agentleFS
anotbanotb/forward-deployed/skills/enterprise-integration/SKILL.md

enterprise-integration

Skill1 starsChanged 33 days agoMITView on GitHub

Connect AI work to enterprise systems through meaningful business objects, usable tools, identity, and reliable actions. Use for integration design, MCP and API tool contracts, asynchronous operations, or diagnosis of a workflow that cannot complete its work.

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

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
  1. Distinctive:

    Use native version and concurrency checks where available.

    line 48
  2. Distinctive:

    Read the provisioning recovery example when an agent must complete a business operation despite a lost response.

    line 50
  3. Distinctive:

    Leave the receiving team with a usable contract, an example transaction, and ownership for unresolved outcomes.

    line 56

≈ “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

Enterprise integration

Make the agent's work count in the systems people use. Follow one assignment from its initiating request through context gathering, business operations, and verified completion. Build the integration around those effects.

Establish the business meaning

Inspect a representative case, its records, and its history. Identify the objects and relationships the agent needs: an employee, project membership, application role, and access request describe different things even when they share an identifier.

Resolve identifiers at the granularity of the action. Name the system that owns each consequential fact and command. Preserve distinctions such as requested, queued, provisioned, and usable. A ticket marked complete does not establish that an employee can use the application.

Carry the time and version semantics that change the decision. Current eligibility can differ from eligibility when a request was submitted. An old policy can explain a historical action without authorizing a new one. Reconcile the decisive relationships before proposing a broad enterprise data model.

Discover the supported path

Inspect the customer's available product, administration, and developer surfaces. Check current primary documentation for the deployment in use, then exercise its interfaces under the intended identity. Entitlement, documented support, and observed behavior answer different questions.

Choose among native extensions, APIs, events, connectors, extracts, and supported browser operation according to the work. An overnight extract may be enough for research; provisioning requires a command and a way to establish its result. Preserve an incumbent application's useful workflow instead of duplicating it by default.

Separate context reads from commitment checks. Cache stable descriptive material where useful; refresh the facts that determine whether the action remains valid. For recurring work, retain a position per source and account for pagination, late updates, and repeated events. A failed read leaves an unread interval; it cannot establish that nothing changed.

Give the agent effective tools

Expose operations that preserve business meaning. A query returning an employee's project membership, role eligibility, and source revision can be more useful than unrelated field lookups. A supported provisioning command can carry validations and downstream events that direct table writes would bypass.

Make the interface intelligible through its operations, parameters, result types, and descriptions. Expose the query or action choices the task needs. Return useful status, source references, versions, and errors that distinguish correction, denial, pending work, and uncertain outcome. Test tool use on complete assignments; repair ambiguity in the interface before adding repeated instructions about how to call it.

Large results should offer summaries or selectable records plus handles for deeper inspection. Preserve the detail the next decision needs. A successful tool call can still be an unusable interface if its output hides the relevant condition or overwhelms the context.

Enforce scope at execution

Determine whose authority each read and action uses, including unattended work. Enforce permissions, allowed targets, and action limits outside the model. Keep credentials out of model-visible material and use the platform's supported credential mechanisms.

Align caches, derived summaries, and shared task state with the source access boundary. Source content can inform the work; it cannot expand authority. Existing authorization should permit eligible actions without repeated approval. Seek a new decision when the requested effect changes materially or exceeds that scope.

Make completion recoverable

Keep proposed intent, attempted command, and confirmed external result distinguishable. Persist an operation reference when the receiving interface supports it. After a timeout, reconcile the authoritative state before repeating a potentially completed action. Reuse the same idempotency reference for the same request; changing it can create a second effect.

For asynchronous operations, retain the returned job or resource identifier and continue through its documented status mechanism. "Accepted" can mean queued. Verify the result at the level promised to the user.

In a read-then-act workflow, mark an item handled only after its required effect is confirmed. If intake advances ahead of execution, preserve the item as durable pending work. After a lost response, reconcile that effect before moving the completion position or sending again. Existing queues or workflow state can supply this behavior.

Use native version and concurrency checks where available. Across systems, describe partial completion and the next valid action. Reversing a completed operation can itself be a new business action. Preserve confirmed effects during retry, cancellation, or manual takeover.

Read the provisioning recovery example when an agent must complete a business operation despite a lost response.

Deliver an exercised integration

Build or specify a vertical slice that uses the difficult semantic relationship and completes a meaningful receiving-system action. Inspect the resulting state and the failure that could duplicate, misapply, or strand the work. Keep documented promises separate from observed behavior.

Leave the receiving team with a usable contract, an example transaction, and ownership for unresolved outcomes. The format can be a working adapter, sequence diagram, replay, or concise engineering brief.

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.