better-agentic-ide
CLAUDE.md45 starsChanged 30 days agoMITView on GitHub
This file is the project constitution: the standing decisions and conventions every agent follows, so parallel and later work stays consistent. It is loaded into every Claude Code session; read it first and don't contradict it. This is an ADE project: disciplined AI development, verified, not vibed. Work flows Plan → Approve → Shard → Build → Verify, and a story is Done only when the agreed verification command passes. No agent certifies its own work. @.ade/rules.md
In this repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- llms.txtllms.txt
- bmad-advanced-elicitationSkill
- bmad-agent-analystSkill
- bmad-agent-architectSkill
- bmad-agent-devSkill
- bmad-agent-pmSkill
- bmad-agent-ux-designerSkill
- bmad-architectureSkill
- bmad-brainstormingSkill
- bmad-build-autoSkill
- bmad-buildSkill
- bmad-code-reviewSkill
- bmad-correct-courseSkill
- bmad-customizeSkill
- bmad-deep-reconSkill
- bmad-evalSkill
- bmad-forge-ideaSkill
- bmad-party-modeSkill
- bmad-prdSkill
- bmad-prfaqSkill
- bmad-product-briefSkill
- bmad-project-contextSkill
- bmad-qa-generate-e2e-testsSkill
- bmad-retrospectiveSkill
- bmad-reviewSkill
- bmadSkill
- bmad-specSkill
- bmad-ticketSkill
- bmad-toolsmithSkill
- bmad-uxSkill
- bmad-walkthroughSkill
- bmod-core-toolsSkill
- bmod-methodSkill
- bmod-toolsmithSkill
The file
We split this CLAUDE.md into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈3
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 16
Follow the coding standards below and the story's acceptance criteria exactly.
- Distinctive: line 17
Do NOT mark the story Done or self-report success: Run the verification command, report its real output, and stop.
- Distinctive: line 56
No scope creep, no gold-plating.
≈ “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
CLAUDE.md: working in better-agentic-ide
This file is the project constitution: the standing decisions and conventions every agent follows, so parallel and later work stays consistent. It is loaded into every Claude Code session; read it first and don't contradict it.
This is an ADE project: disciplined AI development, verified, not vibed. Work flows Plan → Approve → Shard → Build → Verify, and a story is Done only when the agreed verification command passes. No agent certifies its own work.
@.ade/rules.md
If you are a Developer agent working a story
- Implement ONLY the assigned story. Work test-first: write the failing test, then the minimal code to make it pass.
- Follow the coding standards below and the story's acceptance criteria exactly.
- Do NOT mark the story Done or self-report success. Run the verification command, report its real output, and stop. QA or the owner decides.
Agents and commands
- Sub-agents in
.claude/agents/: product-manager, architect, designer, scrum-master, developer, qa, devops, adversarial-reviewer. Delegate to the one that owns the work. - BMAD tasks, checklists, templates and workflows, in the version
.ade/methodologynames. v4: the/BMad:tasks:slash commands in.bmad-core/. v6: the skills in.claude/skills/, with work in_bmad-output/. Either way these are optional helpers you may run inside the flow. BMAD's own personas are deliberately not installed — eight of them are the same jobs as the sub-agents above, and two definitions of Done is worse than one. The ADE rules in.ade/rules.mdalways win: a BMAD task can never override the verification command, the Definition of Done, or anything in this file. Where they disagree, stop and surface the conflict. adversarial-reviewerships with a read-only tool allowlist on purpose: it judges, it does not patch. Don't widen it to "unblock" a story.qacan write, but only the story's Verification section and the journal — never the code or tests it judges.
Project layout
docs/prd.md: product requirements (the product-manager owns this).docs/architecture.md: system design and, under "Verification command", the single command that decides Done (the architect owns this).docs/ux-spec.md,docs/mockup.html: design artifacts (the designer).docs/ops.md: CI/CD, environments, rollout, rollback, monitoring (devops).docs/stories/: one file per story, the unit of work (the scrum-master)..ade/rules.md: the rules: the methodology and the non-negotiables..ade/context/: the Context Store: shared interfaces, types and decisions that parallel and later stories must agree on. Read it before inventing a contract..ade/context/decisions/: the decision log (ADRs:NNNN-slug.md)..ade/session.md: the session journal: what's been planned, built and shipped.
The journal
Append one dated line to .ade/session.md at each milestone, so the next session can see
what happened: the architect records an approved plan, the scrum-master records
each story sharded, and QA records a story Done once the verification command passes.
Discipline
- Small, vertically sliced, independently testable changes.
- Tests are the contract. If the verification command fails, the work is not done.
- No scope creep, no gold-plating.
Coding standards and conventions (the constitution)
<!-- The architect owns this section and fills it in as part of the plan: languages,
frameworks, patterns, naming, error handling, testing conventions. Every developer agent
follows it verbatim, so do not leave it empty — an empty section means every agent
invents its own conventions. -->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.