classify
Skill4 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Assess or re-assess the innovation-vs-implementation classification and 0-100 innovation weight for one feature or the whole Product/Features set, then regenerate the ranked features-index.md and run the portfolio sanity check. Use when features need (re)ranking or after editing the UVP.
5 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- synaptiai/agent-capability-standardtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- norrietaylor/distillerytheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Seanathon/vault-startertheir own version, first seen Sep 28, 2026
- Colab8/rosetta-plugintheir own version, first seen Mar 24, 2026
- toneron2/agentic-platformtheir own version, first seen Jan 10, 2026
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- norrietaylor/distillery★ 25same name
- synaptiai/agent-capability-standard★ 6same name
- toneron2/agentic-platform★ 2same name
- Colab8/rosetta-plugin★ 0same name
- Seanathon/vault-starter★ 0same 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.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
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
- Very specific: line 17
Trace: every innovation feature must cite a contributes_to: UVP-x from Product/innovation.md.
- Very specific: line 23
Target: Default to all Product/Features/F*.md.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
/classify — rank features innovation vs. implementation
You judge each feature against the UVP and assign a binary bucket plus a 0–100 weight, then produce the ranked "where's our edge" index and flag portfolio problems.
Reference: the rubric
A feature is innovation if it embodies the unfair advantage — a reason a user switches. It is implementation if it is necessary for a usable product but undifferentiated (table-stakes every competitor has).
- Decision test: "If a competitor shipped this exact feature tomorrow, would we lose our edge?" Yes → innovation. "Would every competitor have this too?" Yes → implementation.
- Weight: implementation →
0. Innovation →1–100, proportional to how much of the moat the feature carries. Reserve 80–100 for the few features that are the reason to exist. - Trace: every innovation feature must cite a
contributes_to: UVP-xfromProduct/innovation.md. A feature that traces to no UVP element is probably implementation — reclassify it.
Procedure
- Load the reference. Read
Product/innovation.mdfor the enumerated UVP elements (UVP-1, UVP-2…). If it's missing, warn that classification is being done without a defined UVP (soft) and proceed using the user's stated differentiators. Also readProduct/competition.mdif present — the comparison matrix is hard evidence: a capability every rival already has is table-stakes (implementation); a whitespace capability mapping to a UVP is innovation. Prefer matrix evidence over gut. - Target. Default to all
Product/Features/F*.md; or a single feature if the user names one. - Classify each. Apply the decision test, set
classification,innovation_weight,contributes_to, and a one-sentenceclassification_rationale. Update the file frontmatter in place (don't touch the body). - Portfolio sanity checks — report, don't silently pass. Use concrete thresholds so the check is consistent, not a vibe:
- No innovation features (0%) → red flag: "nothing here is a reason to exist." Push the user to find the edge or revisit
/innovate. - Innovation-heavy (>40% of features tagged innovation) → warn: most products are mostly table-stakes; challenge the weakest "innovation" tags. (>60% is a hard flag.)
- Weight clustering — only checked when there are ≥3 innovation features (with fewer, spread isn't meaningful — skip it). When it applies: if innovation weights span <30 points (e.g. all in 80–100), the weights aren't ranking anything; push for spread.
- Near-duplicate edge (two+ innovation features tracing to the same UVP with overlapping
depends_on) → likely one capability split in two; suggest merging, or making one a child of the other viadepends_on. - Healthy shape: mostly implementation (≤40% innovation), a few sharp innovation features with a real weight gradient.
- No innovation features (0%) → red flag: "nothing here is a reason to exist." Push the user to find the edge or revisit
- Regenerate
Product/features-index.md— a rollup sorted by classification then weight desc:
# Features index
_Generated by /classify — N features · X innovation · Y implementation_
## Innovation (ranked — where's our edge)
| weight | id | title | UVP | priority | status |
|-------:|----|-------|-----|----------|--------|
| 90 | F004 | ... | UVP-1 | must | proposed |
## Implementation (table-stakes)
| id | title | priority | status |
|----|-------|----------|--------|
| F001 | ... | must | proposed |- Report the ranked edge list and any sanity-check flags as your closing summary.
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.

