data-retention-policy
Skill0 starsChanged 15 days agoMITView on GitHub
Decide how long tool inputs, outputs and logs live, and make deletion real rather than implied. Use when the server stores captures, findings or credentials-adjacent data
In this repository49 other files it gives its agents.
- argument-construction-from-artifactsSkill
- audit-log-of-tool-callsSkill
- bounded-output-designSkill
- capability-negotiation-checkSkill
- changelog-and-versioningSkill
- concurrency-and-ordering-checkSkill
- context-window-managementSkill
- credential-isolationSkill
- description-as-contractSkill
- destructive-action-confirmationSkill
- destructive-tool-gatingSkill
- deterministic-command-choicesSkill
- done-when-criteriaSkill
- error-shape-for-agentsSkill
- fixture-driven-transcript-testsSkill
- human-in-the-loop-escalationSkill
- idempotency-annotationSkill
- input-schema-strictnessSkill
- least-privilege-tool-grantsSkill
- lifecycle-test-initialize-then-toolsSkill
- local-vs-remote-boundarySkill
- one-procedure-per-skillSkill
- pagination-and-limit-disciplineSkill
- parallel-tool-call-safetySkill
- protocol-conformance-testSkill
- protocol-version-handshakeSkill
- publishing-a-pack-locallySkill
- rate-limit-respectSkill
- reference-canonicalisationSkill
- replay-transcript-for-regressionSkill
- restart-and-reload-semanticsSkill
- scope-guard-before-executionSkill
- search-then-fetch-patternSkill
- secrets-via-environmentSkill
- server-discovery-and-trustSkill
- signal-and-pitfall-sectionsSkill
- skill-frontmatter-contractSkill
- stdio-client-configSkill
- stdout-purity-checkSkill
- third-party-server-sandboxingSkill
- tool-call-budgetingSkill
- tool-call-error-pathsSkill
- tool-error-without-retry-stormSkill
- tools-list-schema-validationSkill
- tool-surface-minimisationSkill
- tool-verb-namingSkill
- transport-choiceSkill
- verify-tool-output-before-reportingSkill
- when-to-use-and-avoidSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
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 23
Verify deletion removes the bytes rather than only the index entry
- Distinctive: line 24
Document the periods where a reviewer can find them
- Distinctive: line 32
no orphaned file remains after a retention sweep
- Distinctive: line 62
every artifact class has an enforced retention period
≈ “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
Data Retention Policy
Decide how long tool inputs, outputs and logs live, and make deletion real rather than implied
Use when: the server stores captures, findings or credentials-adjacent data
Avoid when: the server keeps nothing beyond process memory
Procedure
- List every artifact the server writes and where
- Assign each a retention period based on the engagement rules
- Implement deletion for the shortest-lived class first
- Verify deletion removes the bytes rather than only the index entry
- Document the periods where a reviewer can find them
- Re-test deletion after any change to the storage layout
Signals
- each stored artifact class has a stated period
- deletion removes files, not only references
- the documented periods match the implementation
- no orphaned file remains after a retention sweep
Patterns
1. Artifact classes
logs: 30 days, captures: engagement end, indexes: ephemeral2. Real delete
unlink the file and confirm the path is gone3. Documented
retention table in SECURITY.mdPitfalls
- Deleting the index entry while the file remains on disk
- Keeping captures indefinitely because they were useful once
- Documenting a period that no code enforces
Done when
- every artifact class has an enforced retention period
- deletion is verified at the filesystem level
References
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.

