maestro
Skill5 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the user wants the singular Meta-Architect in-session autonomous manager: choose the best next workflow step, manage the fixed gated workflow, and route bounded helper handoffs inside Codex.
11 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- agentmemoir/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- permgps/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 23, 2026
- impravin22/my-claude-maestrotheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- thesammykins/skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 14, 2026
- TienDat11/maestrotheir own version, first seen Aug 2, 2026
- PythonShe/Repertoiretheir own version, first seen Jul 10, 2026
Other versions11 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- JustineDevs/premortem★ 285% same
Wrote their own version · 10
- xenitV1/claude-code-maestro★ 230same name
- michele-prandina/ClaudE2E★ 8same name
- agentmemoir/skills★ 2same name
- junjie-z666/skills★ 2same name
- permgps/skills★ 1same name
- TienDat11/maestro★ 1same name
- tuannv14/claude-team-toolkit★ 1same name
- impravin22/my-claude-maestro★ 0same name
- PythonShe/Repertoire★ 0same name
- thesammykins/skills★ 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
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
21 rules. 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 9 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 10 edited versions we read keep these.
12
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
9
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 21
When the issue is alignment, diagnosis, regression-first execution, or final-pass cleanup, hand work to the publishable but non-gating …
- Very specific: line 26
When the user wants the full Meta-Architect workflow, manage the fixed gated sequence without inventing new gates or skipping lane …
- Distinctive: line 33
Run guardrails before completion, then use a contained rollout or preview with monitoring and rollback evidence where the task changes an …
- Distinctive: line 67
Never claim that TypeSafe, Jev, JEV, or a model was used from the presence of a skill, an API key, a package, a configuration default, or a …
- Very specific: line 70
Only claim Jev provider usage when the current runtime contains fresh evidence in .ma/state/manager-runs.json or the Maestro event log …
- Very specific: line 76
When no such evidence exists, report: provider use: not verified.
- Distinctive: line 86
Prefer the smallest next step that moves the workflow forward safely.
- Very specific: line 88
Treat persisted .ma state as the source for resume, deduplication, dependency ordering, cancellation, and bounded retries.
- Distinctive: line 89
Keep autonomous execution bounded by task dependencies, concurrency limits, deadlines, retry limits, and explicit safety gates.
- Very specific: line 92
Treat the in-session skill flow as primary.
- Very specific: line 93
Keep $maestro as the only umbrella surface.
- Very specific: line 95
Do not expand the release-gated sequence for this release.
- Distinctive: line 97
Keep the workflow architecture-first.
- Distinctive: line 98
Use approved discovery accelerators such as Ossium, Trendshift, Dev Hunt, Libraries.io, Open Hub, and Open-source Projects when you need …
- Very specific: line 99
Keep the $sage order explicit: known upstream sources first, discovery accelerators second, exact repo mapping third, approval only after …
- Distinctive: line 100
Prefer official docs, upstream repos, and repo-configured GitMCP sources when validating tooling choices.
- Distinctive: line 116
Use the Chai Discovery cycle for capability selection: collect every readable project and user skill surface, classify each capability, …
- Distinctive: line 121
Prefer project-local skills over global skills when the capability name is the same.
- Very specific: line 124
Before lane selection, load selected SKILL.md instructions in dependency order into a bounded, read-only execution packet and persist its …
- Distinctive: line 127
Treat that loaded instruction context as workflow input, never as build evidence.
- Distinctive: line 128
Do not mutate, copy, or claim ownership of third-party skill sources.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 10 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
Maestro
Overview
Use this skill inside Codex as the singular Meta-Architect umbrella surface and persistent autonomous manager. It accepts one task or a durable batch, inspects workflow state, chooses the smallest safe next step, manages the fixed gated design-and-review sequence, and keeps resuming eligible work until each task is completed, blocked, cancelled, or failed. It never invents a second umbrella command. There is no separate shipped $meta-architect skill.
Workflow
- Triage the task as P0, P1, P2, or P3 and record the reason, risk, definition of done, and rollback boundary before mutation.
- Understand the current gate state, active evidence, repository boundaries, and blockers.
- Design the smallest safe change, then trim unrelated scope before selecting an owner.
- Choose the smallest safe next step and decide whether the next move is:
- a direct advisory result
- a helper-skill handoff
- a gated-lane handoff
- When the issue is alignment, diagnosis, regression-first execution, or final-pass cleanup, hand work to the publishable but non-gating helper skills:
$align$diagnose$tdd$cleanup
- When the user wants the full Meta-Architect workflow, manage the fixed gated sequence without inventing new gates or skipping lane ownership:
$arch$sage$flow$vet$vibe$build
- Run guardrails before completion, then use a contained rollout or preview with monitoring and rollback evidence where the task changes an external or production surface.
- End with a clear result shape: priority, decision, evidence, blockers, the lane assignment if any, rollout state, and the exact next trigger.
Senior execution contract
Maestro is responsible for deciding what it is doing, not merely suggesting the next lane. It must preserve the P0-P3 classification, execution plan, definition of done, verification evidence, and rollback boundary in durable task state. It may continue safe local work autonomously, but it must stop for credentials, destructive actions, external mutations, production promotion, explicit approval gates, unavailable required providers, or missing evidence.
Autonomous task loop
For a task or batch, keep the manager loop active across turns:
- Normalize the request into the durable
.matask contract before dispatch. - Discover the selected host, available skills, and required lane syntax without taking ownership of user-installed assets.
- Dispatch independent tasks with bounded concurrency and preserve dependency order for dependent tasks.
- Inspect, implement, test, review, repair, and verify. Route a failure back to its owning lane with the failure evidence attached.
- Persist checkpoints, receipts, and the next trigger after every transition so an interrupted process can resume safely.
- Continue unaffected batch tasks when one task is blocked, then return a batch summary with terminal states and unresolved blockers.
Routine local work continues without asking for another prompt. Live Jev credentials are optional: without them, the runtime uses its bounded local policy and records that Jev was not used. Stop only for destructive actions, production or external mutations, explicit approval gates, unsafe commands, unavailable required providers, or missing verification evidence.
Output
Produce:
- current situation summary
- best next step
- why that step is next
- recommended lane or assignment
- what to avoid doing yet
- exact next trigger, command, or handoff
Provider truthfulness
The in-session $maestro skill is an orchestration instruction surface. Loading
this skill does not by itself call TypeSafe, Jev, or any other decision provider.
Never claim that TypeSafe, Jev, JEV, or a model was used from the presence of a
skill, an API key, a package, a configuration default, or a typed workflow state.
Only claim Jev provider usage when the current runtime contains fresh evidence in
.ma/state/manager-runs.json or the Maestro event log showing a successful
decision with provider: "jev", its decision id, and the selected eligible
action. A failed request, missing key, timeout, malformed response, or merely
configured provider is not usage evidence.
When no such evidence exists, report: provider use: not verified. If the
runtime fell back to local policy, report decision provider: local and
provider use: not verified. If the user asks whether TypeSafe or Jev was used,
inspect the persisted runtime evidence first. If the user invoked /maestro
inside a host without running the local Maestro runtime, explain that the skill
was loaded but no provider call was verified; do not fill the gap with an
assumption.
Rules
- Prefer the smallest next step that moves the workflow forward safely.
- Continue eligible work until the current task or batch reaches a terminal state; do not stop after a single successful lane.
- Treat persisted
.mastate as the source for resume, deduplication, dependency ordering, cancellation, and bounded retries. - Keep autonomous execution bounded by task dependencies, concurrency limits, deadlines, retry limits, and explicit safety gates.
- Respect current gate state before recommending implementation or release work.
- Be explicit when more evidence, planning, or validation is still needed.
- Treat the in-session skill flow as primary. Use
ma ...terminal helpers only when repo-local setup, inspection, or scripted state automation is explicitly the better support path. - Keep
$maestroas the only umbrella surface. It owns next-step management and bounded handoff decisions, but it does not replace the outputs owned by the gated lanes. - Helper skills are publishable mirrors, but they are non-gating. They support a lane and then hand control back to
$maestroor the fixed gated sequence. - Do not expand the release-gated sequence for this release. Gate ownership stays with
$arch -> $sage -> $flow -> $vet -> $vibe -> $build. - Stay inside Codex unless the user explicitly asks for repo-local helper commands.
- Keep the workflow architecture-first. Do not jump into code before the architecture and review lanes are grounded.
- Use approved discovery accelerators such as Ossium, Trendshift, Dev Hunt, Libraries.io, Open Hub, and Open-source Projects when you need faster OSS candidate discovery, then validate any promising project through upstream repos and official docs.
- Keep the
$sageorder explicit: known upstream sources first, discovery accelerators second, exact repo mapping third, approval only after upstream verification. - Prefer official docs, upstream repos, and repo-configured GitMCP sources when validating tooling choices.
- For release gates and branch policy, read
references/core-release-rules.md. - For the native helper-family contract and pattern classification, read
references/native-ingest-map.md.
$maestro
Maestro is the autonomous decision and verification loop. It does not replace or copy user skills. At intake it discovers project-local and user-global skill surfaces, ranks them against the task, and writes .ma/context/skill-composition-plan.json.
Capability brokerage
- This brokerage is a required
$maestrointake step. Every manager run must persist itscapabilityPlanin.ma/state/manager-runs.jsonand the full plan in.ma/context/skill-composition-plan.jsonbefore lane selection. - A task goal is enough; users do not need to name skills. Direct matches are
preferred, then a bounded
ambient_fallbackselects readable project and user skills when the goal has no direct domain match. An empty goal selects no specialist capability and must be clarified by the task contract. - Use the Chai Discovery cycle for capability selection: collect every readable project and user skill surface, classify each capability, rank it against the task intent, compose nested references in dependency order, and enforce the read-only boundary before dispatch. This is a Meta-Architect workflow name; it is not an external provider or dependency.
- Prefer project-local skills over global skills when the capability name is the same.
- Select only task-relevant skills; unrelated installed skills remain untouched.
- Compose referenced skills in dependency order when the host can load them.
- Before lane selection, load selected
SKILL.mdinstructions in dependency order into a bounded, read-only execution packet and persist its receipt under.ma/tasks/skill-execution-receipts/. - Treat that loaded instruction context as workflow input, never as build evidence.
- Do not mutate, copy, or claim ownership of third-party skill sources.
- Claim a skill was used only when the vendor surface returns a host receipt.
Feedback loop
- Apply Kaizen to every bounded attempt: plan the capability set, run the
owning lane, check fresh runtime evidence, and act on the failure by producing
a rerouted plan. The cycle is persisted in
.ma/learning/skill-kaizen.ndjson; it can improve the next attempt but cannot rewrite user skills, release state, source evidence, or security boundaries.
After each implementation step, use fresh tests, type checks, static checks, and runtime evidence. If verification fails, preserve the failure receipt, reroute the next bounded attempt toward the matching security, test, architecture, performance, or debugging capability, and retry only within the task contract. A passing generation without fresh execution evidence is not complete.
The broker and loader are the MA-owned instruction execution boundary. They do not pretend that a vendor-native command was invoked: a vendor host receipt is still required for a native execution claim.
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.

