Fase 0 detected drift), or a tasks-layer change was decided, follow …
- Very specific: line 343
Before task decomposition, check .speckit/extensions.yml per spec-kit-shared/artifact-conventions.md's schema, reading hooks.before_tasks.
- Very specific: line 350
After task decomposition, process hooks.after_tasks the same way, using the same emit-then-execute format the other spec-kit skills use.
≈ “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
Generate Tasks — Task Decomposition Skill
Purpose
Turn an approved technical plan (plan.md) into tasks.md: an ordered, dependency-aware,
user-story-organized task list that spec-kit-execute-tasks can run — without writing product code here.
This skill is the third link in the spec-kit chain (spec-kit-generate-spec → spec-kit-generate-plan →
spec-kit-generate-tasks): it does not redesign the plan, it decomposes an already-approved plan into
atomic, independently verifiable work.
The output is tasks.md plus checklists/tasks-quality.md. It does not implement product
code, and it does not validate cross-artifact consistency in depth — that deeper check is
spec-kit-analyze-consistency's job, when that skill is invoked.
User Input
$ARGUMENTSAlways consider the complete user message and any files or attachments available in the current
conversation, even when $ARGUMENTS appears literally or is empty. The most common input is a
reference to an existing feature directory or plan.md, with optional constraints ("only generate
tasks for the MVP story", "skip test tasks").
Core Principle
Organize by user story, not by technical layer. A story is only complete when its checkpoint holds — closure is structural, not an afterthought.
tasks.mdis grouped by user story (R-US##, inPriorityorderP1 → P2 → P3), so each story is independently implementable, testable, and deliverable as an MVP increment.- Every story's closing checkpoint is the mechanism that enforces "cierre de ciclos": a story only counts as done when it is functional and verifiable on its own — which excludes, by construction, leaving the system broken.
- Every task traces back to an operation in
plan.mdand a requirement/acceptance criterion inspec.md.
Non-Negotiable Rules
- Do not invent facts. Never fabricate a file path, an existing helper, or a test framework
convention not already verified in
plan.md's Technical Context or Project Structure. Useverify-before-implementwhen a task needs a factplan.mddidn't already establish. - Preserve plan intent. Do not reinterpret, split, or merge a
PL-O##operation in a way that changes whatplan.mddecided. Decomposing into smaller tasks is expected; changing the approach is not. - Separate facts from assumptions. A task whose exact file path isn't yet verifiable is
marked
nuevo: <proposed path>, never presented as if the path is confirmed. - Surface conflicts. If decomposing an operation reveals it doesn't actually match
spec.md/plan.mdcleanly, report the mismatch — do not silently resolve it by picking whichever task shape is easiest to write. - Organize by user story — never a flat generic task list. Structure is always Setup →
Foundational → one phase per
R-US##inPriorityorder → Polish. An operation that doesn't belong cleanly to one story is assigned to the story that needs it first, with a forward dependency noted — never placed in an ad hoc "misc" phase. - No code before approval.
tasks.mddescribes work; it does not contain product code. - No hollow tasks.md. Every task states a concrete action, a file (verified or explicitly proposed), a dependency (or "ninguna"), and an observable validation criterion. "Improve X" or "handle edge cases" without specifics is not a valid task.
- Use verified project context. Reuse
plan.md's Technical Context and Project Structure directly — do not re-derive the project's layout independently and risk disagreeing with it. - Keep scope controlled. No task introduces work absent from
plan.md/spec.md. A gap found during decomposition is reported, not quietly filled with a "nice to have" task. - The Closure Rule is mandatory, not optional polish. Every user-story phase — and
Setup/Foundational when it gates the whole feature — ends with an explicit
[CIERRE]task (§ Closure Rule below). It is never omitted, never merged into a regular task, and never marked done by inference. - Safe Deferral consistency is enforced during decomposition. If
plan.md's Safe Deferral table marks an operationDormantfor a later story, no task in an earlier story may invoke that deferred code path — doing so silently invalidates theDormantclassification. If this happens, report it as a conflict withplan.md, do not silently write the task anyway. - Every task is traceable. Each task cites the
R-FR##/R-AC##/PL-O##it satisfies (a legacy plan'sO-0#counts as itsPL-O##, per the convention's Stable ID Namespaces). - Never claim readiness without validation.
tasks.mdisREADYonly afterchecklists/tasks-quality.mdpasses. - Generate portable agent pairs. If this workflow creates a
task-decomposer(or other support agent), it must generate and validate both a Kiro CLI and a Claude Code definition per the shared portability contract. - Validations describe observable behavior, not implementation shape. A
Validaciónnames what to run and what to observe — a test, a grep with its expected count, an HTTP call and its status/body, a log line and what it must (not) contain. It never depends on a parameter name, a variable name, a hunk or line count, or "file X unchanged": those make a task impossible to close when a correct implementation differs in shape. A negative check is allowed only when it restates a specS-SG##(cite it) and is phrased as behavior ("no request log contains the full phone number"), not as a file that must stay untouched. - Every runtime premise marked
assumptiongets a[SONDA]task (plan.mdPL-D##/RS-##with evidence levelassumption), placed in Foundational — or first in the earliest story that needs it — and listed inDepende deof every task built on that premise. - Closed tasks follow the Task Lifecycle in
spec-kit-shared/artifact-conventions.md: never edited except for one appendedSuperada por:line; rework is an[ENMIENDA T0XX]task; each story keeps exactly one active[CIERRE], and a new one is created only when the story'sR-ACset changes.
Shared Files
spec-kit-shared/… paths resolve against <skills-root>, the parent of this skill's own
directory: .claude/skills/ or the host's equivalent once installed, the repository root in a
checkout of the kit. Run shared scripts from the project root as
node <skills-root>/spec-kit-shared/scripts/<script>.mjs, with <skills-root> written out as an
absolute path; a bare spec-kit-shared/… script path resolves against the project and fails.
Cross-Platform Agent Compatibility
The complete portability contract lives in spec-kit-shared/agent-portability.md (same document
spec-kit-generate-spec and spec-kit-generate-plan use). Before generating, validating, or reporting on the
task-decomposer role — or any other agent this skill materializes — read that file completely
and follow it exactly. If the active host cannot resolve the reference, follow its fallback
section.
task-decomposer is the standard role for this skill: decomposing a disproportionately large plan
operation or user story into atomic tasks, to keep the main context light. Do not invent a
different name or redefine it for another purpose.
Artifact Conventions
The .speckit/ layout (including .speckit/specs/<feature-dir>/), feature.json, state.json, and the Content
Fingerprint Convention all live in spec-kit-shared/artifact-conventions.md. Read it before Fase 0
below and follow it exactly.
Run Log
Record this run per spec-kit-shared/artifact-conventions.md § Run Log (<dir> is the feature directory): start with
node <skills-root>/spec-kit-shared/scripts/log-event.mjs <dir> run.start --skill spec-kit-generate-tasks mode=<mode> and pass the printed RUN_ID to every
later call; end with a run.end event (status, reason when it stops, next), also when the run stops early.
Pass --log <RUN_ID> --skill spec-kit-generate-tasks to fingerprint.mjs --record … tasks and lint-artifacts.mjs so they record their own results.
Record these decisions, each with a one- or two-sentence rationale citing its IDs:
drift— in update mode, each changed plan ID classified material or non-materialclosure— for rework of a closed story: a new[CIERRE](R-AC set changed) or a re-walk of the active onereadiness—READYorDRAFT, citing the failed checklist items
If logging is off (RUN_LOG: off), continue normally.
Input Contract
Resolving the Target Plan
- If the user gave an explicit
plan.mdpath or feature directory, use it. - Otherwise, read
.speckit/feature.jsonfor the active feature directory. If neither resolves to a readable
plan.md, stop and ask:Provide the feature directory or
plan.mdpath to decompose into tasks. If you haven't generated a plan yet, runspec-kit-generate-planfirst.- Read
plan.md,spec.md, andchecklists/plan-quality.mdcompletely.
Readiness Gate
- If
plan-quality.md'sSTATUSisREADY, proceed. - If it is
DRAFT — NEEDS CLARIFICATION, stop and ask the user to either resolve the blocking items inspec-kit-generate-planfirst, or explicitly confirm decomposing a draft plan into tasks. If confirmed, proceed but recordDECOMPOSED_FROM_DRAFT_PLAN: trueintasks.md's header and repeat the warning in the Completion Report. - If
spec.md's ownSTATUSis notREADYeither, surface both — a plan built on a draft spec compounds the risk of a draft plan.
New vs. Update Mode
- New mode: no
tasks.mdexists yet. Proceed through all phases below in order. - Update mode:
tasks.mdalready exists. Run Fase 0 below first; follow § Updating an Existing Task List rather than regenerating from scratch.
Fase 0 — Staleness Check (every invocation, new or update)
- If
.speckit/specs/<feature-dir>/state.jsondoes not exist, or has noartifacts.tasksentry yet, this is the first task list for this plan — skip straight to Phase 1, and create/updatestate.jsonat the end (withschema_version, perartifact-conventions.md§ Schema Versions and Migrations). - Otherwise, read
spec-kit-sync-artifacts/SKILL.mdand follow its Phase 1/2 mechanical detection procedure againstartifacts.tasks.based_on_plan_hashvs.plan.md's current content hash — do not re-derive the hashing/comparison mechanism independently. - If
spec-kit-sync-artifactsreports a match,plan.mdhasn't changed since the last task generation — proceed normally. - If it reports drift, this skill does the classification
spec-kit-sync-artifactsleaves to the consuming skill: identify whichPL-O##/PL-D##/RS-##/Safe-Deferral entries actually changed (usingspec-kit-sync-artifacts's best-effort localization, or a direct diff if it couldn't resolve one), and classify each as functionally material (a new/changed/removed operation, a changed Safe Deferral condition) or non-material (wording). Only material changes maketasks.mdstale with impact.- Report the affected IDs and which task phases they touch before proceeding. If
spec-kit-sync-artifactsflagged any already-[x]task as potentially affected, treat that with the same non-negotiable caution as § Updating an Existing Task List step 3 below.
- Report the affected IDs and which task phases they touch before proceeding. If
- This Fase 0 does not depend on
spec-kit-sync-artifactsbeing invoked as a separate conversational step — apply its documented procedure directly, inline, as part of this phase.
Workflow
Phase 1 — Determine Story Order
Read every R-US## in spec.md's Actors and Scenarios, with its Priority (P1/P2/P3).
Order user-story phases P1 → P2 → P3; within the same priority, preserve spec.md's original
order. If a story has no assigned priority (an older spec.md predating the priority field),
treat it as P1 and flag this in the Completion Report rather than silently guessing an order.
Cross-check every PL-O## in plan.md against which R-US##/R-FR## it satisfies, so each
operation can be placed in the correct story phase in Phase 4 below.
Phase 2 — Setup Tasks
Shared, low-risk project setup: creating the structure plan.md's Project Structure describes,
initializing dependencies from Technical Context. No story-specific logic here.
If the existing project structure and dependencies already satisfy everything Technical Context/Project Structure need — a small feature added to an already-scaffolded project — state that explicitly ("No setup tasks required — structure and dependencies already match plan.md") instead of manufacturing a task to fill the phase. An empty phase with a stated reason is honest; a busywork task is not (Rules 7, 9).
Phase 3 — Foundational Tasks (Blocking Prerequisites)
Infrastructure genuinely required by every user story (shared auth, shared schema setup, shared routing/middleware) — not just infrastructure convenient for one story. If in doubt whether something is Foundational or belongs to a specific story, prefer assigning it to the first story that actually needs it; an oversized Foundational phase delays every story's start unnecessarily.
Same rule as Setup: if no shared prerequisite work is actually needed beyond what already exists, say so explicitly rather than inventing a task.
[SONDA] tasks (Rule 16) for premises shared by several stories go here, first — a refuted
premise found now costs a plan amendment; found after the stories are built, it costs rework of
closed tasks.
Ends with a checkpoint statement: foundation ready, user stories may start.
Phase 4 — One Phase per User Story (in Priority order)
For each R-US##, in the order from Phase 1:
- State the Goal (from
R-US##) and Independent test (from itsR-AC##). - Tests (optional — only if
spec.mdexplicitly requests tests): write them first; they must fail before implementation exists. - Implementation tasks: decompose every
PL-O##this plan assigned to this story into atomic tasks. Use the task format below. - Closure task (§ Closure Rule): always the last task of the phase as generated; later
[ENMIENDA]tasks go after it under#### Enmiendas(Rule 17). - Checkpoint statement: the story works and is independently verifiable.
Task Format
- [ ] T0XX [P?] [USn] Description
Traza a: R-FR0#, PL-O0#
Archivo(s): ruta verificada, o "nuevo: ruta propuesta"
Depende de: ninguna | T0YY
Validación: comando o criterio observableField labels and tags (Traza a:, Validación:, [CIERRE], …) are the fixed Grammar Tokens of
artifact-conventions.md: write them exactly as shown, whatever language the task descriptions
use. Archivo(s) is where the work is expected to land, not a fence: touching another file the same
PL-O## needs does not invalidate the task. Write Validación per Rule 15 — for example
"npm test -- prelude-block pasa; GET /allow-list?phone=… deja en el log de request el teléfono
enmascarado (+52…1234)", never "el parámetro se llama now" or "main.js sin cambios".
Probe task (Rule 16):
- [ ] T0XX [SONDA] Confirmar <premisa de runtime> (PL-D0#, RS-0#)
Traza a: PL-D0#, RS-0#
Archivo(s): ninguno (script en scratch, fuera del repo)
Depende de: ninguna
Validación: el comando <probe> muestra <comportamiento esperado>; si muestra otra cosa, la
premisa queda refutada y se detienen las tareas que dependen de ella[P]: parallelizable — different files, no cross-dependency with other[P]tasks in the same phase.[USn]: which user story. Setup/Foundational tasks carry no story tag.- Sequential numbering (
T001,T002, ...) continues across the whole document — do not restart numbering per phase.
Closure Rule (mandatory — see Non-Negotiable Rule 10)
- [ ] T0XX [USn] [CIERRE] Verificar consistencia de cierre de USn
Verifica:
- Ninguna referencia colgante a código de una historia futura no marcada Dormant/Flagged/Aditiva
- Ninguna rama/ruta alcanzable queda a medio conectar
- Todo R-AC de esta historia está satisfecho o formalmente reclasificado como aplazamiento seguro (ver plan.md Safe Deferral)
Validación: recorrido explícito de las condiciones anteriores, no una inferenciaThis task is marked [x] only when it actively confirmed nothing was left half-done — never for
merely producing code. Only the story's active [CIERRE] (no Superada por: line) counts;
earlier ones are history. Cross-reference plan.md's Safe Deferral table: if this story is the
target of a deferred operation from an earlier story, the closure task also confirms that
operation genuinely remains Dormant/behind its Flag/purely Additive and hasn't been
accidentally activated by this story's own work.
Phase 5 — Polish & Cross-Cutting Concerns
Work that spans multiple stories: documentation (delegate to code-documentation when
applicable), cleanup, running quickstart.md as final validation. Depends on all targeted stories
being complete.
Phase 6 — Closing Sections (always generated)
- Dependencies & Execution Order: phase dependencies (Setup → Foundational → stories →
Polish) and, within each story, task-level order (tests before implementation, models before
services, the active
[CIERRE]last except for later[ENMIENDA]tasks). - Parallel Example: one concrete block showing
[P]tasks from theP1story launchable together. - Implementation Strategy: MVP-first (Setup + Foundational + the
P1story only, stop and validate its checkpoint), incremental delivery (one story at a time, each deployable), and parallel execution strategy (once Foundational is done, independent stories may go to separatetask-executoragents inspec-kit-execute-tasks— the story boundary is the primary parallelism unit).
Traceability and Safe Deferral Consistency Checks
Before validating the checklist:
- Every task cites at least one
R-FR##/R-AC##and thePL-O##it decomposes — except a[SONDA], which cites thePL-D##/RS-##it probes. - Every
PL-O##inplan.mdappears in at least one task, in the storyplan.mdassigned it to. - Every user-story phase has exactly one active
[CIERRE]task covering all of that story'sR-AC##; it is the last task of the phase except for[ENMIENDA]tasks under#### Enmiendas. - Every
PL-D##with evidence levelassumptionhas a[SONDA]that precedes every task citing it. - Every
Validaciónfollows Rule 15. - No task in a story earlier than a
Dormant-deferred operation's target story invokes that operation's code path (Non-Negotiable Rule 11). - Task IDs are sequential and unique across the whole document.
Validate and Iterate
Create checklists/tasks-quality.md from the template in references/tasks-quality-checklist.md.
Validate item by item, fix non-blocking failures, re-run up to three iterations. If a blocking gap
remains, set STATUS to DRAFT — NEEDS CLARIFICATION. Set READY only when every item passes.
Updating an Existing Task List
When plan.md changed materially since the last tasks.md (Fase 0 detected drift), or a
tasks-layer change was decided, follow references/updating.md completely.
Pre-Execution Extension Hooks
Before task decomposition, check .speckit/extensions.yml per
spec-kit-shared/artifact-conventions.md's schema, reading hooks.before_tasks. Follow the same
enablement/condition/mandatory-vs-optional rules spec-kit-generate-spec and spec-kit-generate-plan use for their
own hooks.
Mandatory Post-Execution Hooks
After task decomposition, process hooks.after_tasks the same way, using the same
emit-then-execute format the other spec-kit skills use.
Completion Report
Report:
RUN_ID: this run's log ID, oroff.SPECIFY_FEATURE_DIRECTORY: resolved feature directory.TASKS_FILE:tasks.mdpath.CHECKLIST_FILE:checklists/tasks-quality.mdpath.STATUS:READYorDRAFT — NEEDS CLARIFICATION.DECOMPOSED_FROM_DRAFT_PLAN:trueifplan.mdwas notREADYwhen tasks were generated.STORIES: count of user-story phases and their priorities, in the order generated.SAFE_DEFERRAL: confirmation that every plan.md Safe Deferral entry maps to exactly one later task/story, or the mismatches found.VALIDATION: passed/total checklist items and unresolved failures.TRACEABILITY: operation/requirement coverage counts.CHANGES: for updates, the story phases changed, and any closed tasks flagged for review.AGENTS:none, or every generated Kiro/Claude path with validation and parity status.NEXT: clarification if blocked; otherwise recommendspec-kit-analyze-consistency(optional deeper cross-artifact check) and thenspec-kit-execute-tasks, starting with theP1story as the MVP.
Done When
- The run was logged from
run.starttorun.end(or logging is off). plan.mdwas resolved, read, and confirmedREADY(or draft decomposition was explicitly confirmed by the user).- Fase 0 Staleness Check ran and any material drift was reported before proceeding.
- Every
R-US##'sPrioritywas read and used to order the story phases (or the missing- priority fallback was flagged). tasks.mdfollows Setup → Foundational → one phase per story (priority order) → Polish, with no task outside that structure.- Every user-story phase has exactly one active
[CIERRE]task covering that story's fullR-AC##set. - Every
assumptionruntime premise has a[SONDA]ahead of its dependent tasks. - Every
Validacióndescribes observable behavior (Rule 15). - No task violates a
Dormant/Flagged/Additiveclassification fromplan.md's Safe Deferral table. - Every task is traceable to
plan.md'sPL-O##andspec.md'sR-FR##/R-AC##. - Dependencies & Execution Order, Parallel Example, and Implementation Strategy sections were generated.
tasks.mdandchecklists/tasks-quality.mdwere written.state.jsonwas created or updated with accurate content hashes.- Every generated support agent has a validated Kiro/Claude pair, or
AGENTS: noneis reported. - No product code was generated.
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.

