skill-authoring
Skill1 starsChanged 30 days agoMITView on GitHub
Design, author, evaluate, or package agent skills using the destination's conventions and validation requirements. Use when creating or revising a skill, checking its activation triggers, or preparing a skill package.
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 9 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
- +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 repository23 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- address-feedbackSkill
- agent-planningSkill
- anti-ai-writingSkill
- api-designSkill
- ci-cd-workflowsSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- decision-partnerSkill
- explain-itSkill
- frontend-engineeringSkill
- git-deliverySkill
- implement-planSkill
- jira-ticketsSkill
- readme-designSkill
- release-readinessSkill
- review-lenseSkill
- root-cause-debugSkill
- safe-migrationsSkill
- technical-documentationSkill
- test-authoringSkill
- using-skillsSkill
- writing-clean-simple-codeSkill
- writing-optimized-sqlSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 80 edited versions we read keep these.
6
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 13
Use this skill to design, author, revise, evaluate, or package agent skills and their supporting resources.
- Very specific: line 35
Keep activation boundaries, authority, operational actions, and exit gates in SKILL.md.
- Distinctive: line 39
Use relative internal links.
- Very specific: line 43
Follow destination frontmatter and registration contracts.
- Distinctive: line 52
Use numbered steps only when order matters, bullets for independent rules, and checklists for evidence-based gates.
- Distinctive: line 57
Add concrete, domain-specific shortcut protections to each authored skill.
- Distinctive: line 63
Read skill evaluation before evaluating a candidate.
- Distinctive: line 82
Run other destination-required checks.
“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
Scope and authority
Use this skill to design, author, revise, evaluate, or package agent skills and their supporting resources. Use agent-planning for engineering plans, test-authoring for behavioral tests, and writing-clean-simple-code for production code. Those requests do not trigger skill authoring unless the requested artifact is a skill. Read anti-ai-writing before drafting.
Preserve user authorization and unrelated work. Drafting and packaging do not authorize commits, live-host installation, remote publication, or repository-policy changes. Resolve missing intent only when it blocks dependent authoring; continue settled work.
Author a skill
- Define one responsibility, observable output, activation requests, exclusions, and acceptance criteria. Inspect neighboring skills and destination tooling so the new workflow does not duplicate an existing one.
- Identify destination registration requirements before drafting. For additions or renames here, update the README browse table and using-skills routing table in the same change, including counts and affected links. Elsewhere, update existing required inventories. Do not create a README, router, or tooling only to imitate this repo.
- Keep activation boundaries, authority, operational actions, and exit gates in
SKILL.md. Put domain schemas, templates, and exhaustive checklists inreferences/<topic>.md. Link each reference where it is needed and state when to load it. Do not duplicate its procedure or load every reference automatically. - Use relative internal links. Resolve each from its containing file and verify that it stays within the permitted destination. Keep owned references inside the skill folder so extraction retains them. Identify sibling-skill dependencies; links do not install those dependencies.
- Follow destination frontmatter and registration contracts. In this collection,
use YAML frontmatter with a directory-matching name that matches
^[a-z0-9]+(?:-[a-z0-9]+)*$and is at most 64 characters. The nonempty description must be at most 1,024 characters and identify the activation boundary. - For a rewrite, preserve the skill's existing behavioral contract. Keep useful conditions and exceptions, required evidence, failure outcomes, and outputs. Define phase entry conditions and required artifacts or command/read-back evidence. For non-code work, specify deterministic acceptance or read-back criteria. Missing evidence blocks only the dependent transition.
- Use numbered steps only when order matters, bullets for independent rules, and checklists for evidence-based gates. Do not impose one section template on every skill. Prefer direct conditional instructions and explicit prohibitions for real hazards. Remove repetition only after confirming the retained rule covers the same conditions and exceptions.
- Add concrete, domain-specific shortcut protections to each authored skill. They may be concise rules or a table; a table is not required. Do not retrofit unrelated skills just because this workflow is loaded.
Evaluate and validate
Read skill evaluation before evaluating a candidate. Record representative trigger cases, criterion results, evidence, and missing host coverage. Keep structural checks, static walkthroughs, model self-assessment, observed behavior, and token or cost measurements distinct. An opinion or line count does not establish model compliance or token savings.
Choose validation for the actual destination:
- In this repository, from its root and using the Go version in
go.mod, rungo run ./cmd/skillpackandgo test ./.... Show commands, actual output, and exit codes. Both must exit 0, and validation must report the expected skill count, resolved references, and synchronized registries. Missing Go or failed checks blocks this gate. - In another repository or for a standalone skill, run its configured validator and applicable checks. Do not require this repository's Go tooling or install it solely to satisfy this procedure. If no validator exists, record a path-specific read-back of frontmatter, relative links, packaged resources, and registration. A read-back cannot replace a validator or test suite the destination requires.
Run other destination-required checks. Repair failures within scope or report the missing prerequisite; do not declare completion with an applicable gate failed or unverified. Structural validation does not establish host discovery or agent behavior. Report those separately, including untested hosts and scenarios. Give the changed paths, observed checks, and remaining limits. Use authorized git-delivery for later Git or publication actions.
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.

