prompt
Skill3 starsChanged 3 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Compose one bounded handoff for an already selected agent role and session. Do not select roles or routes, start a lifecycle, dispatch agents, add reviews, invent budgets, or turn controller procedures into specialist assignments.
20 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- JetBrains/mcp-steroidtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- renanflustosa/octo-clustertheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- Munsheys/claude-prompt-architecttheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- zhamann/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- webdevarif/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- mehrad-dm/mastermindtheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use brainstorm, init and 1 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.
nicolasestremSkillbrainstorm
Structured idea generation and solution exploration with systematic analysis.
Also in 4 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillinit
Also in 3 projects that use this
SentrySkillreview
Fixture review skill.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions20 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 20
- treylom/prompt-engineering-skills★ 185same name
- JetBrains/mcp-steroid★ 82same name
- oprogramadorreal/optimus-claude★ 75same name
- treylom/ThisCode★ 41same name
- analystacademy/claude-skills★ 35same name
- mehrad-dm/mastermind★ 23same name
- amatray/claude-skills-public★ 9same name
- ksprashu/agent-skill-forge★ 3same name
- renanflustosa/octo-cluster★ 3same name
- furic/extract-alpha★ 2same name
10 more not listed
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 repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- architectural-alignmentSkill
- bearing-liteSkill
- coordinatorSkill
- implementerSkill
- intakeSkill
- integration-engineerSkill
- light-implementerSkill
- onboard-bearingSkill
- planning-and-designSkill
- requirements-engineerSkill
- reviewerSkill
- scope-definitionSkill
- scribeSkill
- systems-modelerSkill
- test-engineerSkill
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 18 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
- Distinctive: line 16
Use the provided role/session, selected route/capability binding, candidate, objective, acceptance, inputs, exact write set, authority, …
- Distinctive: line 45
Use the selected role's exact typed outcomes and genuine stop conditions.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 18 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
Write Agent Handoff
Compose the smallest packet for one authorized assignment; launch nothing. Use the provided role/session, selected route/capability binding, candidate, objective, acceptance, inputs, exact write set, authority, commands, and return contract. Missing material inputs are typed gaps, not permission to invent them. In Bearing, specialist dispatch requires the enabled frozen profile role and task need; independent review also requires the owner's requested scope and cadence.
Procedure
- Select one role/session in
references/role-loops.mdand read its canonical skill. That skill owns responsibilities, self-checks, boundaries, and outcomes; the index does not override it. Resolve conflicting instructions first. - Include useful facts and bindings: paths, source/candidate identities, dependencies, recorded decisions, and gaps. Omit raw history and settled-context rediscovery. Preserve the provided model, harness, reasoning, and authority.
- Define one observable objective and numbered acceptance criteria, each touched trust boundary/invariant (or none), exact write set, and protected actions.
- Include the selected loop only. Requirements Engineer owns its requirements- quality pass and self-repairs. Other authors check and repair their own outputs. Evaluators report without repairing the candidate while evaluating; Light Implementer executes the exact command and returns failure without repair.
- Controllers wait on completion events, wake on responses, and consume each result once. Never poll or add automatic fan-out, reviews, or agent invocations.
- Name the repository gate first and require its exit code; author-selected criteria and focused commands supplement it, never replace it, and a VERIFY list without it is incomplete. Give expected results and evidence per acceptance item. Required missing/not-run proof is a gap. Include time/call limits only when supplied; invent no deadline, round count, or reasoning level. Require one negative check per named trust boundary. A passing return is invalid while an acceptance item is unmet or unmapped in its acceptance-to-evidence table.
- Use the selected role's exact typed outcomes and genuine stop conditions.
Packet template
ROLE / SESSION: <selected role/mode and canonical skill>
STATE / INPUTS: <candidate, source bindings, dependencies, known facts>
OBJECTIVE / ACCEPTANCE: <one outcome; numbered observable conditions>
AUTHORITY: <write set, permitted actions, protected boundaries>
LOOP: <one selected loop, its self-checks, and repair boundary>
VERIFY: <repository gate first with exit code, focused checks, expected results, acceptance-to-evidence table>
RETURN / STOP: <compact receipt: verdict, candidate_ref, changed_paths, tests, findings, blocker; remaining work and genuine stops>Intake, combined Alignment/Scope, final Planning and Design, and explicit profile configuration are controller procedures/helpers, not extra agent roles to invent.
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.

