onboard
Skill20 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Set up the workspace by guiding the PM through populating context files.
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 150 edited versions we read keep these.
9
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 29
Read all 4 context files (context/company.md, context/competitors.md, context/personas.md, context/product.md).
- Distinctive: line 33
Start open. Don't ask structured questions yet.
- Very specific: line 39
If the PM seems unsure what to share: "Do you have any of these lying around?
- Distinctive: line 43
After the PM shares, process everything in one pass:
- Distinctive: line 50
When given a URL or company name, use web search to gather real information.
- Distinctive: line 51
If a URL returns little useful info, say so and ask the PM to fill the gaps manually
- Distinctive: line 52
If input touches multiple files, update all of them in one pass
- Very specific: line 53
Never overwrite existing context.
- Distinctive: line 57
Before asking more questions, play back what you captured.
- Distinctive: line 80
Don't interrogate: After 2-3 questions, process the answers (step 3-4 again) before asking more.
- Distinctive: line 91
When met, say so and offer the next step.
- Distinctive: line 97
Don't force it. If the user wants to keep going, keep going.
- Very specific: line 99
When all files are solid: "Context is looking good.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 150 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
/onboard
Sets up the workspace by guiding the PM through populating context files.
Trigger
- User runs
/onboard - Auto-trigger: 3 or more context files contain only a heading
Context file structure
Route input to the right file using these structures:
- company.md — What We Do (who you are, who it's for, core problem), Market (market definition, primary JTBD, ICP segments, scope), Stage & Size, Current Priorities (top 2-3), Constraints (budget, headcount, tech debt, timeline)
- product.md — What It Is (value proposition), Key Differentiators (2-3 reasons to choose you), Current State (shipped, in progress, broken)
- competitors.md — One section per competitor: what they do, strengths, weaknesses, our angle against them
- personas.md — One section per persona: who they are, their goal, their pains with signal strength and a real quote
Workflow
1. Read context state
Read all 4 context files (context/company.md, context/competitors.md, context/personas.md, context/product.md). Classify each as empty (only heading), thin (missing key sections), or solid (most sections filled). Don't tell the PM this classification yet. Use it to guide your questions.
2. Open with a braindump
Start open. Don't ask structured questions yet.
- All empty: "Tell me about your product. Dump everything: pitch deck, company description, competitor names, user research, strategy docs, a URL, whatever you've got. The messier the better, just get it out of your head. I'll sort it."
- Partially filled: "I see some context already. [1-2 sentences on what's solid]. What's changed recently, or what should I know that's not captured yet?"
- All solid: "Your context looks solid. Anything need updating, or are you here to work on something?"
If the PM seems unsure what to share: "Do you have any of these lying around? A pitch deck, company website, existing PRD, investor update, competitor list, interview notes, strategy doc. Paste, link, or drop files in data/. Any of these will speed things up."
3. Parse, tag, and write
After the PM shares, process everything in one pass:
- Route each piece to the right context file following the structure above
- Tag facts vs assumptions. As you write to context files, distinguish:
- Stated directly with evidence or specifics → write as-is
- Vague, aspirational, or inferred → tag with
[Assumption, verify]
- Proactive web lookup: When the PM mentions their company name, offer to look it up: "Want me to search for [company] and pre-fill what I can find? You can correct anything that's wrong." If they agree, search and populate company, product, and competitors with what's publicly available. Tag all web-sourced content with
[Source: web, verify]so the PM knows what to check. - When given a URL or company name, use web search to gather real information. Don't make things up.
- If a URL returns little useful info, say so and ask the PM to fill the gaps manually
- If input touches multiple files, update all of them in one pass
- Never overwrite existing context. Append or refine. If new info contradicts existing info, keep both and note:
[Updated: YYYY-MM-DD] Previously X, now Y.
4. Summarize back
Before asking more questions, play back what you captured. This builds trust and catches misunderstandings early.
"Here's what I got from that: [2-4 sentence summary of what you wrote]. I flagged a couple of things as assumptions. Does this sound right, or should I fix anything?"
Show the progress checklist:
Context status:
- [x] Company — solid
- [ ] Competitors — thin (missing strengths/weaknesses)
- [ ] Personas — empty
- [x] Product — solid5. Ask pointed follow-ups
Now ask questions, but targeted, not a form. Pick 2-3 questions max based on the biggest gaps. Follow the outside-in order (company → market → competitors → personas → product) but don't force it.
Question style:
- Fill market gaps: "What space or market are you in?" "What problem are your customers hiring you to solve?"
- Probe assumptions: "You mentioned users struggle with onboarding. Is that from data, interviews, or a hunch?"
- Fill critical gaps: "Who are your main competitors? Even just names is fine, I can research the rest."
- Challenge where useful: "You said you're targeting enterprise. What makes you confident that's the right segment?"
Don't interrogate. After 2-3 questions, process the answers (step 3-4 again) before asking more. The rhythm is: braindump → summarize → 2-3 questions → summarize → 2-3 questions.
6. Check if context is sufficient
Minimum viable context to do useful work:
- Company: know what you do, who it's for, and current priorities
- Market: know what market you're in and the primary JTBD
- Product: know what exists and what's broken
- Competitors: at least 2-3 named
- Personas: at least 1 real user type with a real pain
When met, say so and offer the next step. Follow this order:
- Company solid, Market thin → "I know who you are. What market or space are you in? What problem are your customers hiring you to solve?"
- Company + Market solid → "Want me to map out who else is in this space and how they approach it?"
- Personas solid → "You've got strong personas. Want me to synthesize any interview data you have, or keep going?"
- Product solid → "Want me to draft a one-pager for something you're considering? Or fill in more context first?"
Don't force it. If the user wants to keep going, keep going. The goal is to show value early.
When all files are solid: "Context is looking good. You could run /analyze-competitors to go deeper on competition, or /prd to start speccing something out."
Progressive deepening: Don't try to fill everything during onboarding. Get to "good enough" and let other skills deepen context as a side effect of real work. When /prd finds thin personas, it asks 1-2 questions. When /analyze-competitors finds no competitors listed, it asks. Context grows through use, not just onboarding.
Edge cases
- Resuming a partial onboard: The skill reads current file state each time, so it naturally picks up where things are thin. No session state needed.
- Contradictory info: Flag it, keep both versions with dates. Let the PM decide which is current.
- PM dumps everything at once: Parse it, update multiple files in one pass, report all changes.
Other versions162 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 162
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27ksame name
- parcadei/Continuous-Claude★ 3.9ksame name
- parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v2★ 3.9ksame name
- parcadei/Continuous-Claude-v3★ 3.9ksame name
- nateherkai/AIS-OS★ 1.4ksame name
- poshan0126/dotclaude★ 871same name
- talesofai/cohub★ 583same name
- me2resh/apexyard★ 542same name
- nexmoe/DayBee★ 424same name
- nexmoe/eve★ 424same name
152 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.
Used alongsideProjects with it also use soak-test, team-live-ops and 10 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.
lilangMaxSkillsoak-test
Generate a soak test protocol for extended play sessions. Defines what to observe, measure, and log during long play sessions to surface slow leaks, fatigue effects, and edge cases that only appear after sustained play. Primarily used in Polish and Release phases.
Also in 9 projects that use this
lilangMaxSkillteam-live-ops
Orchestrate the live-ops team for post-launch content planning: coordinates live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer, and narrative-director to design and plan a season, event, or live content update.
Also in 9 projects that use this
HK-hubSkillteach-impeccable
One-time setup that gathers design context for your project and saves it to your AI config file. Run once to establish persistent design guidelines.
Also in 19 projects that use this
CoralGameSkillproject-stage-detect
Automatically analyze project state, detect stage, identify gaps, and recommend next steps based on existing artifacts.
Also in 15 projects that use this
CoralGameSkillteam-level
Orchestrate level design team: level-designer + narrative-director + world-builder + art-director + systems-designer + qa-tester for complete area/level creation.
Also in 11 projects that use this
- +6 more from lilangMax
- +1 more from CoralGame
In this repository13 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- analyze-competitorsSkill
- break-downSkill
- critiqueSkill
- meeting-notesSkill
- prdSkill
- prioritizeSkill
- product-teardownSkill
- release-notesSkill
- status-updateSkill
- synthesize-interviewsSkill
- triage-feedbackSkill
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.

