programming-python
Skill0 starsChanged 5 days agoMITView on GitHub
Write, change, review, and test modern Python using repository-native environments, precise static typing, validated boundaries, explicit errors, restrained dependencies, and complete local quality gates. Use for Python applications, libraries, packages, CLI tools, services, scripts, and asynchronous code.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ROCm/rocprofiler-systems-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 27, 2026
- Muvon/octomind-taptheir own version, first seen Mar 15, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- Muvon/octomind-tap★ 6same name
- ROCm/rocprofiler-systems-skills★ 5same 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.
In this repository25 other files it gives its agents.
- batch-issuesSkill
- batch-planSkill
- champion-challengerSkill
- coding-guidelinesSkill
- convert-documentsSkill
- convert-mediaSkill
- create-pull-requestSkill
- dockerfileSkill
- email-campaignSkill
- git-commitSkill
- github-actionsSkill
- github-issueSkill
- merge-pull-requestSkill
- prod-huntSkill
- programming-goSkill
- programming-rustSkill
- programming-typescriptSkill
- pr-stewardSkill
- pull-requestSkill
- refactor-debts-and-smellsSkill
- ruthless-criticSkill
- security-invariantsSkill
- shoppingSkill
- squash-pull-requestSkill
- support-ticketSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈5
Distinctive · estimate
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 15
Use the repository's declared environment, package manager, build backend, and locked commands.
- Distinctive: line 25
Prefer the standard library.
- Distinctive: line 27
Prefer clear functions and composition over speculative classes, frameworks, decorators, metaprogramming, or compatibility layers.
- Distinctive: line 34
Before completion, run every applicable gate through the repository's declared environment against the final worktree:
- Distinctive: line 43
Do not add a formatter, linter, type checker, validator, or packaging migration to satisfy this checklist.
≈ “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
Programming Python
Produce modern Python whose types and tests make behavior explicit. The repository's architecture and configured tools come before these defaults.
Establish the Contract
- Inspect project metadata, every dependency or constraint file, lockfiles, supported Python versions, package layout, entry points, CI, tests, and repository guidance.
- Classify the project (application, library, service, CLI, package, or script collection) and record its public imports, serialized forms, CLI behavior, exceptions, and other compatibility boundaries before changing them.
- Use the repository's declared environment, package manager, build backend, and locked commands. Do not infer the interpreter from the machine default, regenerate a lock without an in-scope dependency change, install tools globally, or migrate an established workflow because another tool is preferred.
- For a new project without established tooling, choose a current maintained workflow from deployment, packaging, and contributor needs; a library declares and tests a minimum Python version, an application follows its declared deployment interpreter.
Implement Strictly
- Type every changed production interface and meaningful local value precisely: no unrestricted
typing.Any, bare containers, unchecked casts, ignored diagnostics, or annotations the runtime does not honor. - Receive untrusted values as
objectand parse JSON, configuration, environment variables, database rows, CLI input, and network data once at the system boundary, with the repository's existing rigorous validator; otherwise a small explicit parser for a small shape, or one justified maintained dependency when nested schemas, unions, refinements, or error reporting make handwritten parsing less trustworthy. - Convert parsed input into explicit domain values (existing models, dataclasses, enums, tuples, or ordinary typed classes); loose mappings stay at serialization boundaries, out of domain logic. Do not add runtime validation to values already guaranteed by trusted construction.
- Name every meaningful literal: numbers, strings, durations, sizes, limits, keys, and paths live in a module-level
typing.Finalconstant or anenum.Enum, defined once in the module that owns the concept, and every use refers to that name, never a bare inline literal. Self-evident0,1, or""in a plain arithmetic or identity role are not magic. - Raise precise domain exceptions, preserve exception chains, and catch only errors that can be handled meaningfully; no bare
except, silent failures, or sentinel returns for genuine errors. - Prefer the standard library; add a large, overlapping, weakly maintained, or security-sensitive package only for a concrete benefit. Keep direct dependencies declared and environments locked.
- Stay synchronous; use async only for genuine concurrent I/O, on the project's existing async stack, with blocking work off the event loop.
- Prefer clear functions and composition over speculative classes, frameworks, decorators, metaprogramming, or compatibility layers. Preserve public API compatibility unless a breaking change is requested.
- For a change to authentication, authorization, tokens, sessions, cookies, identity, proxy trust, registration, or abuse controls, follow the
security-invariantsskill when installed: enumerate every sibling entry point before editing, parse scopes, roles, groups, domains, origins, and external identities into explicit domain values, never authorize with substring, prefix, or suffix checks, and add a deterministic regression test that fails for the intended reason before the fix.
Prove the Change Locally
With the project's testing library and conventions, add focused tests for changed behavior, boundary validation, failure paths, and preserved public behavior; prefer real local integrations over mocks when practical.
Before completion, run every applicable gate through the repository's declared environment against the final worktree:
- the repository's own formatting, linting, type-checking, and test commands;
- focused boundary and failure tests, then the complete relevant suite and configured coverage threshold;
- the repository's strictest configured static type checker, with no new diagnostics ignored;
- package builds, metadata checks, and clean installation or import checks for distributable projects;
- dependency, lock, security, and policy checks when configured;
- a real invocation of the built application, command, public library interface, or integration boundary.
Do not add a formatter, linter, type checker, validator, or packaging migration to satisfy this checklist; a missing gate added separately in scope must be maintained, compatible with the existing workflow, and no weaker than current policy.
For a library, test every supported Python version when locally practical. Report the exact commands run, interpreter versions exercised, behavior observed, baseline failures, and every gate that could not run with its reason; mark conflicting or unavailable evidence as unclear, never as passed.
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.

