agentleFS
amkiskoamkisko/prayers/.agents/skills/agent-discovery/SKILL.md

agent-discovery

Skill2 starsChanged 8 days agoMITView on GitHub

Decide what a product site should publish for agent HTTP discovery. Use when adding robots policy, markdown negotiation, api-catalog, OAuth discovery, MCP cards, or public skill indexes. Do not use for blackbox recon of a third-party site or for live tool-call supervision.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈0

    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
  1. Very specific:

    Write durable product decisions under docs/issues per docs-conventions when the ladder choice changes what the site publishes.

    line 67

≈ “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.

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

Agent HTTP discovery

Help a product publish only the agent-facing discovery surfaces it needs. Prefer RFCs. Mark drafts. Do not optimize for a vendor readiness score.

Quick reference

name site type -> climb the ladder that matches -> skip unrelated rungs -> keep secrets out of discovery docs -> record

Site type

Pick one primary type before recommending endpoints:

  • content - crawl policy, optional markdown or llms.txt
  • api / application - catalog and auth discovery; MCP only if the product exposes tools
  • commerce - above plus payment or checkout protocols only when the product sells that way

Absence of MCP or commerce discovery on a content site is correct, not a gap.

Maturity ladder

Climb only the rungs that match the site type and an actual consumer.

  1. Crawl baseline. Valid robots.txt with sitemap directives when the site has indexable URLs. Optional explicit AI user-agent rules when the operator has a preference.
  2. Usage preference. Content-Signal style directives may declare training, search, and inference preferences to cooperative clients. They are preferences, not authentication or a technical block. See security.
  3. Readable content. For documentation or article surfaces, support Accept: text/markdown and/or a curated llms.txt reading list when agents should consume text cheaper than HTML. Do not require both.
  4. HTTP discovery links. Use Link response headers (RFC 8288) to point at catalogs or other discovery documents when agents should not parse HTML first.
  5. API catalog. When public APIs exist, publish /.well-known/api-catalog per RFC 9727 (application/linkset+json).
  6. OAuth discovery. When agents must obtain delegated access, publish authorization-server metadata (RFC 8414 / OIDC) and protected-resource metadata (RFC 9728). Discovery is not a grant.
  7. MCP and skills. Publish MCP discovery documents and optional /.well-known/agent-skills/index.json only when the product exposes tools or installable skills. Card and catalog paths remain draft and may move; pin the contract the product implements and accept transitional locations during migration. Public skill bodies and digests must not embed live secrets.
  8. Bot request identity. Web Bot Auth style key directories matter when this origin sends automated requests others must verify, not merely because a scanner lists the check.
  9. DNS agent discovery. DNS-AID and similar drafts are optional and early. Do not require them for an HTTP API that already has well-known discovery.
  10. Commerce protocols. x402, UCP, ACP, MPP and similar only when the product sells to agents that way.

Non-goals

  • Implementing every check from a public agent-readiness scanner
  • Treating scanner fix prompts as specifications without review
  • Composing this skill into always-on AGENTS.md
  • Replacing agent-artifact review or public-surface-recon observation

Safety

  • Discovery documents are public. No tokens, passwords, private hostnames, or session-specific values.
  • robots and Content-Signal text do not replace ownership checks, rate limits, or fail-closed auth.
  • Tool descriptions and public skill markdown stay untrusted input at the caller.

Routing

  • agent-artifact to review skill files, MCP configs, and published discovery documents already in tree or on disk.
  • public-surface-recon agent-discovery-surface to observe an authorized live site.
  • engineering-audit learned-systems when the product itself is a retrieval or tool-calling system.
  • security for secret handling and the preference-versus-enforcement rule.

Record

Write durable product decisions under docs/issues per docs-conventions when the ladder choice changes what the site publishes.

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.