whats-next
Skill0 starsChanged 33 days agoMITView on GitHub
Tells the user which skill to run next in the change workflow and how: the step, the command for this host, and whether to stay in this session or start a new one. Use when the user asks what to run next, where they are in the flow, which skill fits the work in front of them, or how to continue after a step finished. Not for doing the step itself (the named skill), preparing tools (setup-tools), or routing among Matt Pocock's skills alone (his ask-matt).
15 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- TidalPaladin/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- jackneil/claude-jackedtheir own version, first seen Nov 5, 2026
- aayushchugh/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- TanKaizokuO/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- alabenkhlifa/dayjobtheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- DavoDC/claude-playbooktheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use release and handoff.
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.
MicrosoftSkillrelease
Use ONLY when the user explicitly asks to cut/publish a Huabu desktop release or tag a version. Performs an outward action — bumps the version in apps/desktop/package.json, commits + annotated-tags vX.Y.Z, and pushes the branch + tag. That tag push auto-builds the macOS/Windows installers and publishes a GitHub Release. Provides `status`, `bump`, `tag-push`, and a one-command `run` (bump → tag-push).
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillhandoff
Compact the current conversation into a handoff document for another agent to pick up.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions15 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 15
- petarzarkov/dunx★ 93same name
- WellApp-ai/skills★ 8same name
- aayushchugh/skills★ 4same name
- postmeridiem/clide★ 4same name
- wyattjoh/skills★ 3same name
- jackneil/claude-jacked★ 2same name
- alabenkhlifa/dayjob★ 1same name
- cacardinal/laila★ 1same name
- DavoDC/claude-playbook★ 1same name
- luw2007/skills★ 1same name
5 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 repository8 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- check-acceptanceSkill
- explainSkill
- find-bugsSkill
- fix-bugSkill
- plan-changeSkill
- pr-review-guideSkill
- setup-toolsSkill
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 13 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 28
Add what the scan cannot see: the step this conversation just finished and the path or URL it reported, the decisions the user stated, and …
- Very specific: line 77
Write the command as the host registers it: /aantoniadis-skills:<name> in Claude Code, $aantoniadis-skills:<name> in Codex, /<name> or …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 13 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
For helper loading, follow package references. Write in the shared technical English; name the evidence behind the placement, as evidence says.
What's next
Give one answer: where the user is in the workflow, the next step, the exact command, and the session to run it in. Read the state first; ask only when two positions fit. Write nothing to the project, and stop after the answer: the user runs the next step.
1. Read the state
Run python3 <package>/skills/whats-next/scripts/workflow_state.py <project>.
It prints the branch and its distance from the default branch, the uncommitted
files, the investigation location, every note and report our skills left
(understanding note, plan, diagnosis note, PR review guide, acceptance report)
with its summary line and date, local tickets, visual-pr tasks, Matt's
tracker setup, and whether a local tool record exists. It reads only and
creates nothing.
Add what the scan cannot see: the step this conversation just finished and the
path or URL it reported, the decisions the user stated, and the argument when
it names a goal. When the branch has an upstream, check for an open PR with the
host's Git tooling, such as gh pr view. Print the tool record with
python3 <package>/skills/tool_setup_path.py --show <project> to learn which
originals are installed and how the host registers them; none means no setup
ran, so take install commands from
original skills.
2. Place the user
Take the first row whose evidence holds, top to bottom. "The same session" is the one that holds the planning conversation. "A new session" is a fresh context window: a new session in the host, or its clear command.
| Evidence | Next | Session |
| A failing check, an issue reporting wrong behavior, or a production symptom, with no diagnosis note for it | fix-bug, with the symptom and the contract when known | Where the symptom arrives: the implementing session for a check it broke, a new one for an issue or a production symptom |
| A PR the user did not write and has to review | pr-review-guide, with the PR URL | A new session, without the author's context |
| An epic, tickets, or a spec, and a delivered head or an integration branch | check-acceptance, with the sources and the head | A new session on the delivered head |
| An acceptance report with Partial or Unmet rows, or bug cards | plan-change for a missing decision, Matt's implement per gap, fix-bug per bug card, each with the report path | A new session per handoff |
| A feature branch ahead of the default branch, and no PR | find-bugs on the branch against the default branch, then HumanLayer's visual-pr | The implementing session, or a new one checked out on the branch |
| Tickets with blocking edges, and no commits for them yet | Matt's implement per unblocked ticket, or implement-spec for the whole spec | A new session per ticket, on the feature branch; one new session for implement-spec |
| A plan whose Readiness line says ready, and no spec or tickets | plan-change to draft the spec and tickets, or Matt's to-spec then to-tickets | The same planning session, unbroken |
| A plan with open decisions or blocked slices | plan-change on the open choices | The same planning session |
| An understanding note, and no plan | plan-change, with the note path | The same session |
| A change with consequences beyond its own function, and no note or plan | explain for one concrete question about today's behavior, or plan-change when the flow is already known | Start the planning session here |
| A contained change in familiar code | No skill: the host's normal coding workflow, with find-bugs when a defect search would help | The current session |
| Investigation work ahead, and no local tool record | setup-tools, naming the skills to run | Any |
An idea with no repository under it takes Matt's grill-me. A huge, foggy
effort takes his wayfinder, which merges at to-spec. When two rows fit and
the conversation does not settle it, ask one question with the recommended row
first, as asking says for a round and for a host without the
question tool.
3. Answer
Reply in this shape, with the real paths and URLs from the scan:
**Where you are:** <position, with its evidence: branch, file, PR, report line>
**Next:** <skill> — <what it settles, one line>
**Run:** <the command for this host, with the paths and the choices already settled>
**Session:** <same | new> — <reason>
**Carry:** <the paths or URLs the next step needs, which a fresh session cannot see>
**Also possible:** <one alternative row, and when it is the better one>Write the command as the host registers it: /aantoniadis-skills:<name> in
Claude Code, $aantoniadis-skills:<name> in Codex, /<name> or
opencode run --command <name> in OpenCode; an original as the tool record
lists it, such as /mattpocock-skills:implement or /implement. Put a
kickoff choice the conversation already settled inside the command, so the
next skill asks less. When an original is not installed, give its install
command and the local route instead. Name what was not checked, such as a
tracker that could not be reached. Done when the user can paste the command.
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.

