skill-authoring
Skill4 starsChanged 43 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use when writing, tightening, or reviewing an Agent Skill (a SKILL.md), including when one misfires, bloats, or doesn't trigger. Produces lean, portable skills tested against a no-skill baseline.
- Installs packages
89 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- neuroborus/agent-runnertheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- juninmd/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- TrueImmortal82/open-code-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- patrykmurzyn/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- frnkgns/Overgeared-Skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- notivn/AIEVv2their own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use cloud-api-recipe-authoring, codebuddy-ide-mcp-upgrade 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.
TencentCloudBaseSkillcloud-api-recipe-authoring
Author or revise a cloud-api-operations recipe (config/source/skills/cloud-api-operations/references/recipes/). Encodes why the long tail of control-plane capabilities is deliberately NOT wrapped as MCP/CLI tools, the API-first admission test for whether a capability deserves a recipe, the negative and positive lists, the fixed recipe structure, the writing rules distilled from writing-for-agents, the user-facing copy red lines, and the product regeneration/verification pipeline. Also routes contributors (and their agents) to the contribution flow and the pre-PR self-test protocol in references/contributing.md. Use when adding a recipe, judging whether a scenario belongs in the recipe set, updating the recipes index, re-checking existing recipes against the admission test, or onboarding someone who wants to submit one.
Also in 3 projects that use this
TencentCloudBaseSkillcodebuddy-ide-mcp-upgrade
升级 CodeBuddy IDE(genie 扩展)内置的 CloudBase MCP,以及 MCP 发版时同步 IDE 侧白名单。当用户提到「更新 IDE 里的 MCP」「内置 MCP 版本太老」「IDE 集成的 CloudBase 功能不足」「改工具白名单 toolWhiteList」「把新 bundle 打进 CodeBuddy」「白名单漂移」「MCP 发版要同步什么」时使用。覆盖:解包定位内置 bundle 与内嵌配置、重新构建 mcp bundle、生成新的工具白名单与系统提示词、安全注入 IDE 并备份、用 MCP 协议验证工具清单、人工端到端验收、一键回滚。
Also in 3 projects that use this
DIL8654Skillapi-contract-review
Review ASP.NET Core Web API contracts for HTTP semantics, versioning, backward compatibility, and response consistency. Use when the user asks to review an API, check endpoints, validate REST behavior, or before releasing contract changes.
Also in 5 projects that use this
zaxbysauceSkillpr-review-fix
Codex adapter for addressing pull request review feedback in opencode-swarm. Use when the user asks to fix PR review comments, requested changes, reviewer findings, CI-review notes, or a pasted review summary with low false-positive tolerance.
Also in 3 projects that use this
albertdobmeyerSkillgit-workflows
Advanced git operations beyond add/commit/push. Use when rebasing, bisecting bugs, using worktrees for parallel development, recovering with reflog, managing subtrees/submodules, resolving merge conflicts, cherry-picking across branches, or working with monorepos.
Also in 3 projects that use this
rogue-dev-studioSkillfrontend-engineering
Expert frontend application engineering: accessible UI structure, state and data-fetching discipline, form/validation UX, responsive layouts, performance budgets, and integration with API contracts. Use when building or refining SPA/web screens, design-system consumption, client-side routing, or fixing UI reliability (loading, empty, and error states).
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +6 more from TencentCloudBase
Other versions89 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 89
- nyldn/claude-octopus★ 4.4ksame name
- endurain-project/endurain★ 2.4ksame name
- joaovitoriasilva/endurain★ 2.4ksame name
- theopenco/llmgateway★ 1.7ksame name
- TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-ToolKit★ 1.2ksame name
- TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-MCP★ 1.2ksame name
- TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit★ 1.2ksame name
- pockebot/openpocket★ 847same name
- QuixiAI/agi-memory★ 623same name
- QuixiAI/Hexis★ 623same name
79 more not listed
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.
In this repository13 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- llms.txtllms.txt
- cost-analysisSkill
- designSkill
- leadSkill
- remote-setupSkill
- researchSkill
- reviewerSkill
- securitySkill
- soloSkill
- technical-writingSkill
- workerSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 80 edited versions we read keep these.
4
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
- Distinctive: line 19
Write the body for a capable agent that isn't necessarily Claude.
- Distinctive: line 20
Keep instructions that change default behavior.
- Distinctive: line 23
Use one linear process with conditional steps rather than a matrix of modes, because routing tables breed contradictions.
- Distinctive: line 38
Check triggering. Write about 10 prompts, half that should trigger and half near-misses.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 80 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
Skill authoring
A skill shares a context window with everything else, and agents you don't control will load it. It earns its tokens only by changing what an agent would otherwise do. Measure that instead of assuming it.
Process
Steps 1, 7, 8, and 9 need a fresh agent with no context: either a subagent, or the user running a prompt in a new session. If neither is available, do those steps yourself as a cold read and mark them unverified in the handoff. Don't present a self-review as a baseline.
To fix or review an existing skill, first reproduce the problem (step 9 for triggering, step 1 for behavior), then run steps 3-8 on the change.
- Watch it fail first. Run 2-3 realistic tasks with no skill, and record what goes wrong, verbatim where you can. The skill fixes those failures and stays brief about everything the baseline already does well.
- Write the description for triggering. It's the only part that's always loaded (1024 characters at most, and some listings truncate sooner), so put the trigger first. Say when to use the skill, in the user's words, and when not to. Agents tend to under-trigger, so name concrete situations.
- Write the body for a capable agent that isn't necessarily Claude.
- Keep instructions that change default behavior. Keep exact commands, configs, versions, paths, and gotchas, meaning anything that drifts between versions or that an older or smaller model would get wrong.
- Cut explanations of things any capable agent knows, and persona or motivational openers ("You are an expert…"). Start with what to do.
- State each rule once. A closing checklist or template that restates the body is the most common source of bloat, so make it the only copy or drop it.
- Use one linear process with conditional steps rather than a matrix of modes, because routing tables breed contradictions.
- Give the reason in a clause rather than capital-letter MUST or NEVER.
- Name tools by capability (a shell, a subagent with no context) and give a fallback for when one is missing.
- Stay well under 500 lines (about 5,000 tokens). Move reference material to
references/(one level deep) only if you know the install target keeps extra files. Some installers save SKILL.md alone.
- Run everything in it. Execute every command, config, and code block in a scratch environment against realistic input. A skill that ships an untested config ships a bug. Run commands with real side effects (deploys, payments, production, mainnet) only against a dry-run or sandbox target, or else mark them untested. Skip this step if nothing in the skill is executable.
- Hold it to its own rules. A skill must not contain what it tells agents to avoid. Check for bold-label bullets (
- **Label:** text), scattered bold, rules stated twice, claims stronger than their sources, and stock filler phrases. - Validate the format:
pip install skills-ref, thenagentskills validate <skill-dir>. The package installs theagentskillscommand, notskills-ref. The only required frontmatter isnameanddescription.namehas at most 64 characters, uses lowercase letters, digits, and hyphens, and must match the folder name. If you can't install the validator, check those rules by hand. - Test on a fresh reader. Give it only the SKILL.md and 5-7 scenarios ("the user asks X; which steps do you run?"), including edge cases and a should-it-trigger case. It answers from the skill alone, quoting the line it relied on, and lists ambiguities, contradictions, and missing information. Fix the gaps that would cause wrong behavior. Turn down requests to add back things any capable agent knows, unless they're version-specific or tested. One or two rounds is usually enough.
- Re-run the step 1 tasks with the skill. Compare against the baseline: did the failures go away, did new ones appear, and what did it cost in tokens and turns? If nothing improved, rewrite the skill around the failures that remain, or drop it.
- Check triggering. Write about 10 prompts, half that should trigger and half near-misses. Give a fresh agent only the names and descriptions of this skill and 2-3 plausible neighbors, and ask which one it would load for each prompt. Tighten the description wherever it misses.
For heavier testing in Claude Code, Anthropic's skill-creator has an eval runner, a blind comparator, and a description optimizer. They shell out to claude -p, so they don't work in other agents.
Handoff
Deliver the SKILL.md, its size (words, and tokens at about 4 characters each), a line each on baseline versus with-skill results, what you cut and why, and which steps were unverified.
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.

