agentleFS
Sign inStart free
ForgeyClapForgeyClap/Forge-Core/.claude/skills/forge-fullstack/SKILL.md

forge-fullstack

Skill2 starsChanged 5 days agoMITView on GitHub

Playbook for full-stack apps: backend, auth, SaaS, CRUD dashboards (gebruik bij een webapp).

  • Reads credentials

1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

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
  1. Distinctive:

    Use for: full-stack apps: frontend, backend, database and auth together.

    line 11

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Forge playbook — Full-stack app

When to use

  • Use for: full-stack apps: frontend, backend, database and auth together.

Do not duplicate ECC skills — defer to: make-plan/do (planning+execution), using-git-worktrees (parallel isolation), subagent-driven-development (both ship with Forge as pinned vendored skills). Orchestration only.

Hard rules

  • Auth on every protected route, enforced server-side (authn + authz). Protected pages and API routes read the session server-side (cookies); a client-side check is never the only guard, and auth tokens are not kept in localStorage.
  • Input validation on every endpoint; never trust client data.
  • Secrets in env + .env.example placeholders; no secrets in the client bundle.
  • DB migrations reviewed by database-reviewer and reversible.
  • Auth/secret/DB changes are a required Codex review area — force /codex:adversarial-review.

Team (conditional by stack/level)

  • Lead: architect + planner.
  • Frontend: react-reviewer / vue-reviewer.
  • Backend: fastapi-reviewer / django-reviewer (Python) or typescript-reviewer / go-reviewer (by stack).
  • Data: database-reviewer (Postgres/Supabase).
  • Cross-cutting: security-reviewer, tdd-guide, e2e-runner / production-validator.

Skills / commands / MCP

make-plan→do, using-git-worktrees, language build/test commands (/react-build, /python-review, etc.), /test-coverage, security-reviewer. Supabase/Shopify MCP via ToolSearch if relevant.

Fan-out & flow

L3 standard; L4 for a platform / prod client delivery (phased, review after each phase). Serial: plan → DB schema + API contract first → integration → e2e → security → review. Parallel: frontend ∥ backend ∥ schema in separate worktrees; you integrate. Don't let two agents write the same tree.

Domain gates

Auth flow tested (signup/login/logout/refresh); validation on all endpoints; migrations clean on a fresh DB; e2e green; no folder mixing.

Ship-readiness (unique)

Migrations run clean on a fresh DB; auth flow verified; .env.example complete; no secrets in repo; rollback/seed documented; dev/preview by default (production needs explicit user approval). The ship-readiness full-stack/auth checklist is advisory; optionally run codex-reviewer (Codex) on auth/migration code — not a blocker.

Safety, approval and honesty

  • Approval / safety: dev/preview by default; production needs explicit user approval.
  • Approval / safety: secrets in env + .env.example; none in the client bundle or repo.
  • Honest failure: auth flow and fresh-DB migrations count as verified only when actually run.
  • Shared gates for every playbook (honesty, owner approval, secrets, reviews): .claude/docs/forge-reference/playbook-template.md.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free