agentleFS
Grit-77Grit-77/done-is-a-claim/AGENTS.md

done-is-a-claim

AGENTS.md33 starsChanged 34 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Rules for coding agents. Each one exists because breaking it cost us a real failure; the story behind each is in INCIDENTS.md.

  • Deletes or force-pushes

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this AGENTS.md into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Unknown is not pass: If a check could not run, report it as not run, with the reason.

    line 16
  2. Distinctive:

    Green means every required check: Read every required CI job on the revision, not the one you picked.

    line 17
  3. Very specific:

    Verify every citation: Check repository citations with git cat-file -e <sha> and git cat-file -e <ref>:<path>.

    line 24
  4. Very specific:

    A test that repeats a constant proves nothing: If the code says MIN = 3.51 and the test checks 3.51, ask where 3.51 came from.

    line 29

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 40,246 AGENTS.md 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
AGENTS.md

Done is a claim

Rules for coding agents. Each one exists because breaking it cost us a real failure; the story behind each is in INCIDENTS.md.

Before you start

  1. Write the acceptance command before the work. Name the observable outcome it checks. Never weaken it to make it pass; if the command is wrong, explain and record a correction that preserves the intended outcome before relying on it.
  2. Check that every path you were given exists. Resolve missing inputs before relying on them. An explicitly requested new file is different: verify its intended parent and scope.

Before you say "done"

  1. Re-run the acceptance yourself, on the current work, and quote its output. Name the revision and any uncommitted inputs. A check that changes those inputs does not certify the resulting tree.
  2. Run the whole relevant suite, not only your test. Your test passing says nothing about the tests next to it. If a required check cannot run, name the gap instead of claiming full verification.
  3. Record the command's own exit code. In cmd | tail; echo $? the $? belongs to tail. Capture the producer's status before reading its saved output, or use the shell's per-command pipeline statuses. pipefail detects a failing pipeline but is not necessarily the producer's own code.
  4. "No tests ran" is a failure. An exit code of 4 or 5 from pytest, an empty collection or a skipped suite is not a pass.
  5. Unknown is not pass. If a check could not run, report it as not run, with the reason.
  6. Green means every required check. Read every required CI job on the revision, not the one you picked; report skipped or unavailable checks explicitly.

When you report

  1. Read the artefact, not the summary. A status: ok file, a log that says "Saved" or a falling counter describes something narrower than your claim. Open the diff, the file, the frame.
  2. A file that exists is not a file that works. Decode the image, load the page, run the binary.
  3. Look at it yourself. A 200 response is not a working page; open it and look.
  4. Verify every citation. Check repository citations with git cat-file -e <sha> and git cat-file -e <ref>:<path>; open external sources and verify that they support the claim. Identify private or historical sources and their access limits.
  5. State the base, and re-check it before you publish. "Tested on abc123" stays true; "abc123 is current main" expires.

When you write tests and fixes

  1. A test that repeats a constant proves nothing. If the code says MIN = 3.51 and the test checks 3.51, ask where 3.51 came from.
  2. Fix the class, not the instance. Find every call site of the defect before you call it fixed, and test more than the one you changed.
  3. Run a detector on a known-good case first. A check that flags 100% of its inputs is measuring itself.
  4. Register cleanup before the work it cleans up. Cleanup placed after the work never runs on the path that fails.

Never

  1. Never run a destructive command to answer a question. git status and git diff answer "does this match main"; git reset --hard destroys the answer.

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.