agentleFS
TNTcraftHIMTNTcraftHIM/Piik/.agents/skills/ponytail/SKILL.md

ponytail

Skill4.1k starsChanged 19 days agoMITView on GitHub

Choose the smallest coherent implementation for Piik coding, code review, refactoring and implementation design, including dependency choices. Also use when Ponytail or YAGNI is requested; not for ordinary prose or status.

144 other projects use a version of this.

Trending

More talk lately.thin dataabout the whole repository

Dec 2025: 0 mentionsJan 2026: 0 mentionsFeb 2026: 0 mentionsMar 2026: 0 mentionsApr 2026: 0 mentionsMay 2026: 0 mentionsJun 2026: 0 mentionsJul 2026: 0 mentionsAug 2026: 0 mentionsSep 2026: 0 mentionsOct 2026: 2 mentionsNov 2026: 1 mention
Dec 2025Jun 2026Nov 2026
Mentions a month of the TNTcraftHIM/Piik repository that our weekly crawl found: only 3 in all, so this is a hint, not a trend. There is no adoption data for this file yet.

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use reimagine, herdr-cli 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.
  • dev-willbird1936Skill

    reimagine

    Rebuild an instruction file for reliable adherence and lower context cost. Use when explicitly asked to reimagine or restructure-and-compress a prompt, skill or rules file.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • julweberSkill

    herdr-cli

    Expert guide for herdr, the terminal workspace manager for AI coding agents.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • vikas8520-coderSkill

    cli-backup-sync

    Backup and restore Nerve data from the CLI. Trigger incremental snapshots, sync to cloud storage, manage backup schedules, and restore from archive files.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • vikas8520-coderSkill

    cli-batches

    Submit and monitor batch inference jobs from the CLI. Upload and manage files for batch processing, retrieve results, and integrate batch pipelines with CI/CD workflows.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +8 more from vikas8520-coder

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 140 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 8

    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:

    Read the affected owner and actual flow before choosing a solution.

    line 19
  2. Distinctive:

    Use this order to find a sufficient solution, not as a mandatory research tour:

    line 32
  3. Distinctive:

    Remove speculative additions that the requested outcome does not need.

    line 34
  4. Distinctive:

    Prefer standard-library, native-platform or already-installed capabilities.

    line 36
  5. Distinctive:

    Use a mature dependency when it reduces total ownership more than custom code.

    line 37
  6. Distinctive:

    Verify the requested behavior at the affected boundary using the project's existing checks.

    line 52
  7. Distinctive:

    Check the result against the intended experience and remove unnecessary additions.

    line 59
  8. Distinctive:

    Default full applies the method above.

    line 66

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 140 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

Ponytail · Piik

Reduce what Piik must own while delivering the complete requested experience. This is an implementation method under AGENTS.md, not permission to reduce scope or defer design. The repo adaptation and license are documented in UPSTREAM.md.

Understand The Responsibility

Read the affected owner and actual flow before choosing a solution. Establish the user outcome, state/resource lifetime and consumers that must keep working. For a bug, trace where the incorrect fact or action first arises and check sibling callers of that owner. Correct that boundary instead of adding a guard to each symptom. A shared guard is useful only if it restores the real contract.

For UI, inspect the existing interaction and visual primitives before adding a control, panel, status or animation. A reused component must still have the right meaning, placement and lifecycle; reuse alone does not establish design quality. Different responsibilities need not look or behave identically.

Choose The Smallest Coherent Design

Use this order to find a sufficient solution, not as a mandatory research tour:

  1. Remove speculative additions that the requested outcome does not need.
  2. Reuse the existing owner, component or helper when its semantics and lifetime fit.
  3. Prefer standard-library, native-platform or already-installed capabilities.
  4. Use a mature dependency when it reduces total ownership more than custom code.
  5. Implement the remaining behavior in a cohesive module with a narrow interface.

Compare user effort, state, dependencies and maintenance, not just lines or file count. A larger correction is justified when it removes competing writers or finishes the affected flow. Keep readable code and clear boundaries rather than compressing logic into a one-liner or one oversized file.

Apply the shared implementation rules for helper boundaries, typed validation, comments and generated sources rather than maintaining separate coding rules in this skill. Preserve useful provenance and required license notices when removing replaced paths.

Verify And Finish

Verify the requested behavior at the affected boundary using the project's existing checks. New mechanisms need evidence for their actual success, failure and lifecycle behavior; a test for each branch or helper is not the goal. Use Stop That Shit to keep verification proportionate; required checks and delivery remain in CONTRIBUTING.md.

Check the result against the intended experience and remove unnecessary additions. Report the outcome, meaningful evidence and material limits at the detail the user needs. Do not ship an easier subset as completion or impose a fixed response length.

Optional Intensity

Default full applies the method above. If requested, lite focuses on the scoped implementation and obvious reuse; ultra more aggressively removes unnecessary ownership within that scope. These levels change simplification effort, never the requested result, design quality, authority or verification.

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.