handover-review
Skill1 starsChanged 6 months agoNo licenceView on GitHub
Run a rigorous, adversarial self-review pass on a piece of work before it ships, using a verification-and-failure-mode discipline (reconstruct the actual request, check decomposition against the load-bearing question, hunt every unverified specific, audit communication for hedging/confidence calibration, scan for known failure modes like confident interpolation and sycophancy). Trigger via /handover-review, "run the handover review", or "audit this before I ship it". Distinct from sparring-partner (adversarial review of an artifact's substance/credibility) and blind-spot-audit (lateral checks nobody assigned) — this is a self-audit against a specific verification discipline, run against the most recent piece of work in the conversation or an artifact the user points to.
In this repository31 other files it gives its agents.
- anti-sycophancySkill
- blind-spot-auditSkill
- caveman-coworkSkill
- clarifying-questionsSkill
- context-auditSkill
- decision-toolkitSkill
- dispatcherSkill
- earnings-analysisSkill
- fact-checkerSkill
- find-skillsSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- frontend-slidesSkill
- graphifySkill
- handoffSkill
- humanizerSkill
- investigateSkill
- llm-councilSkill
- office-hoursSkill
- plan-ceo-reviewSkill
- product-launchSkill
- prompt-masterSkill
- prompt-principlesSkill
- qa-expertSkill
- request-validatorSkill
- retroSkill
- sparring-partnerSkill
- style-enforcer-pipelineSkill
- summarize-docSkill
- task-auditSkill
- usage-local-apiSkill
- website-creative-directionSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
No licence file, so all rights are reserved — read it at the source. We count its rules but don't quote them. Read them on GitHub.
≈ “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.
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.