github-repo-polish
Skill0 starsChanged 45 days agoMITView on GitHub
Makes an EXISTING repo look professional (name, description, topics, README, releases) and guides GitHub Flow branching; confirms every public change first. Only when asked. NOT for writing code, routine commit/push, new repos, or CI.
- Commits and pushes
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- cstdr/royding-skillstheir own version, first seen Jun 10, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- cstdr/royding-skills★ 1same 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 repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- audit-codeSkill
- audit-docsSkill
- auditSkill
- bisect-driverSkill
- coding-conventionsSkill
- commit-gateSkill
- compact-ioSkill
- cron-task-manageSkill
- cve-auditSkill
- data-integrity-auditSkill
- decision-logSkill
- deck-builderSkill
- determinism-guardSkill
- etl-validateSkill
- experiment-logSkill
- fetch-firstSkill
- flaky-test-detectorSkill
- golden-lockSkill
- history-leak-scanSkill
- landing-checkSkill
- llm-eval-harnessSkill
- local-secrets-manageSkill
- long-taskSkill
- milestone-trackSkill
- opus-workersSkill
- path-quirk-auditSkill
- reorg-proposalSkill
- research-briefSkill
- seed-controlSkill
- shell-portabilitySkill
- skill-vetSkill
- small-taskSkill
- token-squeezeSkill
- venue-fitSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 5 are 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.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 25
Does NOT fire on: routine "commit this"/"push this" of already-settled work, writing or refactoring code, "create a new repo"/scaffolding a …
- Distinctive: line 52
Never rename or publish without an explicit yes.
- Very specific: line 54
Anti-fabrication (portfolio-grade — this is the #1 rule): Every claim in a README/description/release-notes must trace to REAL repo content …
- Very specific: line 62
Surgical + respect what's there: Read the current state first (Step 0), propose the minimum that raises the bar, and match the project's …
- Distinctive: line 68
Don't propose blind. Read what's already set (verified on gh 2.96.0):
- Very specific: line 192
Every .md file this skill creates or writes to gets ASCII characters only (bytes 0x00-0x7F) in the text you add.
- Very specific: line 200
Check before saving. In a git repo, git diff -U0 -- <file> | grep -v '^+++' | grep '^+' | grep -nP '[^\x00-\x7F]' must print nothing.
- Distinctive: line 204
Leave non-ASCII in text you did not write.
≈ “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
github-repo-polish
Make a repo look professional on GitHub, and run a clean git workflow on it. Two layers: the presentation / discoverability surface, and the branch workflow (GitHub Flow). Every outward-facing change is proposed first and only applied on an explicit yes.
Trigger
Fires on an explicit request to (a) polish an existing repo's presentation — "professionalize this repo", "set up the repo's description and topics", "write a proper README", "cut a v1 release" — or (b) run/learn the branch workflow — "should I make a branch for this", "how do I open a PR", "set up a feature branch", "walk me through GitHub Flow".
Does NOT fire on: routine "commit this"/"push this" of already-settled work, writing or refactoring code, "create a new repo"/scaffolding a project, or CI/Actions/Projects/Wikis/Pages/Discussions (all out of scope, below).
Scope
In: repo name, description, topics, homepage URL, README structure,
default branch, git tags + semver releases, and the branch workflow
(feature branches → PR → merge → delete, GitHub Flow).
Out (say so, don't improvise): GitHub Actions/CI, Projects, Wikis, Pages,
Discussions, packages, branch-protection rules, org/security settings. README
prose texture → defer to the-humanizer. Turning the project record into a
narrative case study → defer to portfolio-case-study.
Hard rules (read before running anything)
- PROPOSE → CONFIRM → APPLY. Never auto-apply a public change. For every
mutating command —
rename,--description,--add-topic/--remove-topic,--homepage,--default-branch,release create— show the user the exact command and the before→after, get an explicit yes, THEN run it. Theghpermission prompt is the hard gate; your job is to surface the consequence before it:- Rename breaks every existing clone URL and link. GitHub adds a redirect, but don't rely on it — flag it and confirm before renaming.
- A published release is public and notifies watchers. Draft first
(
--draft) for review unless the user says publish. - Changing the default branch affects PRs/clones — confirm. Never rename or publish without an explicit yes.
- Anti-fabrication (portfolio-grade — this is the #1 rule). Every claim in a
README/description/release-notes must trace to REAL repo content (code, the
project record, commits, tests). No invented features, metrics, benchmarks,
"used by", or badges for things that don't exist. Topics must be real tech in
the repo. Missing info stays a marked
[ADD: …]placeholder — never filled with a plausible guess. For a portfolio or public repo, a fabricated claim is worse than a blank. - Surgical + respect what's there. Read the current state first (Step 0), propose the minimum that raises the bar, and match the project's existing conventions/CLAUDE.md. "Already solid, leave it" is a valid outcome.
Step 0 — inspect current state first
Don't propose blind. Read what's already set (verified on gh 2.96.0):
gh repo view <owner>/<repo> --json name,nameWithOwner,description,homepageUrl,repositoryTopics,defaultBranchRef,visibility,latestReleaseThen propose only the gaps.
Playbook
Target the repo explicitly in EVERY command — pass the <owner>/<repo>
positional (e.g. gh repo edit OWNER/REPO --description "…"), OR run from inside
the repo's working dir. The bare form infers the repo from your cwd's git remote
and dies with fatal: not a git repository if you're not in it. Use the
explicit target so it works from anywhere.
gh flags below are grounded in cli.github.com/manual; anything genuinely
undocumented is tagged [verify]. Prefer LONG flags (e.g. --homepage, not
-h, which is the usual --help alias).
Name
Lowercase, hyphen-separated, descriptive. Rules: ≤ 100 code points; only
hyphen -, underscore _, period ., or ASCII alphanumerics (other chars
collapse to a single hyphen). Rename only with explicit confirm (Rule 1):
gh repo rename <new-name> # current repo; add --yes to skip gh's own prompt
gh repo rename <new-name> --repo OWNER/OLD # a different repoDescription
One line, concrete, says what it is and who it's for — no buzzwords, no
fabricated scope. Max length ~350 chars [verify: community-reported, not in
official docs].
gh repo edit <owner>/<repo> --description "One-line: what it is and who it is for (concrete, no buzzwords)"Topics
5–15 real ones (language, framework, domain). Rules (GitHub docs): ≤ 20 topics, each ≤ 50 chars, lowercase letters + numbers + hyphens only. Repeat the flag per topic (most reliable form):
gh repo edit <owner>/<repo> --add-topic fastapi --add-topic nextjs --add-topic typescript --add-topic volunteering
gh repo edit <owner>/<repo> --remove-topic <stale-topic>README (structure checklist — not prose)
Propose the sections; hand the actual writing voice to the-humanizer and any
record→narrative to portfolio-case-study. A portfolio README should have, each
grounded in real repo content:
- Title + one-line what/why.
- Status + stack — only badges/tech that are real.
- Demo — screenshot / GIF / live link, only if it exists (else
[ADD: …]). - What it does — real features only.
- Run it — the actual commands from the repo (verify they work).
- Architecture / decisions — link to
docs// the project record, don't restate. - Tests — how to run them; real coverage only.
- License.
Mark every section you can't ground as
[ADD: …]rather than inventing it.
Branches, tags, releases (semver)
Tags are vMAJOR.MINOR.PATCH (the v is convention; semver itself is X.Y.Z,
non-negative integers). MAJOR = incompatible change, MINOR = backward-compatible
addition, PATCH = backward-compatible fix. Cut a release (confirm first, Rule 1):
gh release create v1.0.0 --target main --title "…" --notes "…" # notes trace to real changes
gh release create v1.0.0 --draft # draft for review first
gh release create v1.0.0 --generate-notes # starting point ONLY — still verify every line--generate-notes is a draft aid, not a source of truth — anti-fabrication still applies to whatever it produces.
Homepage
gh repo edit <owner>/<repo> --homepage https://example.comBranch workflow (GitHub Flow)
Branches isolate work so main stays stable and shippable — you write and test
on a branch, then merge back only when it's ready. When to branch: start a
new branch off an up-to-date main for each distinct unit of work —
- a feature (
feature-<name>), - a bug fix (
fix-<name>), - a risky experiment (a throwaway you can discard if it fails).
A tiny solo tweak can go straight to main; anything you might not finish
cleanly, or that could break main, gets a branch. (Team collaboration is the
other reason — branches keep two people off the same live files.)
The cycle is create → work → PR → merge → delete. Creating/switching
branches locally is harmless and reversible — do it freely. But push, PR,
merge, and remote-branch delete are outward-facing: gate them behind Rule 1 and
the user's standing rules — commit/push only when the user authorizes, and merge is a
confirm-first action (it ships to main).
# 1. Create off a fresh main (local — no confirm needed)
git switch main && git pull # or: git checkout main && git pull
git switch -c feature-login-page # or: git checkout -b feature-login-page
# 2. Work, then push (push = confirm first; commit only when the user authorizes)
git push -u origin feature-login-page # first push sets upstream
# 3. Open a PR (confirm first — outward-facing)
gh pr create --fill # title/body from commits; or --title/--body; --web for the browser
# 4. Merge after review/CI (confirm first — this ships to main)
gh pr merge --squash --delete-branch # or --merge / --rebase; -d also drops the local branch
# 5. Sync local afterward
git switch main && git pull
git branch -d feature-login-page # if not already removed by --delete-branchBranch names: lowercase, hyphenated, describing the work (feature-…, fix-…,
chore-…). Never force-push a shared branch, and never merge without the user's go.
(git switch -c needs git ≥ 2.23; git checkout -b is the universal fallback.
gh pr needs gh auth status green.)
Prerequisites
gh must be installed and authenticated (gh auth status). If not, say so and
stop — don't fabricate the outcome (report it as blocked). All writes need repo push
access [verify auth scope per command if a write is rejected].
ASCII-only markdown (rule added 2026-09-23)
Every .md file this skill creates or writes to gets ASCII characters only
(bytes 0x00-0x7F) in the text you add. No exceptions for headings, tables,
quotes, names or pasted tool output.
- Dashes:
-(never an en or em dash). Arrows:->and<-. Quotes: straight"and'. Ellipsis:.... Math:x,+/-,<=,>=,~. Separators:-,;or|. No emoji, no check-mark glyphs (use[x]and[ ]), no accented letters: transliterate names and quoted text. - Check before saving. In a git repo,
git diff -U0 -- <file> | grep -v '^+++' | grep '^+' | grep -nP '[^\x00-\x7F]'must print nothing. For a new or untracked file,grep -nP '[^\x00-\x7F]' <file>must print nothing. - Leave non-ASCII in text you did not write. Earlier entries of an append-only record stay byte for byte; converting an existing file is a separate, explicit job.
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.

