agentleFS
NickolasBenakisNickolasBenakis/agent-playbook/skills/delegate/SKILL.md

delegate

Skill5 starsChanged 6 days agoMITView on GitHub

Decide whether to hand work to a subagent or child thread, and write the brief - what context to pass, what to leave out, and what to ask back. Use before launching any subagent, reviewer, or bb child thread.

81 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use state, preview 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.
  • MicrosoftSkill

    state

    Store and query a Microsoft Managed App's built-in state and file attachments with `ms project state` CLI schema commands and generated TypeScript clients. First, with the user signed in to the CLI, run `ms feature status --name state --json`; if `feature.enabled` is not `true`, recommend an alternative connector or data source.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • kv0906Skill

    preview

    Render vault notes as styled HTML and open in browser. Turn markdown docs, decisions, progress reports into readable previews. Use for "/preview docs/project-a/checkout-flow.md", "/preview progress all", "/preview decide auth-approach", or when user wants to see a doc before sharing.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • GitHubSkill

    prd

    Generate high-quality Product Requirements Documents (PRDs) for software systems and AI-powered features. Includes executive summaries, user stories, technical specifications, and risk analysis.

    Also in 5 projects that use this

  • nicolasestremSkill

    document

    Create focused documentation for specific components or features

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • anombyte93Skill

    discover

    Phase 1 of the prd-taskmaster pipeline: brainstorm-driven discovery. Delegates to superpowers:brainstorming in Interactive Mode (one adaptive question at a time), or self-brainstorms in Autonomous Mode when no user is present. Intercepts before the brainstorming chain hands off to writing-plans — this skill owns the exit. Extracts constraints, calibrates scale (Solo / Team / Enterprise), and advances the pipeline to GENERATE.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • Microsoft AzureSkill

    skill-authoring

    Write Agent Skills that comply with the agentskills.io specification. WHEN: "create a skill", "new skill", "write a skill", "skill template", "skill structure", "review skill", "skill PR", "skill compliance", "SKILL.md format", "skill frontmatter", "skill best practices". DO NOT USE FOR: general documentation. INVOKES: vally CLI.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 71 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    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:

    Write it as if for a capable colleague who just walked in:

    line 27
  2. Distinctive:

    Never put secret values in a brief.

    line 43

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 71 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

Delegate

A helper knows only what you put in the brief, and you get back only its summary. Both handoffs lose detail. Delegate when that loss buys something: time, a clean context, or an unbiased opinion.

Pick the vehicle

NeedUseWhy
Find something across many filesan Explore/read-only subagentyou keep its conclusion, not the file dumps
A second opinion on a diffplaybook-reviewer with the criteria and a diff fileit can't be anchored on your reasoning
Several independent reads or reviewsparallel subagents in one messagecheap; they finish together
Read-only work over 3+ separate areas, too much to read yourselfone subagent per area, launched togetheryou keep conclusions, not dumps
Independent builds that each run 10+ minutes of agent timea child thread or worktree subagent per buildonly then does parallel time beat start-up cost
A small build (most fixes take this model 1–2 min), or one that shares files with yoursdo it yourselfthe handoff costs more than the work

Two builds that touch the same files are one task: give them to one agent.

The brief

Write it as if for a capable colleague who just walked in:

  1. Goal and finish line, as checks ("npm test passes, GET /x?page=2 returns the second page").
  2. Pointers, not payloads: file paths with line ranges, the commands to run, the branch to start from. Don't paste file contents or the chat.
  3. What's settled: decisions already made, approaches ruled out and why, so it doesn't redo them.
  4. What to reuse: existing helpers, tables, patterns and test setup, by path. Children that weren't told reinvented existing code.
  5. Constraints: scope limits, and the playbook rules that bite here (Decisions, secrets, no push to the default branch).
  6. What to return: at most ~15 lines: the result, the evidence (command and its outcome), Decisions, open questions. Diffs as a branch or file path, not inline.

Never put secret values in a brief; name the variable.

For a verifier or reviewer, pass the task and the artifact only, not your hypothesis or your reasons: a helper handed a conclusion tends to confirm it.

When it comes back

A summary can be confidently wrong. Re-run the finish-line check yourself before you report the work as done, and read the diff of anything you will put your name on.

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.