agentleFS
cbdreamer11cbdreamer11/CB-loop-kit-claude-plugin/skills/loop-doctor/SKILL.md

loop-doctor

Skill8 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Checks that the loop is actually installed and working in this project - files present, role profiles valid, connections alive, effort level real. Use after setup, after an upgrade, or when something behaves as if the method is not loaded.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions1 project uses a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 1

    1. TheMattBerman/loop-kit★ 9same name

    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.

  • In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Verify the installation the same way the method verifies everything else: by observing, not by assuming it took.

    line 8
  2. Very specific:

    If that shows a level, that is the real one — including any silent downgrade.

    line 37

≈ “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

Doctor

Verify the installation the same way the method verifies everything else: by observing, not by assuming it took.

1 · The files

ls -la .loop/ .loop/roles/ .claude/agents/ 2>&1 and confirm: STATE.md, VERIFY.md, DECISIONS.md, GOTCHAS.md, the four role profiles, the loop wrapper (and that it is executable), and the role agents in the project's .claude/agents/.

Report anything missing, and whether .loop/ACCESS.local.md is gitignored — if it is tracked, stop and say so loudly: it is the file most likely to hold a credential.

2 · The contract is still true

.loop/VERIFY.md rots faster than anything else. Run each declared command and report which ones still work. A verification contract with a stale build command is worse than none, because it produces confident green nonsense.

3 · The connections

Re-run the connection table from session 0: build, browser, database, payments test mode, git remote. PASS / FAIL / ABSENT. Every ABSENT should already be a declared GAP in .loop/VERIFY.md; if it is not, add it.

4 · The effort this session is really running at

This session's effort level: ${CLAUDE_EFFORT}

If that shows a level, that is the real one — including any silent downgrade. If it printed the placeholder literally, this version does not interpolate it; run echo "$CLAUDE_EFFORT" in a shell instead. There is deliberately no equivalent for the model: no session can read which model it is running on, so do not print a guess. If the role matters, relaunch with ./loop <role> and trust the profile.

5 · Verdict

One table: what is healthy, what is broken with the exact command to fix it, and what is absent by design. If anything in section 1 or 2 is broken, say plainly that the method is not in force in this project yet.

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.