agentleFS
blamechrisblamechris/chroxy/.claude/skills/start-working/SKILL.md

start-working

Skill8 starsChanged 9 days agoMITView on GitHub

Scan all work sources — GitHub issues, open PRs, roadmap files, audit outputs, codebase TODOs — to determine what to work on next.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

18 rules. About 0 are common, 12 are distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈12

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 6

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    If empty, scan everything with defaults

    line 17
  2. Very specific:

    Read CLAUDE.md and any .claude/rules/ files to understand the project's conventions, priorities, and known issues.

    line 38
  3. Distinctive:

    Search for these files (check existence, don't fail if missing):

    line 109
  4. Distinctive:

    Check for existing audit reports:

    line 120
  5. Distinctive:

    If audit reports exist, read the master assessment for any unaddressed recommendations (check if corresponding issues exist).

    line 134
  6. Very specific:

    Use Grep to find TODO, FIXME, HACK, XXX, and WORKAROUND markers in source files.

    line 154
  7. Distinctive:

    Test fixtures and generated files

    line 156
  8. Very specific:

    If focus=AREA was specified, boost items matching that area by one tier (P2→P1, P3→P2).

    line 174
  9. Distinctive:

    If a roadmap item already has a GitHub issue → keep the issue, drop the roadmap entry (note the link)

    line 179
  10. Very specific:

    If an audit recommendation already has a from-audit issue → keep the issue, drop the audit entry

    line 180
  11. Very specific:

    If a TODO in code references an issue number (e.g., TODO(#42)) → link to the issue, don't list separately

    line 181
  12. Distinctive:

    If multiple TODOs relate to the same theme → group them as one item

    line 182
  13. Very specific:

    If focus=AREA is set, filter to only show items related to that area.

    line 186
  14. Distinctive:

    After the summary table, provide detail sections only for sources that had findings:

    line 220
  15. Distinctive:

    When the queue is truly empty, perform a lightweight codebase scan to surface potential investigations.

    line 283
  16. Distinctive:

    Check which source directories have corresponding test files

    line 293
  17. Distinctive:

    Look for test files that are empty or minimal (< 5 assertions)

    line 295
  18. Distinctive:

    Check for known vulnerabilities if tooling is available

    line 306

≈ “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

/start-working

Scan all work sources — GitHub issues, open PRs, roadmap files, audit outputs, codebase TODOs — to determine what to work on next. If nothing actionable is found, perform a lightweight codebase audit to surface potential investigations.

This skill is read-only — it never writes files, creates issues, or commits. It's a triage tool that feeds naturally into /autonomous-dev-flow or manual work.

Arguments

  • $ARGUMENTS - Optional filters. Space-separated tokens:
    • focus=AREA — Narrow to a specific area (e.g., focus=testing, focus=security, focus=performance)
    • limit=N — Max items to show per source (default: 10)
    • include-closed — Also scan recently closed issues for context
    • If empty, scan everything with defaults

Examples:

/start-working
/start-working focus=testing
/start-working limit=5
/start-working focus=security include-closed

Instructions

0. Setup

REPO=$(gh repo view --json nameWithOwner -q .nameWithOwner)
REPO_NAME=$(basename "$REPO")

Parse $ARGUMENTS for focus, limit (default 10), and include-closed flag.

Read CLAUDE.md and any .claude/rules/ files to understand the project's conventions, priorities, and known issues.

1. Gather Work Sources

Collect data from all sources. Run independent queries in parallel where possible.

1a. GitHub Issues

# Open issues sorted by updated date (most recent activity first)
gh issue list --state open --json number,title,labels,assignees,milestone,createdAt,updatedAt --limit 50

# If include-closed flag set, also grab recently closed for context
gh issue list --state closed --json number,title,labels,closedAt --limit 20

Categorize each open issue:

CategoryDetection
BlockedHas label matching: blocked, wontfix, needs-design, on-hold
AssignedHas assignees (someone is already working on it)
ReadyUnblocked, unassigned enhancement or from-review issues
BacklogOpen, unassigned, not blocked, but no explicit "ready" signal

For "Ready" and "Backlog" issues, read the issue body to check for acceptance criteria:

gh issue view ${ISSUE_NUM} --json body -q .body

Issues with clear acceptance criteria rank higher than vague ones.

1b. Open PRs Needing Attention

# All open PRs with review and check status
gh pr list --state open --json number,title,author,reviewDecision,isDraft,headRefName,createdAt,updatedAt --limit 20

Flag PRs that need attention:

SignalMeaning
reviewDecision: CHANGES_REQUESTEDReview feedback needs addressing
isDraft: trueWork in progress — may be stale
Stale (no update in 7+ days)Forgotten PR — needs decision (finish, close, or rebase)

Also check CI status for open PRs:

# For each open PR, check if CI is failing
gh pr checks ${PR_NUM} --json name,state --jq '[.[] | select(.state != "SUCCESS" and .state != "SKIPPED")]'

1c. Roadmap and Planning Files

Scan for planning documents in common locations:

# Check for common planning files (don't fail on missing)
for f in ROADMAP.md TODO.md CHANGELOG.md; do
  test -f "$f" && echo "Found: $f"
done

# Check common planning directories
for d in docs/roadmap docs/planning docs/TODO; do
  test -d "$d" && echo "Found: $d/" && ls "$d"
done

Search for these files (check existence, don't fail if missing):

  • ROADMAP.md, TODO.md, CHANGELOG.md (for recent/planned entries)
  • docs/roadmap/, docs/planning/, docs/TODO/

For each found file, scan for:

  • Unchecked items (- [ ])
  • Sections labeled "Planned", "Next", "Upcoming", "TODO", "Backlog"
  • Items not yet represented as GitHub issues

1d. Audit Output Files

Check for existing audit reports:

# Look for project-audit output
ls docs/project-audit/ 2>/dev/null
ls docs/audits/ 2>/dev/null

# Also check for from-audit issues that are still open
gh issue list --state open --label "from-audit" --json number,title,labels --limit 20 2>/dev/null

# And from-review issues (deferred work from PR reviews)
gh issue list --state open --label "from-review" --json number,title,labels --limit 20 2>/dev/null

If audit reports exist, read the master assessment for any unaddressed recommendations (check if corresponding issues exist).

1e. Codebase TODOs

Scan for TODO/FIXME/HACK markers in source code:

# Search for actionable markers in server and app source files
grep -r "TODO\|FIXME\|HACK\|XXX\|WORKAROUND" \
  server/**/*.js \
  app/**/*.tsx \
  app/**/*.ts \
  --exclude-dir=node_modules \
  --exclude-dir=.godot \
  --exclude-dir=build \
  --exclude-dir=dist \
  --exclude="*.lock" \
  2>/dev/null

Use Grep to find TODO, FIXME, HACK, XXX, and WORKAROUND markers in source files. Exclude:

  • node_modules/, .godot/, build/, dist/, vendor directories
  • Test fixtures and generated files
  • Lock files

Collect file path, line number, and the marker text for each hit.

2. Prioritize and Deduplicate

2a. Assign Priority Tiers

Map every finding to a unified priority tier:

TierLabelSignals
P0ImmediatePRs with CHANGES_REQUESTED, open bug issues, failing CI on open PRs
P1Highfrom-review issues, unblocked enhancement issues with acceptance criteria, stale PRs
P2Normalenhancement issues with acceptance criteria, from-audit issues, roadmap items
P3ExploratoryCodebase TODOs, vague issues without criteria, audit recommendations without issues

If focus=AREA was specified, boost items matching that area by one tier (P2→P1, P3→P2).

2b. Deduplicate

Cross-reference findings across sources:

  • If a roadmap item already has a GitHub issue → keep the issue, drop the roadmap entry (note the link)
  • If an audit recommendation already has a from-audit issue → keep the issue, drop the audit entry
  • If a TODO in code references an issue number (e.g., TODO(#42)) → link to the issue, don't list separately
  • If multiple TODOs relate to the same theme → group them as one item

2c. Apply Focus Filter

If focus=AREA is set, filter to only show items related to that area. Match against:

  • Issue labels
  • Issue title/body keywords
  • File paths (e.g., focus=testing matches test files)
  • TODO context

3. Present Work Queue

Output the primary summary table, then detail sections for each source. Cap each detail section to the top limit items (default 10) by priority — the queries fetch a wide net so categorization is accurate, but only the most relevant limit rows per source are shown. Note any truncation (e.g. "showing top 10 of 23").

Primary Output — Work Queue Table

## What's Next for ${REPO_NAME}

**Sources scanned:** GitHub issues, open PRs, roadmap files, audit outputs, codebase TODOs
**Found:** ${TOTAL_ITEMS} actionable items across ${SOURCE_COUNT} sources

### Work Queue

| Priority | Source | Item | Why |
|----------|--------|------|-----|
| P0 | PR | #45 — Failing CI, changes requested | Review feedback unaddressed for 3 days |
| P0 | Issue | #12 — Login broken on Android | Bug, reported 2 days ago |
| P1 | Issue | #18 — Add retry logic to API | from-review, has acceptance criteria |
| P1 | PR | #38 — Draft PR stale 14 days | Needs decision: finish or close |
| P2 | Issue | #25 — Improve error messages | enhancement, milestone v1.2 |
| P2 | Roadmap | Add rate limiting | In ROADMAP.md, no issue yet |
| P3 | TODO | 5× FIXME in src/auth/ | Scattered workarounds for token refresh |
| P3 | Audit | Upgrade vulnerable deps | From project-audit, no issue created |

Detail Sections

After the summary table, provide detail sections only for sources that had findings:

GitHub Issues (if any):

### Open Issues ({N} total, {M} ready, {K} blocked)

**Ready to work on:**
- #18 — Add retry logic to API (`from-review`, `enhancement`) — has 3 acceptance criteria
- #25 — Improve error messages (`enhancement`) — milestone v1.2

**Blocked / Needs input:**
- #30 — Choose auth provider (`needs-design`) — requires decision
- #35 — Blocked by #18 (`blocked`)

**Assigned (in progress):**
- #22 — Refactor auth module — assigned to @user

Open PRs (if any):

### Open PRs Needing Attention ({N})

- **#45** — Fix login flow: Changes requested 3 days ago, CI failing
- **#38** — Add caching layer: Draft, no updates in 14 days

Roadmap Items (if any):

### Roadmap Items Not Yet Tracked ({N})

Items from planning docs without corresponding GitHub issues:
- Add rate limiting (ROADMAP.md line 42)
- Implement offline mode (ROADMAP.md line 58)

Codebase TODOs (if any):

### Codebase TODOs ({N} markers across {M} files)

| Marker | Count | Top Locations |
|--------|-------|---------------|
| TODO | 12 | server/auth/ (5), server/api/ (4), app/utils/ (3) |
| FIXME | 3 | server/auth/token.js (2), server/db/migrate.js (1) |
| HACK | 1 | server/api/retry.js:42 |

Recommended Next Action

End with a concrete recommendation:

### Recommended Next Action

Based on the work queue:
- **If you want to fix what's broken:** Address P0 items first — {description}
- **If you want to build features:** Run `/autonomous-dev-flow {issue_numbers}` for the P1/P2 ready issues
- **If you want to clean up:** The {N} TODOs in server/auth/ suggest a refactoring pass

4. Quick Audit (Fallback — Only If Queue Is Empty)

ONLY run this phase if Phases 1-3 found zero actionable items. If there were any issues, PRs, roadmap items, or TODOs, skip this phase entirely.

When the queue is truly empty, perform a lightweight codebase scan to surface potential investigations. This is NOT a full project audit — it's a quick check across a few dimensions.

4a. Test Coverage Gaps

# Check which source directories have corresponding test files
# Server: npm test
# App: npx jest
  • Check which source directories have corresponding test files
  • Identify source files with no test counterpart
  • Look for test files that are empty or minimal (< 5 assertions)

4b. Dependency Health

# Check for outdated dependencies
npm outdated
npm audit
  • Count outdated dependencies
  • Check for known vulnerabilities if tooling is available

4c. Code Quality Signals

Quick scan for potential issues:

  • Files over 500 lines (may need splitting)
  • Functions/methods over 50 lines (may need refactoring)
  • Deeply nested code (4+ levels of indentation)
  • Duplicated patterns across files

4d. Documentation Gaps

  • README.md: is it up to date? Does it cover setup, usage, contributing?
  • API documentation: are public interfaces documented?
  • Architecture: any docs/architecture/ or ADR files?

4e. Present Quick Audit Results

## Quick Audit — Potential Investigations

No actionable items found in the standard work sources. Here's what a quick codebase scan revealed:

| Area | Status | Finding |
|------|--------|---------|
| Test Coverage | ⚠️ | {N} source files have no test counterpart |
| Dependencies | ✅ | All up to date |
| Code Quality | ⚠️ | {N} files over 500 lines |
| Documentation | ⚠️ | README missing setup instructions |

### Suggested Investigations

1. **Add tests for {module}** — {N} files in `server/{path}/` have no tests. Effort: M
2. **Split {file}** — {file} is {N} lines. Consider extracting {concept}. Effort: S
3. **Update README** — Missing: setup instructions, environment variables. Effort: S

### Want a Deep Audit?

Run `/project-audit` for a comprehensive multi-agent analysis with detailed recommendations.

Critical Rules

  1. Read-only — This skill NEVER writes files, creates issues, creates PRs, or commits. It is purely informational. The user decides what to act on.
  2. Quick, not deep — Phase 1-3 should complete in under 2 minutes. The fallback audit (Phase 4) adds 1-2 minutes. This is NOT /project-audit.
  3. Prioritize actionability — Items with clear acceptance criteria and "ready" signals rank above vague ideas. The user should be able to pick the top item and start working immediately.
  4. Deduplicate across sources — Never show the same work item from multiple sources. Link them instead.
  5. Graceful degradation — If a source is unavailable (no gh auth, no roadmap file, no audit reports), skip it silently and note it in the sources summary. Never fail on a missing source.
  6. Respect blocked/assigned — Show blocked and assigned items for context but clearly separate them from the actionable queue. Never recommend working on a blocked or assigned item.
  7. Composable output — The "Recommended Next Action" section should include copy-pasteable commands (e.g., /autonomous-dev-flow #12 #18 #25) so the user can immediately act on the findings.
  8. No file writes — The fallback audit in Phase 4 outputs to the conversation only. Unlike /project-audit, it does NOT write report files or create a docs/ directory.

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.