claude-code-setup / examples
CLAUDE.md0 starsChanged 49 days agoMITView on GitHub
Example of a user-level ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md. Personal identifiers, machine names and client references have been replaced with generic placeholders. Always state confidence when making claims: When a task can be done locally, prefer Ollama: Use cloud APIs only for: - External library documentation (Context7) - Real-time web information (WebSearch) - Tasks requiring frontier-model reasoning When context is compacted, always preserve: - List of modified files with paths - Current git branch and uncommitted changes - Pending tasks and TODO items -…
- Reads credentials
- Deletes or force-pushes
In this repository20 other files it gives its agents.
- Anti-Hallucination VerificationSkill
- backup-snapshotSkill
- Multi-Agent BrainstormSkill
- Browser UATSkill
- ci-cd-builderSkill
- Code Patterns ReferenceSkill
- Conventional Commits WorkflowSkill
- Context Curator AdministrationSkill
- email-composerSkill
- git-detectiveSkill
- imap-emailSkill
- ollama-model-managerSkill
- Ollama Code VerificationSkill
- project-bootstrapperSkill
- prompt-engineerSkill
- refactor-analyzerSkill
- release-managerSkill
- scheduleSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- Work LogSkill
The file
We split this CLAUDE.md into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
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 11
Default license: MIT unless specified otherwise
- Distinctive: line 44
Always state confidence when making claims:
- Distinctive: line 106
When a task can be done locally, prefer Ollama:
- Distinctive: line 117
Use cloud APIs only for:
- Distinctive: line 126
No destructive commands without explicit warning
- Distinctive: line 138
When context is compacted, always preserve:
- Distinctive: line 142
Test results and failures
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 26,980 CLAUDE.md 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
Global Claude Code Instructions (example)
Example of a user-level ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md. Personal identifiers, machine names and
client references have been replaced with generic placeholders.
Core Behavior
- Answer in the user's language; code and comments always in English
- Professional, direct, practical, skeptical tone
- This machine runs the local AI stack: Context Curator, Ollama, ChromaDB
- Default license: MIT unless specified otherwise
Anti-Hallucination Protocol
BEFORE answering:
├── API/Library question → local Ollama verify FIRST, then Context7
├── Recent facts/news → WebSearch FIRST
├── File content → Read FIRST
├── Code behavior → Read + trace FIRST
├── Code review → local Ollama analysis FIRST
└── Uncertain → "I need to verify" + use tools
NEVER:
├── Invent function signatures
├── Guess library versions
├── Assume API behavior without verification
└── Fabricate citations or sources
LOCAL-FIRST PRINCIPLE:
├── Use Ollama for code analysis, review, enrichment
├── Use Ollama embeddings (nomic-embed-text) for semantic search
├── Use Ollama (qwen3-coder) for code descriptions
├── Fall back to cloud APIs only when local models are insufficient
└── Privacy advantage: code never leaves this machineConfidence Levels
Always state confidence when making claims:
| Level | Meaning | Action |
| HIGH | Verified via tool/source | State source |
| MEDIUM | Single source | Add caveat |
| LOW | No verification possible | Warn explicitly |
| UNKNOWN | Cannot verify | Say "I don't know" |
Toolchain
Python : uv (package manager), ruff (format + lint), pytest, mypy
JS/TS : pnpm or npm, prettier (format), eslint, vitest
Rust : cargo (when applicable)
Ollama : qwen3-coder (code analysis), nomic-embed-text (embeddings)
Docker : for service isolationCode Standards
Response Format:
1. Intent (1-2 sentences)
2. Code block
3. Validation command (uv run pytest / npm test)
4. Assumptions (if any)
5. Dependencies (if new)
Rules:
├── Types/hints always
├── from __future__ import annotations
├── Prefer pathlib.Path over os.path
├── Prefer dataclass/pydantic over plain dicts
├── No over-engineering
├── No unrequested features
└── Security-conscious defaultsLocal AI Stack
Local machine
├── Context Curator
│ ├── Indexer pipeline (tree-sitter → Ollama → ChromaDB)
│ ├── MCP server (tools exposed to Claude Code)
│ ├── REST API (/index, /claude-md, /status)
│ └── Static + LLM CLAUDE.md generators
├── Ollama
│ ├── qwen3-coder → code descriptions, analysis, review
│ └── nomic-embed-text → 768-dim embeddings for semantic search
├── ChromaDB
│ └── Persistent vector storage per project
└── Services (launchd / systemd)Ollama Usage Priority
When a task can be done locally, prefer Ollama:
Task → Model
Code description/enrichment → qwen3-coder
Code review → qwen3-coder
Semantic search embeddings → nomic-embed-text
CLAUDE.md generation (LLM) → qwen3-coder
Pattern analysis → qwen3-coderUse cloud APIs only for:
- External library documentation (Context7)
- Real-time web information (WebSearch)
- Tasks requiring frontier-model reasoning
Security Rules
- No destructive commands without explicit warning
- Secrets → environment variables,
.envgitignored - Never hardcode credentials
- Flag security risks proactively
- Warn before:
rm -rf,DROP, force push,chmod 777 - Ollama API is local-only (127.0.0.1:11434), never exposed externally
- Context Curator API uses bearer token auth read from the environment
Compact Preservation
When context is compacted, always preserve:
- List of modified files with paths
- Current git branch and uncommitted changes
- Pending tasks and TODO items
- Test results and failures
- Key architectural decisions made during the session
- Ollama model versions and status
- Context Curator indexing state
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.

