agentleFS
InSciCoInSciCo/i-framework/.claude/skills/feature/SKILL.md

feature

Skill4 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Create or revise a single Product feature file with a complete user story, Given/When/Then acceptance criteria, and an innovation-vs-implementation classification. Use when adding one feature to Product/Features/, or refining an existing feature, outside a full /innovate run.

71 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use bug, bugfix and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • paulocsbSkill

    bug

    Investigation playbook for fixing a bug. Walks through 5 phases: reproduce → isolate → root cause → propose fix → validate. Forces concrete reasoning with code reads, log inspection, and git blame instead of pattern-matching guesses. Use for any non-trivial defect.

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • team-attentionSkill

    bugfix

    Root cause based one-shot bug fix. debugger diagnosis → requirements.md generation → /execute. /bugfix "error description" Full investigation pipeline: debugger + gap-analyzer + standard verify. QA suggestion after successful fix.

    Also in 7 projects that use this

  • codebycoreySkill

    adopt

    Adopt an existing plan from conversation context into delta-spec format. Use when importing a plan, adopting planning that already happened, capturing plan mode output, or bringing in prior design work.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • Google CloudSkill

    fix

    Plan a remediation strategy after a test failure.

    Also in 10 projects that use this

  • marylinSkill

    recover

    Recover work from a crashed or interrupted session. Use when Claude crashed mid-task, after an unexpected exit, when you see 'stale sessions detected', or when you lost context and need to figure out what was happening.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • aegiswizardSkill

    context

    Also in 4 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 65 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Write a one-sentence classification_rationale.

    line 25

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 65 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.

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

/feature — author one feature file (the atom)

You produce or revise exactly one file in Product/Features/ that conforms to the feature schema. Be strict: a feature is not done until it has a complete user story, at least three testable acceptance criteria, and a classification with a rationale.

Procedure

  1. Locate the product root. Find Product/Features/ from the current directory. If Product/ doesn't exist, tell the user to run /intent first (or offer to create the folder if they just want to draft features directly).
  2. New or revise?
    • Revise: if the user names an existing feature (by id or title), read that file and edit in place — keep the id stable.
    • New: scan Features/F*.md, find the highest F<NNN>, assign the next id. Filename = F<NNN>-<kebab-slug>.md.
  3. Gather the content. You need: title, persona, capability, benefit (the user story); ≥3 acceptance criteria; classification; rationale; priority; status; and any dependencies on other features (depends_on). If the caller (e.g. /innovate) supplied these, use them. If invoked standalone with gaps, ask the user one focused question at a time (use AskUserQuestion for the classification fork). Do not invent a user story from nothing — ask.
  4. Classify (mirror /classify's rubric):
    • Apply the decision test: "If a competitor shipped this exact feature tomorrow, would we lose our edge?" → innovation. "Would every competitor's product have this too?" → implementation.
    • Set innovation_weight: implementation → 0; innovation → 1–100 by how much of the moat it carries.
    • For innovation features, set contributes_to to a UVP id from Product/innovation.md (read it if present). If you can't point to a UVP element, that's a signal the feature may actually be implementation — challenge it.
    • Write a one-sentence classification_rationale.
  5. Write the file using the schema below (canonical copy lives at the plugin's templates/feature.md). Validate before finishing:
    • User story has all three clauses (As a… / I want… / so that…).
    • ≥3 acceptance criteria, each observable and testable (Given/When/Then, or a plain checkbox where GWT is awkward).
    • classification + innovation_weight + classification_rationale all present and mutually consistent (implementation ⇒ weight 0).
  6. Refresh the index. Note that Product/features-index.md is now stale; offer to run /classify (regenerates the ranked index) or /product-status.

Schema (reproduce exactly)

---
id: F00N
title: Short feature name
classification: innovation | implementation
innovation_weight: 0-100        # implementation = 0; innovation = 1-100
classification_rationale: One sentence.
contributes_to: UVP-x           # innovation features only
priority: must | should | could | wont
status: proposed | validated | building | done
risk_retired:
created_by_stage: ideation | innovation | manual
depends_on: [F00X]              # optional, structured — features this builds on
---

## User story
As a **<persona>**, I want **<capability>**, so that **<benefit>**.

## Acceptance criteria
- [ ] **Given** <context>, **when** <action>, **then** <result>.
- [ ] ...
- [ ] ...

## Notes & open questions
- ...

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.