agentleFS
alexnthnzalexnthnz/keel/skills/arena/SKILL.md

arena

Skill5 starsChanged 49 days agoMITView on GitHub

Spawn N parallel candidates at the same task, pick a base, graft the strongest parts of the losers into it. Use for /keel:arena, 'arena this', 'throw it in the arena', or when one attempt at a non-trivial artifact would lock in the wrong shape.

84 other projects use a version of this, 57 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use addskill, apply-firmware and 10 more.

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.
  • ryanportfolioSkill

    addskill

    Create, import, update, or install repo or personal skills: runtime ownership, resources, discovery checks.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • ryanportfolioSkill

    apply-firmware

    Bring current folder (plain folder, existing repo, old or partial firmware copy) up to full Harness Firmware in place. Mirror external repo → adopt-repo.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • +10 more from ryanportfolio

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 83 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Every candidate gets the same prompt, so the prompt is the contract.

    line 15
  2. Distinctive:

    If the candidates converge on one shape, that is strong agreement.

    line 42

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 83 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Arena

Other keel skills named here sit beside this one at ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../<name>/SKILL.md, and a principle at principle-<name>. The Skill tool refuses them, so read the file and follow it.

Open a todolist with one entry per phase (Frame, Fan out, Cross-judge, Pick, Graft, Verify) before launching anything.

Phase A: Frame

Every candidate gets the same prompt, so the prompt is the contract.

  1. State the artifact each candidate is producing.
  2. Derive the rubric, 3-6 concrete gradeable criteria for what success looks like on this task. It is the picker's tool in Phase D. Candidates only see the task.
  3. Pick the runners. Use the arena runners line. Read ${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/keel-models.md if it exists; use the role's line, else the default, one runner each on opus, fable, and sonnet. Three different Claude models give the panel its diversity. An inherit, inherit-parent, or auto entry in this line means the parent model, so omit model for it. If the Agent tool rejects a configured entry, run that seat on the default at the same position and say so. If it rejects a default, omit model for that seat and say so. Spawn more runners when the arena covers multiple design directions. Use the same model N times when the work is generation-bound rather than judgment-sensitive. Pick each subagent's effort for the job, per the Subagents section of the lead skill.
  4. Give each candidate its own output location (a git worktree where possible, via isolation: "worktree" on its Agent call, otherwise /tmp/arena-<slug>/candidate-<n>/), per the separate-before-serializing-shared-state principle skill.

Phase B: Fan out

Spawn all N subagents in one message, each with the task, the path to the shared grounding, its own output path, and instructions to produce the artifact and a short rationale naming the alternatives it considered and what it rejected.

Subagents run in the background and the parent is notified as each completes, so never poll or sleep-wait. If a candidate produces no output, proceed with N-1 and note the dropout.

Phase C: Cross-judge

After all Phase B candidates complete, choose one model from the arena cross-judge pool line. Read ${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/keel-models.md if it exists; use the role's line, else the default pool of opus, fable, and sonnet. Spawn one read-only judge subagent, its prompt opening with "Read-only: do not edit files." The judge is never on the parent's model. Try only the entries that name a different model from the parent's, in pool order. An inherit, inherit-parent, or auto entry is the parent model, so it never judges. If the Agent tool rejects an entry, move to the next one. If no entry runs, try the default pool's entries other than the parent's model the same way. If none of those runs, skip the judge, pick the base alone in Phase D, and say so. If you do not know the parent's model, try the pool's entries in order and say that the parent-model check did not run. The judge sees the rubric and the candidates by path label, scores each criterion, and recommends a base with rationale. It runs in parallel with your reading in Phase D. Don't spawn it while candidates are still writing.

Phase D: Pick a base

Read every candidate end to end before picking. Score each against the rubric criterion by criterion, not on holistic feel, and compare with the cross-judge when Phase C ran one. Agreement on the base confirms the pick. Disagreement means one of you is biased or the rubric was ambiguous. Read both rationales before deciding.

Pick the base a future maintainer can extend most easily without breaking invariants. When two feel tied, prefer the cleaner boundary or smaller API, per the Laziness Protocol.

Phase E: Graft

Walk each losing candidate once more for what is worth porting into the base, usually one or two things per candidate, not most of it. Fold each graft in by hand, per the redesign-from-first-principles principle skill, so the result stays coherent under one mental model. Don't paste mechanically.

If the candidates converge on one shape, that is strong agreement. Note it and ship the consensus shape. No graft is needed. If they wildly diverge, Phase A was under-specified. Reframe and re-run rather than averaging the divergence.

Phase F: Verify

Verify the synthesized artifact like any other output, per the prove-it-works principle skill. If verification finds a problem the arena missed, either Phase A was wrong (re-frame and re-run) or a candidate caught it and you missed the graft (go back to Phase E). Don't paper over it.

Outputs

One synthesized artifact, with a short synthesis note alongside naming the base and why, the cross-judge's verdict or that Phase C skipped the judge, each graft with its source candidate, what was rejected and why, any convergence or dropouts, and the verification result.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.