avc-start
Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Start or reframe one AVC/XP story by capturing a small observable outcome, examples, non-goals, risk lane, scope budget, commands, and next factual signal. Use before implementation when no valid active run exists.
In this repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- ai-memory-durable-pagesSkill
- ai-memory-handoffSkill
- ai-memory-learning-maintenanceSkill
- ai-memory-retrievalSkill
- ai-memory-routing-installSkill
- avc-amendSkill
- avc-build-sliceSkill
- avc-freeze-oracleSkill
- avc-live-qaSkill
- avc-retroSkill
- avc-reviewSkill
- avc-scoutSkill
- avc-spikeSkill
- avc-verifySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
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
- Very specific: line 27
Create or amend .avc/run.yaml only as Navigator.
≈ “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
Start an AVC/XP story
Act as the Navigator and read AGENTS.md, .avc/config.yaml, and the current
.avc/run.yaml if present. Query ai-memory for related prior decisions when the
subsystem or task is non-trivial; validate recalled claims against current
instructions and checkout state.
Capture one vertical outcome, why it matters, explicit non-goals, one to three
observable examples, reversibility, the smallest initial allow/deny surface,
and known commands. Classify risk from .avc/config.yaml: risk_triggers:
confirmed_impacts and a lane's confirmed_paths promote a lane on their
own; signal_keywords and a lane's signal_paths are scouting signals only
(never proof) — a path that only names a convention (e.g. **/auth/**)
must not by itself force a lane the way a real confirmed impact does. Run
python3 .avc/bin/avc.py classify as a mechanical cross-check on the
path/keyword side of this before declaring the lane — it never replaces your
judgment on semantic confirmed_impacts, but a floor it reports above what
you're about to declare is worth a second look. Unknown risk is at least
guarded. Promotion is autonomous for the Navigator; reduction is
human-only.
Create or amend .avc/run.yaml only as Navigator. Keep the oracle draft, the
graph to one Scout node, and implementation inactive until baseline, frame, and
oracle gates pass. Do not invent commands, HEAD, acceptance, or human authority.
Return the canonical result from .avc/templates/agent-result.yaml and stop
with BLOCKED when outcome/acceptance authority cannot be inferred safely.
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.

