feature-delivery
Skill1 starsChanged 44 days agoMITView on GitHub
Implement a defined feature across affected UI, API, data and tests. Use for build this feature, implement the approved flow, or wire this UI to the API. Planning-only requests belong to product-planning; audit-only requests belong to the relevant review workflow.
8 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- MarioJames/skill-foundrytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- pdugan20/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- florian101010/awesome-agentic-AI-coding-templatetheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Eliahhango/nullbyte-securitytheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- microsoft/testfxtheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- LanternOps/breezetheir own version, first seen Oct 9, 2026
Other versions8 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 8
- microsoft/testfx★ 1.1ksame name
- DodoraApp/DodoStream★ 243same name
- LanternOps/breeze★ 169same name
- Eliahhango/nullbyte-security★ 4same name
- florian101010/awesome-agentic-AI-coding-template★ 4same name
- Cem-Tas96/claude-skills★ 1same name
- MarioJames/skill-foundry★ 1same name
- pdugan20/skills★ 1same name
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 repository12 other files it gives its agents.
- templates/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- code-qualitySkill
- data-integritySkill
- design-qualitySkill
- growth-strategySkill
- performance-reviewSkill
- product-designSkill
- product-planningSkill
- product-qualitySkill
- release-engineeringSkill
- security-auditSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.
3
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
- Distinctive: line 12
Read applicable project instructions and the relevant acceptance criteria.
- Distinctive: line 20
Put business rules in their existing domain owner.
- Distinctive: line 25
Keep technical and product documentation aligned when behaviour changes.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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
Feature delivery
Deliver the requested user outcome through the relevant layers of the existing project. Explicit user instructions take precedence over this workflow's defaults.
Scope and evidence
Read applicable project instructions and the relevant acceptance criteria. Inspect the manifests, nearby implementation, contracts and tests to learn the actual stack and supported commands. Preserve unrelated changes. In a new project, establish only the foundations needed for the requested feature.
Trace affected consumers before changing shared behaviour. For substantial work, make a short implementation plan covering dependencies, data impact and verification. Resolve material requirement conflicts; use disclosed reasonable defaults for reversible implementation details. Do not invoke every skill or demand a new specification for a small edit.
If the full fix requires edits outside the authorized task, explain the impact and obtain expanded scope before those edits. Keep unresolved decisions and their owners in the project's existing records; only material dependencies block the affected work. Use its adopted task lifecycle rather than adding parallel statuses.
Implement
- Put business rules in their existing domain owner. Keep transport, persistence and presentation responsibilities clear without inventing layers solely to fit a pattern.
- Reuse authoritative contracts, utilities, design tokens and components. Extend them when the requirement warrants it; avoid parallel copies that drift.
- Handle relevant validation, ownership, permissions, partial failures, retries, concurrency and recovery. A hidden UI control is not authorization.
- Preserve compatibility with existing stored data and supported clients. Schema changes follow the project's migration process; inspect generated migrations.
- Connect UI actions to real outcomes within scope. Loading, empty, error and success states must reflect the actual operation, including failures.
- Keep technical and product documentation aligned when behaviour changes. Do not rewrite unrelated documents or broaden the product scope.
Verify the outcome
Select checks from requirements and risk. Use focused behaviour/regression tests, relevant lint/type/build commands, and the actual browser/device journey when available. For cross-layer work, confirm the result at the other end rather than only mocking every boundary.
Inspect test setup before execution: verify that destructive fixtures/reset commands target disposable data. Never point a test reset at a shared or production database. Use existing fake adapters for external side effects where possible.
Fix issues caused by the change, rerun the affected checks, and report unrelated failures separately. Do not remove assertions or update expected results just to match accidental implementation behaviour. Record checks that could not run.
Finish
Summarize delivered behaviour, changed surfaces, verification evidence and remaining limitations. Remove temporary diagnostics introduced by this work. A passing build does not establish product, design, security or performance acceptance; make claims only within the scope verified.
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.

