agentleFS
arslanvuzmalarslanvuzmal/VoxCircuit/AGENTS.md

VoxCircuit

AGENTS.md2 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

This is a security-sensitive, multi-tenant Next.js application. Read the relevant local Next.js documentation before changing Next APIs or routing conventions. Discover -> audit -> plan -> implement -> test -> review diff -> document -> commit. Keep changes focused and do not reset, force-push, delete data, or discard user work. Run the smallest relevant tests first, then npx prisma validate, lint, typecheck, and the affected suite. Review git diff --check. Browser tests must target a VoxDesk server, not another project…

The file

We split this AGENTS.md into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 1 is common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈1

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  • could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
  1. Very specific:

    Use additive migrations and review SQL.

    line 16
  2. Common:

    Never invent data, weaken auth, bypass security validation, commit secrets, or claim provider verification without an authorized test.

    line 17
  3. Very specific:

    Run the smallest relevant tests first, then npx prisma validate, lint, typecheck, and the affected suite.

    line 21
  4. Distinctive:

    Update docs when behavior, provider boundaries, activation requirements, migration delivery, or user-visible capability state changes.

    line 25

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 40,246 AGENTS.md 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
AGENTS.md

VoxDesk Engineering Instructions

This is a security-sensitive, multi-tenant Next.js application. Read the relevant local Next.js documentation before changing Next APIs or routing conventions.

Working loop

Discover -> audit -> plan -> implement -> test -> review diff -> document -> commit. Keep changes focused and do not reset, force-push, delete data, or discard user work.

Non-negotiable boundaries

  • Resolve session, membership, role, workspace, then resource. IDs never grant authority.
  • Models request actions; server-owned tools authorize, validate, apply idempotency, and persist safe results.
  • Provider webhooks require raw-body verification, timestamp/replay checks, event identity, prompt acknowledgement, and asynchronous projection.
  • Simulation is explicit and authenticated. It never calls Telnyx or enters public provider webhook routes.
  • Telnyx is the production PSTN/SIP boundary and ElevenLabs is the conversational boundary. Keep provider code out of UI components.
  • Use additive migrations and review SQL. Never use db push for production delivery.
  • Never invent data, weaken auth, bypass security validation, commit secrets, or claim provider verification without an authorized test.

Verification

Run the smallest relevant tests first, then npx prisma validate, lint, typecheck, and the affected suite. Review git diff --check. Browser tests must target a VoxDesk server, not another project sharing the local port.

Documentation

Update docs when behavior, provider boundaries, activation requirements, migration delivery, or user-visible capability state changes. Use the vocabulary: implemented, configured, verified, simulated, activation-required, and planned.

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.