repo-next-task
Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Inspect a software repository and recommend the most valuable next implementation task from current state, recent commits, roadmaps, TODOs, and issue context. Use when the user asks what to do next, asks to inspect the next task, requests backlog prioritization, or says phrases such as "ดูงานถัดไป", "ควรทำอะไรต่อ", or "next task". This is a read-only planning workflow unless the user separately asks to implement.
In this repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- audit-product-experienceSkill
- commit-messageSkill
- git-deliver-workSkill
- git-flow-releaseSkill
- management-talkSkill
- post-mortemSkill
- scrutinizeSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
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
- Distinctive: line 12
Read applicable repository instructions such as AGENTS.md.
- Distinctive: line 14
Read recent commit subjects and enough diff or commit detail to understand the work just completed.
- Distinctive: line 16
Use a connected issue tracker only when it is available and materially improves the answer.
- Distinctive: line 18
Treat dirty files as user-owned.
- Distinctive: line 25
Prefer finishing an in-progress milestone before starting the next one unless evidence supports a deliberate switch.
- Distinctive: line 39
Prefer a small task that can be completed and verified over a broad theme with unclear boundaries.
- Distinctive: line 54
Do not edit files, create issues, change branches, or begin implementation.
≈ “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.
Files
Repository Next Task
Recommend one concrete next slice using evidence from the repository rather than a generic backlog guess.
Gather current state
- Read applicable repository instructions such as AGENTS.md.
- Inspect the current branch, upstream state, working tree, and staged or unstaged changes.
- Read recent commit subjects and enough diff or commit detail to understand the work just completed.
- Locate the repository's planning sources, such as a roadmap, milestones, TODO files, README status, changelog, or issue references.
- Use a connected issue tracker only when it is available and materially improves the answer. Prefer local sources for a local repository question.
Treat dirty files as user-owned. Identify whether they are active work, documentation drift, or unrelated changes; never edit, stage, or discard them in this workflow.
Reconcile plans with reality
- Detect roadmap items that are marked pending even though recent commits implemented part of them.
- Detect implementation that is blocked by an unfinished prerequisite, migration, configuration decision, or release gate.
- Distinguish the current milestone from later attractive work.
- Prefer finishing an in-progress milestone before starting the next one unless evidence supports a deliberate switch.
- Separate user-facing work from maintenance, release metadata, and optional someday items.
Rank candidates
Evaluate candidates by:
- ability to complete or unblock the current milestone;
- user value and frequency of the affected workflow;
- dependency and regression risk;
- size of the smallest independently verifiable slice;
- strength of repository evidence;
- availability of a proportional verification path.
Prefer a small task that can be completed and verified over a broad theme with unclear boundaries.
Recommend
Lead with one primary task. Include:
- the intended outcome;
- why it is next, citing repository evidence;
- what recent work already covers;
- the exact first slice and the main surfaces it touches;
- risks or user changes that must be preserved;
- the smallest useful verification plan.
Optionally list at most two follow-up tasks in order. State when roadmap status itself needs reconciliation.
Do not edit files, create issues, change branches, or begin implementation. If the user later says to proceed, treat that as a separate implementation request and re-check the working tree first.
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.

