agent-native-architecture
Skill1 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Build applications where agents are first-class citizens. Use this skill when designing autonomous agents, creating MCP tools, implementing self-modifying systems, or defining architecture artifacts around deletion tests, interfaces, seams, adapters, and explicit contracts.
3 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- iliaal/ai-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 7, 2026
- originalrashmi/rc-engine-product-frameworktheir own version, first seen Mar 25, 2026
- CodeWithBehnam/cc-docstheir own version, first seen Mar 15, 2026
Other versions3 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 3
- iliaal/ai-skills★ 45same name
- CodeWithBehnam/cc-docs★ 2same name
- originalrashmi/rc-engine-product-framework★ 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 repository30 other files it gives its agents.
- .codex/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- compound-engineeringSkill
- compound-engineeringSkill
- agent-browserSkill
- agent-native-auditSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- cavemanSkill
- compound-docsSkill
- compound-engineeringSkill
- compounding-operating-systemSkill
- compound-refreshSkill
- create-agent-skillsSkill
- document-reviewSkill
- file-todosSkill
- finishing-branchSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- gemini-imagegenSkill
- git-worktreeSkill
- grill-meSkill
- ideateSkill
- i-have-adhdSkill
- laravel-conventionsSkill
- orchestrating-swarmsSkill
- rcloneSkill
- resolve-pr-parallelSkill
- setupSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- ubiquitous-languageSkill
- xml-tag-structureSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
10
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 28
Run the architecture checklist below before recommending new abstractions.
- Very specific: line 29
If this is part of the compound workflow chain, turn the guidance into a concrete architecture artifact under docs/architecture/.
- Distinctive: line 32
Parity: if the user can do it, the agent can achieve the same outcome.
- Distinctive: line 54
Every important UI action has an agent path.
- Distinctive: line 63
When this skill is used inside the compound workflow chain, produce an artifact that downstream phases can consume directly.
- Distinctive: line 65
Use this vocabulary exactly:
- Very specific: line 84
When part of the workflow chain, an artifact under docs/architecture/ that uses the contract vocabulary above.
- Distinctive: line 88
Do not recommend agent features that lack an execution path.
- Distinctive: line 89
Do not hide business logic inside tools when a prompt or primitive would suffice.
- Distinctive: line 90
Do not treat architecture as commentary.
- Distinctive: line 91
Prefer deletion and simpler seams before adding abstractions.
- Distinctive: line 92
Ask for missing domain constraints only when they materially change the architecture recommendation.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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
agent-native-architecture Skill
Design software where agents are first-class operators, not an afterthought. Start with parity, primitive tools, and explicit contracts so new features can be delivered as prompts, not hard-coded workflows.
When to use
- Designing or refactoring an agent-native application.
- Creating MCP tools, tool contracts, or system prompts.
- Reviewing action parity between UI and agent capabilities.
- Producing the architecture artifact consumed by the compound workflow chain.
Workflow
- Identify the user's goal: design, files/workspace, tool design, domain tools, execution patterns, system prompts, context injection, action parity, self-modification, product design, mobile patterns, testing, or refactoring.
- Load only the reference files needed for that topic, then map the advice onto the current product, data model, and deployment constraints.
- Run the architecture checklist below before recommending new abstractions.
- If this is part of the compound workflow chain, turn the guidance into a concrete architecture artifact under
docs/architecture/.
Core principles
- Parity: if the user can do it, the agent can achieve the same outcome.
- Granularity: tools are primitives; features are prompt-defined outcomes.
- Composability: new capabilities should come from new prompts before new code.
- Emergent capability: open-ended requests should reveal gaps and product demand.
- Improvement over time: context, prompt refinement, and safe self-modification should make the system better with use.
Reference router
- Design from scratch ->
references/architecture-patterns.md - Files and workspace design ->
references/files-universal-interface.md,references/shared-workspace-architecture.md - MCP and primitive tool design ->
references/mcp-tool-design.md - Domain-tool thresholds ->
references/from-primitives-to-domain-tools.md - Execution and completion loops ->
references/agent-execution-patterns.md - System prompt design ->
references/system-prompt-design.md - Dynamic context injection ->
references/dynamic-context-injection.md - Action parity reviews ->
references/action-parity-discipline.md - Self-modification ->
references/self-modification.md - Product implications ->
references/product-implications.md - Mobile patterns ->
references/mobile-patterns.md - Testing ->
references/agent-native-testing.md - Refactoring legacy systems ->
references/refactoring-to-prompt-native.md
Architecture checklist
- Every important UI action has an agent path.
- Tools expose primitives, not hidden business decisions.
- CRUD completeness exists where the domain needs it.
- Agents and users share the same workspace or data plane.
- Runtime context explains available resources, capabilities, and vocabulary.
- Long-running work has explicit completion, partial progress, and resume rules.
- The design still works under bounded context windows.
Compound Architecture Artifact Contract
When this skill is used inside the compound workflow chain, produce an artifact that downstream phases can consume directly.
Use this vocabulary exactly:
- Deepening candidates -- areas that need more design work before
/deepen-plan. - Deletion test -- what can be removed, avoided, or delayed before adding structure.
- Interface as test surface -- the behavior callers and tests rely on.
- Seam -- where behavior can be swapped, isolated, or tested.
- Adapter -- the boundary component that translates external detail into domain-safe behavior.
Required sections for the artifact:
- Problem framing and constraints.
- Capability map and parity gaps.
- Deepening candidates.
- Deletion test outcomes.
- Interfaces as test surfaces.
- Seams, adapters, and explicit contracts.
- Design-it-twice options when two credible architectures remain.
- Recommended next step for
/deepen-planor implementation.
Output
- A concise architecture recommendation grounded in the chosen references.
- When part of the workflow chain, an artifact under
docs/architecture/that uses the contract vocabulary above. - Clear parity gaps, tool gaps, and follow-up actions.
Guardrails
- Do not recommend agent features that lack an execution path.
- Do not hide business logic inside tools when a prompt or primitive would suffice.
- Do not treat architecture as commentary; emit an artifact when the workflow requires it.
- Prefer deletion and simpler seams before adding abstractions.
- Ask for missing domain constraints only when they materially change the architecture recommendation.
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.

