agentleFS
Kastalien-ResearchKastalien-Research/thoughtbox/.agents/skills/implement/SKILL.md

implement

Skill64 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Implement a specification using a TDD-oriented workflow. Extracts requirements, generates tests first, then implements to pass the tests. Includes spiral detection and acceptance gates.

192 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use setup-ts-deep-modules, ask-matt 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.
  • liufeng1976Skill

    setup-ts-deep-modules

    Wire dependency-cruiser into a TypeScript repo so each package is a deep module — implementation hidden in subfolders, reachable only through its entry-point files. User-invoked.

    Also in 43 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    ask-matt

    Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.

    Also in 91 projects that use this

  • RoentekSkill

    loop-me

    Grill me about specs for the workflows I want to build, within this workspace.

    Also in 50 projects that use this

  • AWSSkill

    to-questionnaire

    Turn a decision you can't fully answer into a questionnaire for someone else to fill in.

    Also in 88 projects that use this

  • ryotaroh180105Skill

    claude-handoff

    Hand the current conversation off to a fresh background agent that picks up the work immediately.

    Also in 42 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    to-spec

    Turn the current conversation into a spec and publish it to the project issue tracker — no interview, just synthesis of what you've already discussed.

    Also in 168 projects that use this

  • +3 more from google

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

9 rules. 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 172 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 9

    Distinctive

    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:

    Read the spec file (if a path was given) or parse the description

    line 14
  2. Distinctive:

    Create a checklist of acceptance criteria

    line 17
  3. Distinctive:

    Write a failing test that captures the requirement

    line 21
  4. Distinctive:

    Run the test to confirm it fails (red)

    line 22
  5. Distinctive:

    Run the test to confirm it passes (green)

    line 28
  6. Distinctive:

    Check for regressions after each change

    line 30
  7. Distinctive:

    Spiral detection: If you find yourself editing the same files 3+ times without making progress, stop and reassess your approach.

    line 32
  8. Distinctive:

    Run the full test suite

    line 35
  9. Distinctive:

    Check for edge cases not covered by tests

    line 37

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 172 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

Implement the following specification: $ARGUMENTS

Workflow

Phase 1: Requirement Extraction (10% of effort)

  1. Read the spec file (if a path was given) or parse the description
  2. Extract atomic, testable requirements
  3. Identify dependencies (internal and external)
  4. Create a checklist of acceptance criteria

Phase 2: Test-First Development (25% of effort)

For each requirement:

  1. Write a failing test that captures the requirement
  2. Run the test to confirm it fails (red)
  3. Move to the next requirement

Phase 3: Implementation (50% of effort)

For each failing test (in dependency order):

  1. Implement the minimum code to make the test pass
  2. Run the test to confirm it passes (green)
  3. Refactor if needed (keeping tests green)
  4. Check for regressions after each change

Spiral detection: If you find yourself editing the same files 3+ times without making progress, stop and reassess your approach.

Phase 4: Verification (15% of effort)

  1. Run the full test suite
  2. Walk through each acceptance criterion — does the implementation satisfy it?
  3. Check for edge cases not covered by tests
  4. Report results

Output

At completion, present:

## Implementation Summary

Requirements: [N total, N implemented, N deferred]
Tests: [N passing, N failing, N skipped]
Files changed: [list]

Acceptance Criteria:
  - [criterion 1]: PASS | FAIL
  - [criterion 2]: PASS | FAIL

Deferred items (if any):
  - [item]: [reason deferred]

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.