reality-check
Skill0 starsChanged 46 days agoMITView on GitHub
Hold a project's stated vision up against what's actually built and running, and report the gap without flattery: what works, what's claimed-but-broken, what's missing, what drifted, ending in an explicit SHIP-READY / NOT verdict. When a project has no intent doc at all, flips to INTENT EXTRACTION instead: reconstructs the project's goals from code, tests, beads, and commits into a confirmable intent statement. Use when "reality check", "where are we really", "does this actually work", "are we on track", "gap analysis", "what's missing", or when project-autopilot / ship-it / idea-forge need their assess, preflight, or intent-extraction step.
14 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- scoobydrew83/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 3, 2026
- microsoft/amplifier-smart-tool-reality-checktheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- Valeriy1980/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- naticorrea-03/claude-code-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- devpilotX/skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 22, 2026
- creationisttest-git/startup_studiotheir own version, first seen Sep 12, 2026
Other versions14 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 14
- dazuck/operator-skills★ 17same name
- EmanueleMinotto/minottobot★ 4same name
- naticorrea-03/claude-code-skills★ 4same name
- microsoft/amplifier-smart-tool-reality-check★ 2same name
- quatico-solutions/agent-skills★ 2same name
- dazuck/claude-code-skills★ 1same name
- evanmcgoogan/skin-in-the-game★ 1same name
- creationisttest-git/startup_studio★ 0same name
- dabodamjan/app-idea-to-spec★ 0same name
- devpilotX/skills★ 0same name
4 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 repository51 other files it gives its agents.
- advisor-councilSkill
- advisor-persona-buildSkill
- agent-exploit-pathsSkill
- agentic-loopsSkill
- ai-receptionist-tenant-onboardingSkill
- audit-lensSkill
- beadsmithSkill
- bug-sweepSkill
- bug-zeroSkill
- build-in-public-scope-guardSkill
- consulting-sales-playbookSkill
- deepenSkill
- deposit-first-shippingSkill
- design-intelSkill
- dueling-idea-forgeSkill
- forgeSkill
- hotspot-scoutSkill
- idea-forgeSkill
- incident-zeroSkill
- kickstartSkill
- local-llm-opsSkill
- memguardSkill
- memory-forgeSkill
- migrate-proofSkill
- no-slop-bug-hunterSkill
- optimize-proofSkill
- perf-maxSkill
- polish-passSkill
- problem-breakthroughSkill
- project-autopilotSkill
- qwen-bug-zeroSkill
- qwen-forgeSkill
- qwen-kickstartSkill
- qwen-perf-maxSkill
- qwen-project-autopilotSkill
- qwen-ship-itSkill
- qwen-ux-maximizerSkill
- readme-realSkill
- recallSkill
- security-sweepSkill
- session-mineSkill
- ship-itSkill
- simplify-proofSkill
- skillifySkill
- stream-demo-prepSkill
- swarm-runSkill
- test-maxSkill
- trace-itSkill
- unslopSkill
- ux-maximizerSkill
- ux-scanSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 12 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 17
Every project tells two stories: the one its docs tell and the one its runtime tells.
- Very specific: line 41
br is optional: If br list works, the bead graph (open AND closed) is a first-class evidence source.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 12 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
Reality Check
Every project tells two stories: the one its docs tell and the one its runtime tells. This skill reads both and reports the difference. It is the instrument the other verticals steer by (project-autopilot's assess step, ship-it's Phase-0 preflight gate, idea-forge's intent source of last resort), and its only loyalty is to what actually ran. The value is catching "we think it works but it doesn't" before a ship, a demo, or a week of polish built on sand.
Core Insight: The README is a press release; the only admissible evidence for "it works" is watching it work. Build it, launch it, exercise the headline promise end to end, unmocked. The gap that kills projects is never the one in the backlog (that one's at least known). It's the one between "we believe it works" and "we watched it work." Every WORKS in the report cites an execution trace, never a doc.
Core Insight #2: Reality-check is read-only by design. It never fixes, never refactors, never "while I'm here"s. The moment the assessor starts repairing, the report stops being trustworthy (you grade what you wish you'd found). Output is a report, a verdict, and inbox items. Fixing belongs to project-autopilot and the quality verticals downstream.
Preconditions
- A project directory with code in it. That's the whole bar: this skill exists precisely for projects whose docs are missing, stale, or lying.
- br is optional. If
br listworks, the bead graph (open AND closed) is a first-class evidence source; if not, proceed without it and say so in the report. Never fail the run over a missing tracker. - Leave the tree as found. Builds/test runs/launches must not dirty the
working tree (stash or clean anything they create); downstream skills ratchet
off a clean baseline. On a unified-memory box (e.g. an NVIDIA DGX Spark/GB10)
with
memguardinstalled, launch anything memory-heavy viamemguard run, never bare; elsewhere, launch normally.
Mode gate
Intent sources, in priority order: AGENTS.md · README.md · CLAUDE.md · plan
docs · any project notes in the repo · existing
<project>/.autopilot/INTENT.md. Any of these states what the project is trying
to be → ASSESS (default). None do → EXTRACT first, then (on a combined
run) feed the confirmed statement back into ASSESS.
ASSESS Pipeline (staged: issue each phase only when the prior finishes)
Phase 0 PROMISES Read every intent source. Distill into a NUMBERED promise
list: concrete claims the project makes about itself ("does
X", "handles Y", "deployed at Z"), headline promises flagged.
This list is the rubric; everything after grades against it.
Phase 1 LEDGER The tracker's own account: `br list --status=open` and
`--status=closed`, `bv` (if installed) for triage shape.
Closed beads = what the project claims it finished; open =
what it admits is missing. Note promises with no bead
anywhere; invisible work is the usual hiding place for drift.
Phase 2 RUN IT The heart of the skill. Build · test · launch · exercise each
headline promise end to end as a user would (memguard-wrapped
on a unified-memory box if you have it; bare elsewhere).
Record verbatim what ran, what errored, what
was unreachable. A green test suite is supporting evidence;
only an unmocked end-to-end exercise proves a headline
promise. Capture the actual commands + output traces.
Phase 3 CLASSIFY Per promise, one verdict with evidence cited
(references/CLASSIFICATION.md for the rubric):
WORKS · PARTIAL · CLAIMED-BUT-BROKEN · MISSING · DRIFTED
(built something other than promised), plus UNDOCUMENTED
for real built capability no doc ever promised.
Phase 4 VERDICT Write <project>/.reality/GAP-REPORT.md (template in
references/CLASSIFICATION.md). FIRST LINE is the greppable
verdict: `VERDICT: SHIP-READY` or `VERDICT: NOT SHIP-READY —
<top reason>`. SHIP-READY requires: every headline promise
WORKS via unmocked exercise · tests green · zero
CLAIMED-BUT-BROKEN anywhere. Anything less is NOT, with
blocking gaps ranked by intent impact.
Phase 5 INBOX Judgment calls go to <project>/.autopilot/DECISIONS.md
(recommended option first), not into the verdict: drift that
might be deliberate ("code went Y, vision says X: which
wins?"), promises that maybe should be cut, UNDOCUMENTED
capability that maybe should be promoted to promise. The
skill reports; the operator arbitrates vision.EXTRACT Pipeline (when no intent source exists)
Phase E1 SIGNALS Interview the codebase: entry points + what they wire up ·
what the tests assert the system must do · UI copy / CLI help
(the project pitching itself to users) · package metadata ·
commit-log story (what got built first, fixed hardest) ·
closed beads (revealed priorities: effort spent IS intent) ·
any project notes.
Phase E2 DRAFT One-paragraph Intent Statement in the INTENT.md shape: who it
serves, what job it does, what "winning" looks like,
commercial vs fun. Plus 2–3 lines of "evidence for this
reading" and any signals that point a different direction.
Phase E3 CONFIRM Write to <project>/.autopilot/INTENT.md headed
`STATUS: DRAFT — UNCONFIRMED (extracted by reality-check)`.
Surface to the operator (or the calling orchestrator, which confirms
with the operator). A reconstructed intent NEVER silently drives
destructive or directional moves. Confirmation flips the
header to CONFIRMED, and only then does ASSESS grade
against it.Contract (what orchestrators can rely on)
<project>/.reality/GAP-REPORT.md: the gap report; first line is the greppableVERDICT:line. ship-it consumes this at Phase 0 PREFLIGHT as its go/no-go reality gate. project-autopilot consumes it as the assess step for vision-vs-reality drift (auto); each non-WORKS row is bead-ready.<project>/.autopilot/INTENT.md: EXTRACT mode's intent statement, written to the exact path project-autopilot already reads, DRAFT-flagged until the operator confirms. idea-forge and project-autopilot route here when a project lacks intent docs ("no intent = run reality-check's extraction first").<project>/.autopilot/DECISIONS.md: appended judgment items (the same inbox project-autopilot drains; one inbox, not two).- Verdict echoed as the LAST line of the reply, so callers grep either place.
- Exit state: tree clean, nothing fixed, nothing committed. Reality-check ends where remediation begins.
THE EXACT PROMPT
/reality-check
Target: <project path>
Mode: assess | extract | auto (default auto: assess, falling back to extract)
Focus: <optional — one promise or area, e.g. "the booking flow" — narrows Phase 2>Anti-Patterns
- Grading from the README without running anything: the one failure mode this skill exists to prevent. No execution trace, no WORKS.
- Rounding PARTIAL up to WORKS to be encouraging. Flattery here costs a failed ship later; honest-and-specific IS the deliverable.
- Accepting a mocked test as proof of a headline promise. Mocks prove wiring, not delivery (shipped-reality standard).
- Fixing anything mid-assessment, even a one-line obvious bug. Report it, classify it, leave it. Read-only or the report is compromised.
- Skipping closed beads. They're the project's revealed priorities and the fastest drift detector (effort that went somewhere the vision never asked for).
- Treating an extracted DRAFT intent as confirmed, or grading against it before the operator signs off.
- Burying the verdict in prose. First line of the report, last line of the reply, greppable, every time.
- Launching the project bare on a unified-memory box (e.g. a DGX Spark) when memguard is available. Wrap anything heavy.
- Verdict-creep: SHIP-READY "except for…" is NOT SHIP-READY. The exception IS the reason.
References
- CLASSIFICATION.md: the six classes with evidence standards, the verdict rules, and the GAP-REPORT.md template
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.

