adapters
Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
How to execute AUTO channels safely — preview, confirm, execute, receipt. Two implemented adapters (dev.to draft, github-meta) and the roadmap stubs. Used by /launch-auto.
- Reads credentials
In this repository4 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- copywritingSkill
- introspectionSkill
- strategySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 13
Preview: Run the adapter script in --preview mode and show the user EXACTLY what will be sent: method, URL, full body, and the before → …
- Very specific: line 16
Confirm: Ask the user explicitly (one question, one action).
- Very specific: line 89
Every stub follows the same safety flow when implemented.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill 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.
Files
Adapters: safe execution of AUTO channels
An adapter performs a real external action via a legitimate API. AUTO never means unattended: every external action follows preview → confirm → execute → receipt.
The safety flow (non-negotiable, in this order)
- Preview. Run the adapter script in
--previewmode and show the user EXACTLY what will be sent: method, URL, full body, and the before → after change. Never summarize the payload — show it. - Confirm. Ask the user explicitly (one question, one action). Only after a yes,
re-run with
--execute --yes.--yesis the script-level assertion that this conversation happened; never pass it preemptively. - Execute. The script performs the calls and stops at the first failure.
- Receipt. The script appends a receipt to
launches/<slug>/log.md(--log): timestamp, adapter, mode, exact bodies sent, before-state, HTTP results, and resulting resource URLs. Receipts are the launch's audit trail.
--dry-run runs the full flow including the receipt but sends nothing — use it to
demonstrate or test the flow safely. Both adapters print their full interface with
--help.
Worked example (github-meta, full flow)
# 1. Preview — target is positional (<owner/repo>), at least one action required
node scripts/adapters/github-meta.mjs merriban/lockjack \
--description "Read-only lockfile forensics for npm, pnpm, and yarn" \
--topics "security,lockfile,supply-chain,sca,npm" --preview
# 2. Show the preview to the user, ask "send exactly this? yes/no"
# 3. Only after an explicit yes:
node scripts/adapters/github-meta.mjs merriban/lockjack \
--description "Read-only lockfile forensics for npm, pnpm, and yarn" \
--topics "security,lockfile,supply-chain,sca,npm" \
--execute --yes --log launches/lockjack/log.md
# 4. Show the appended receipt from launches/lockjack/log.mddev.to is identical in shape (--title + --body-file instead of the positional
target); see node scripts/adapters/devto.mjs --help.
Credential hygiene
- Keys come from env vars or git-ignored
.env.local(template + minimal-scope documentation:.env.example). Never ask the user to paste a token into chat. - Tokens live in HTTP headers only. Every string an adapter prints or writes goes
through
scrub()(scripts/adapters/env.mjs), which redacts any registered credential — previews, receipts and log.md are token-free by design. - GitHub: fine-grained PAT scoped to the single target repo,
Administration: writeMetadata: readand nothing else (see.env.examplefor the exact setup).
Implemented in v0.1 (the only two — hard cap, see CLAUDE.md)
dev-to — scripts/adapters/devto.mjs
Creates the launch article as a draft. published: false is a frozen constant:
there is no flag to publish, --publish/--published are rejected with an error,
and the payload is asserted immediately before send. Publishing is a human act in
the dev.to dashboard. Key: DEVTO_API_KEY. Limits: ≤ 4 tags.
github-meta — scripts/adapters/github-meta.mjs
Sets repo description (PATCH /repos/{owner}/{repo}) and/or replaces topics
(PUT /repos/{owner}/{repo}/topics) via REST. Fetches current state first and
previews a real diff; skips calls that would be no-ops. The social preview image
has no API — the adapter prints the manual checklist instead, naming the exact file
to upload (assets/brand/social-preview-1280x640-dark.png, the recommended one). Key: GITHUB_TOKEN
(fine-grained, see .env.example). The gh CLI (gh repo edit) is an optional
manual alternative; the adapter does not require it.
Roadmap stubs (documented, NOT implemented in v0.1)
| Adapter | API | Keys (planned) | Notes |
| hashnode | GraphQL publishPost | HASHNODE_TOKEN | Cross-post with canonicalUrl pointing at the dev.to article |
| bluesky | AT Protocol com.atproto.repo.createRecord | BSKY_HANDLE, BSKY_APP_PASSWORD | App password, not account password; embed images via blob upload |
| mastodon | REST POST /api/v1/statuses | MASTODON_INSTANCE, MASTODON_ACCESS_TOKEN | Mark the account as a bot if fully automated posting is ever used; respect instance culture |
| telegram | Bot API sendMessage/sendAnimation | TELEGRAM_BOT_TOKEN, TELEGRAM_CHAT_ID | Own channels/groups only |
| discord-webhook | Webhook POST | DISCORD_WEBHOOK_URL | Own servers / explicitly-allowed #showcase only; the URL itself is a secret |
| x-twitter | API v2 POST /2/tweets | X_API_KEY + OAuth set | Write access is PAID — premium tier; do not implement before pricing is confirmed with the user |
| email-outreach | SMTP/provider | provider-specific | SEMI-AUTO forever: per-message human approval, curated opt-in lists only, GDPR/CAN-SPAM (identity, opt-out). Never batch-send |
Every stub follows the same safety flow when implemented. None of them may ever
touch a channel classified assisted or excluded — that boundary is the product.
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.

