agentleFS
andrewthetechieandrewthetechie/andrew-skills/skills/fabro-workflow/SKILL.md

fabro-workflow

Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Author, edit, validate, and debug Fabro workflows — Graphviz DOT graphs (.fabro) paired with a workflow.toml run config. Use when writing or changing a .fabro file, a workflow.toml, a .fabro/workflows/<name>/ package, or when a Fabro run fails and needs diagnosing via fabro validate/preflight/events/logs.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 3 are 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.

  • 3

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Run these in order after every edit.

    line 45
  2. Very specific:

    When a node behaves as the wrong type or an attribute seems ignored, fabro parse <file.fabro> prints the parsed AST so you can see what …

    line 55
  3. Very specific:

    Read the routing decision, not just the failure: fabro events -p shows which edge was selected and why.

    line 78

≈ “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

Fabro workflows

A workflow is a package directory, not a single file:

.fabro/workflows/<name>/
├── workflow.toml      # run config: graph path, inputs, model, environment, artifacts
├── workflow.fabro     # the DOT graph (name must match [workflow].graph)
├── prompts/*.md(.j2)  # long prompts, referenced as prompt="@prompts/foo.md"
└── schemas/*.json     # JSON Schemas, referenced as output_schema="@schemas/x.json"

Minimal pair:

# workflow.toml
_version = 1

[workflow]
graph = "workflow.fabro"
// workflow.fabro
digraph Hello {
    graph [goal="Say hello and demonstrate a basic Fabro workflow"]
    rankdir=LR

    start [shape=Mdiamond, label="Start"]
    exit  [shape=Msquare, label="Exit"]

    greet [label="Greet", prompt="Add a haiku to the README"]

    start -> greet -> exit
}

The loop

Run these in order after every edit. Do not skip to fabro run.

fabro validate .fabro/workflows/<name>/workflow.fabro   # structure, conditions, @file refs
fabro preflight .fabro/workflows/<name>/workflow.toml   # + resolves inputs/vars/model/env
fabro graph .fabro/workflows/<name>/workflow.toml -o /tmp/wf.svg   # eyeball the routing
fabro run <name> --dry-run                              # simulate execution
fabro run <name> --auto-approve -d                      # real run, detached, skip human gates

When a node behaves as the wrong type or an attribute seems ignored, fabro parse <file.fabro> prints the parsed AST so you can see what Fabro actually inferred. It is hidden from --help but present.

--auto-approve skips human gates; drop it when you are testing the gates themselves. --preserve-sandbox keeps the sandbox alive for post-mortem fabro sandbox ssh. Override inputs per-run with repeatable -I key=value (sparse per-key merge, unlike TOML [run.inputs], which replaces the whole map).

Debugging a run

fabro inspect <run>          # status, current node, outcome summary
fabro events <run> -p        # pretty event log — start here; -f to follow, --since 10m
fabro logs <run> -n 200      # raw worker tracing when events aren't enough
fabro attach <run>           # live terminal view
fabro steer <run> "..."      # correct a running agent mid-execution (--interrupt to cut in)
fabro dump <run> -o ./dump   # full durable state for offline analysis
fabro fork <run>             # re-run from an earlier checkpoint after fixing the graph

<run> accepts a run ID prefix or a workflow name (resolves to its most recent run).

Read the routing decision, not just the failure: fabro events -p shows which edge was selected and why. If the wrong edge was taken, the cause is almost always the transition cascade, not the node itself.

Gotchas that cause most breakage

  • Templates render in exactly three attributes: graph goal, node prompt, and the root model_stylesheet. script gets value substitution only ({{ goal }}, {{ inputs.X }}, {{ vars.X }} — no {% if %}, no filters). Every other attribute, including label, condition, model, and all edge attributes, is literal text; {{ }} there produces a detemplated_attribute warning and silently does nothing.
  • Shape determines the handler. Omitting shape/type gives an agent node, unless the node sets script (then: command). A prompt node must say shape=tab — agent and prompt take identical attributes and are otherwise indistinguishable.
  • Setting both script and prompt on one node is an error.
  • thread_id requires fidelity="full" — validation rejects the pair otherwise.
  • selection="random" cannot coexist with conditional edges on the same node.
  • Every node named by an edge needs its own declaration, or validation fails.
  • A failed human gate never falls through an unconditional edge. Route it explicitly with condition="outcome=failed".
  • auto_status=true is deprecated — write on_failure="succeed".
  • Exactly one start (shape=Mdiamond) and one exit (shape=Msquare); all nodes must be reachable from start.

Reference

Full attribute tables (node types, all node/edge/graph attributes, condition grammar, workflow.toml sections, imports, stylesheets, parallel fan-out): see REFERENCE.md.

Canonical in-repo examples worth copying from: .fabro/workflows/hello (minimal), .fabro/workflows/code-review (prompts, schemas, scripts, custom environment image, artifacts, GitHub permissions), docs/internal/demo/*.fabro (one pattern per file).

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.