harness-map
Skill104 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Map a repository's mechanical harness layers: canonical check command, local and CI gates, architecture boundaries, structural rules, behavioral verification, docs ratchets, evidence workflows, and operator-facing surfaces. Use when you need to understand how a repo keeps change safe.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- quocld/hephaestus-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- dreamiurg/harness-maptheir own version, first seen Jul 4, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- quocld/hephaestus-agent-skills★ 8same name
- dreamiurg/harness-map★ 4same 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 repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- agents-md-mapperSkill
- ast-grep-setupSkill
- differential-session-runnerSkill
- execute-phaseSkill
- plan-phaseSkill
- qa-from-executeSkill
- research-phaseSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈5
Distinctive · estimate
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 55
Import Linter, dependency-cruiser, Bazel visibility, custom dependency tests
- Distinctive: line 71
Use this skill when the user asks to:
- Distinctive: line 76
document how architectural constraints are enforced
- Distinctive: line 93
every subcommand it runs
- Distinctive: line 207
Write a research artifact to:
- Very specific: line 279
use plan-phase if the user wants to add or improve a harness layer
≈ “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
Harness Map
Map the repository's actual harness: the mechanical checks, policies, workflows, and artifacts that make change safe.
This skill is narrower than generic codebase research. It is specifically for answering questions like:
- "What is the harness in this repo?"
- "What does
checkactually run?" - "Which layers are local vs CI vs docs vs evidence?"
- "How is architecture enforced here?"
- "What operator surfaces teach agents how to use the harness?"
Core Principle
Map the harness as implemented, not as imagined.
Prefer:
- commands that actually run
- config files that actually enforce policy
- CI workflows that actually gate merges
- docs and playbooks that actually structure investigations
- agent/operator files that actually expose the workflow
Avoid:
- aspirational architecture prose without enforcement
- recommendations before the map exists
- broad codebase summaries that skip the gate structure
What Counts as Harness
A repo harness usually includes some or all of these layers:
- Canonical local command
just check,make check,task check,npm test, etc.
- Architecture boundaries
- Import Linter, dependency-cruiser, Bazel visibility, custom dependency tests
- Structural rules
- ast-grep, semgrep, custom lint rules, codemod rule tests
- Behavioral verification
- unit/integration tests, snapshots, goldens, deterministic checks, build verification
- Docs ratchets
- docs link checks, nav checks, metadata/frontmatter checks, allowlists
- CI decomposition
- matrix jobs or separate workflows that mirror harness gates
- Evidence workflows
- session logs, diff reports, chunk docs, experiment records, replay/debug artifacts
- Operator surface
AGENTS.md,.codex/, environment files, repo-local skills, slash commands
When to Use
Use this skill when the user asks to:
- map or explain the harness
- identify all gate layers in a repo
- compare local checks with CI checks
- document how architectural constraints are enforced
- understand how agents/operators are expected to use the repo safely
Workflow
1. Find the canonical local entrypoint
Inspect common entrypoint files first:
justfileMakefilepackage.jsonpyproject.toml- task runner config files
Capture:
- the canonical command name
- every subcommand it runs
- whether it chains all gates or only a subset
2. Find CI gate execution
Inspect CI workflows:
.github/workflows/*.yml- other CI configs (
.gitlab-ci.yml,buildkite, etc.)
Capture:
- job names
- matrix dimensions
- whether
fail-fastis enabled - which local gates are mirrored in CI
- which gates only exist in CI
3. Find architecture enforcement
Look for:
- Import Linter / grimp
- dependency-cruiser
- layering tests
- package-boundary configs
- forbidden import tests
Capture:
- contract names
- source and forbidden modules
- ignore lists / allowed exceptions
- exact config path
4. Find structural rule enforcement
Look for:
sgconfig.yml, ast-grep rule directories- semgrep configs
- custom lint rule packages
- rule tests and snapshots
Capture:
- rule config files
- rule directories
- test directories
- snapshot/baseline locations
- any custom parser or language extensions
5. Find behavioral verification layers
Look for:
- test commands
- snapshot directories
- golden outputs
- deterministic helpers
- numerical equivalence docs
- build verification steps
Capture:
- exact commands
- test conventions docs
- locations of snapshots/goldens
- special validation steps outside the main test runner
6. Find docs ratchets
Look for:
- docs check scripts
- nav validation
- broken-link validation
- frontmatter/tag checks
- allowlists / baselines
Capture:
- categories of docs failures
- allowlist file paths
- whether the check behaves as a ratchet
7. Find evidence workflows
Look for:
- chunk docs
- debugging session logs
- replay/trace diff playbooks
- benchmark result docs
- evidence indexes
Capture:
- index files
- per-session or per-chunk docs
- required evidence fields
- exact commands recorded in those artifacts
8. Find operator-facing surfaces
Look for:
AGENTS.md.codex/environments/*.codex/skills/*- command docs
- plugin manifests
Capture:
- setup / run / test actions
- repo-local skills that wrap harness flows
- operator instructions that point to real commands
9. Synthesize the harness map
Write a research artifact to:
memory-bank/research/YYYY-MM-DD_HH-MM-SS_<repo>-harness-map.md
Recommended structure:
---
title: "<repo> – Harness Map"
phase: Research
date: "YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS"
owner: "<agent_or_user>"
tags: [research, harness, <repo>]
---
## Canonical Entry Point
- `path:line-line` → command and subcommands
## Harness Layers
### Layer 1: Local checks
### Layer 2: Architecture boundaries
### Layer 3: Structural rules
### Layer 4: Behavioral verification
### Layer 5: Docs ratchet
### Layer 6: CI matrix
### Layer 7: Evidence workflow
### Layer 8: Operator surface
## Source Index
- `path:line-line` → what this file contributes
## Observed Command Chain
- ordered list of checks from the main commandOutput Requirements
Your harness map must:
- identify the single best local entrypoint if one exists
- show where each layer is enforced
- distinguish between enforced config and descriptive docs
- include exact file paths
- include line numbers when they materially improve traceability
- describe what exists before suggesting changes
Good Output Example
## Canonical Entry Point
- `justfile:22-29` defines `check *args:` and runs Ruff, Import Linter, ty, docs checks, ast-grep, pytest, and Zig checks.
## Layer 2: Architecture Boundaries
- `pyproject.toml:80-110` defines four Import Linter forbidden contracts.
## Layer 6: CI Matrix
- `.github/workflows/ci.yml:13-79` runs seven matrix tasks with `fail-fast: false`.Bad Output Example
The repo appears to care about quality and uses several tools.
It has some tests and some linting.Handoff
Common next steps after this skill:
- generate a condensed harness summary for operators
- compare two repos' harnesses
- use
plan-phaseif the user wants to add or improve a harness layer
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.

