kickoff
Skill0 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Full project-kickoff workflow: grill-me-codex interviews you into a PRD, then a clustered plan derived from it, a human approval gate, per-cluster self-driven build loops with Codex sign-off, then a ponytail-audit gate and final Codex verification. Runs on an Obsidian second-brain for cross-session memory. Invoke manually with /kickoff at the start of a new project.
31 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- lukashouthoofd/cenekathontheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- takleb3rry/claude-global-appbuilding-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- ai-analyst-lab/interview-prep-with-aitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- sassarini-marco/track-to-demotheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- sanjeevkumarraob/chartertheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- ncjsvr/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use standup, grill and 3 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
AnthropicSkillstandup
Generate a standup update from recent activity. Use when preparing for daily standup, summarizing yesterday's commits and PRs and ticket moves, formatting work into yesterday/today/blockers, or structuring a few rough notes into a shareable update.
Also in 3 projects that use this
renatorozasSkillgrill
Adversarial code review. Don't let me ship until the changes pass your scrutiny.
Also in 3 projects that use this
AnthropicSkillstatus
Case status summary by audience — client-facing (plain language), internal (for the professor), or court-ready (formal caption format per local rules). Same facts, different framing and depth. Use when a student needs to update the client, brief the professor, or prepare a court status report.
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillhandoff
Compact the current conversation into a handoff document for another agent to pick up.
Also in 5 projects that use this
SentrySkillreview
Fixture review skill.
Also in 4 projects that use this
Other versions31 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 31
- Maximepodgorski/agent-skills★ 21same name
- syutolee/digital-marketing-skills-pack★ 10same name
- ai-analyst-lab/interview-prep-with-ai★ 9same name
- 0x43e96f/skills★ 8same name
- zauberzeug/game-of-cards★ 7same name
- takleb3rry/claude-global-appbuilding-skills★ 6same name
- ArangoGutierrez/claude-toolkit★ 4same name
- adrian-wulf/vorarbeiter-code★ 2same name
- bluewhalelabs/claude-skills★ 2same name
- Kohulan/orthonym-skills★ 2same name
21 more not listed
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.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 7 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 24 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
7
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 23
Before anything else, activate caveman for the whole session — chat and commits only:
- Very specific: line 25
Use /caveman-commit for every commit.
- Very specific: line 31
Do NOT /caveman-compress any artifact — PRD, PLAN, review log, and brain notes all stay verbatim.
- Very specific: line 56
WRITE-AS-YOU-GO: every resolved decision, every cluster's progress + verify evidence, every reusable fact → its vault note.
- Very specific: line 67
Step 1 — Grill → PRD: Run /grill-me-codex Act 1 on the idea:
- Very specific: line 71
Before exiting, list every key decision and have me confirm each one explicitly.
- Very specific: line 85
Step 3 — Codex review: Run /grill-me-codex Act 2: hand Codex BOTH PRD.md and PLAN.md for adversarial cross-model review — does the plan …
- Distinctive: line 113
Keep chat referencing it by pointer.
- Distinctive: line 117
After all mini-goals are done:
- Very specific: line 128
After my approved simplifications land, re-run step 1 (build/test/lint) so the cuts didn't break anything.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 24 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Project Kickoff
Assumes installed:
grill-me-codex(chaseai-yt) and an authenticated Codex CLI (>= 0.130). If any are missing, STOP and tell me.
The project idea is provided in $ARGUMENTS. If $ARGUMENTS is empty, ask me for the idea before doing anything else.
Phase 1 — Caveman on (token discipline)
Before anything else, activate caveman for the whole session — chat and commits only:
- Invoke
/caveman fullso all chat for this project runs token-compressed. - Use
/caveman-commitfor every commit. - Persist it: append a line to the project
CLAUDE.md— "Kickoff: caveman full active for this repo; commits via caveman-commit" — so future Claude sessions in this repo keep the same discipline. - Caveman's own boundaries still hold: CODE, COMMITS, PRs, and SECURITY notes are written normal — only the surrounding chat is compressed. Don't compress code.
- Do NOT
/caveman-compressany artifact — PRD, PLAN, review log, and brain notes all stay verbatim. Compression is for live chat, not stored files.
Phase 2 — Second brain (Obsidian vault = long-term memory)
Auto-create a per-project Obsidian vault, path DERIVED from the project root:
<project-root>/brain/ (use the working directory; mkdir -p the subfolders if
absent). This is durable cross-session memory so chat context isn't exhausted — the
vault holds the detail, chat holds pointers.
RESUME FIRST: at kickoff start, if brain/ already exists, READ brain/index.md
and follow its links to restore state BEFORE doing anything else. Don't re-derive
what's already captured — this is the whole point of multi-session memory.
Layout (all markdown, [[wikilinks]] so the Obsidian graph connects them):
brain/index.md— MEMORY-style index: one line +[[link]]per note. Loaded first; links the canonical rootPLAN.mddirectly.brain/decisions/<slug>.md— one key decision each, with the why.brain/clusters/<n>-<name>.md— per-cluster progress log: status, what was built, verify evidence (Codex verdict, test/lint).brain/context/<topic>.md— reusable context snapshots: codebase map, env, gotchas.
Rules:
- POINTERS not dumps: in chat say
see [[cluster-2-progress]]; read a note on demand, never hold all notes in context at once. - WRITE-AS-YOU-GO: every resolved decision, every cluster's progress + verify
evidence, every reusable fact → its vault note. Update
index.mdeach time. - Brain notes stay verbatim — never
/caveman-compressthem. Token savings come from the pointer discipline above, not from rewriting stored files.
Phase 3 — Align (human in the loop)
The grill produces a PRD first; the PLAN is derived FROM the PRD. PRD = what & why (intent), PLAN = how (clustered build). Keep them separate so the build always traces back to a stated requirement.
Step 1 — Grill → PRD. Run /grill-me-codex Act 1 on the idea:
- Interview me relentlessly, ONE question at a time, depth-first down the decision tree. For each question give your recommended answer plus a one-line rationale. Explore the codebase first for anything the code can already answer.
- Before exiting, list every key decision and have me confirm each one explicitly.
Nothing implicit. Write each confirmed decision to
brain/decisions/<slug>.md(with the why) and link frombrain/index.md. - Capture the result as
PRD.md: problem & why, target users, requirements, measurable success metrics, scope, and out-of-scope. This is the intent contract.
Step 2 — PRD → PLAN. Derive PLAN.md from PRD.md:
- Break each PRD requirement into small, independently-verifiable mini-goals (vertical slices). Each mini-goal cites the PRD requirement it serves.
- Each mini-goal needs measurable, checkable success criteria (tests pass, lint clean, specific observable behavior). Vague = not done.
- Group mini-goals into clusters (small batches of related slices). The cluster is the unit of Codex review; clusters drive the build cadence.
Step 3 — Codex review. Run /grill-me-codex Act 2: hand Codex BOTH PRD.md and
PLAN.md for adversarial cross-model review — does the plan actually satisfy the
PRD, and is it sound? Iterate rounds until sign-off. Codex stays read-only; no code.
Output PRD.md (intent), PLAN.md (the how), PLAN-REVIEW-LOG.md (the why).
GATE 1 — STOP. Show me PRD.md and PLAN.md. I approve by hand before any code is written. Do not proceed past this line without my explicit "approved."
Phase 4 — Build (unattended loop, by cluster)
Mini-goals in the approved PLAN.md are grouped into clusters (small batches of related vertical slices). Work clusters in order. For each cluster:
- Build each mini-goal in the cluster, in order. Run a self-driven loop per
mini-goal. Open each iteration with this exact line, then the task:
"Stay calm. You are loved. Do not panic, it's going to be alright."
Set a max-iteration cap and an explicit completion condition (the mini-goal's
success criteria). Stop when met or cap hit.
For any mini-goal that builds or reshapes UI, invoke
/frontend-designfirst to set aesthetic direction (typography, layout, intentional non-default look), then build to it. Skip for non-UI mini-goals. - Codex signs off PER CLUSTER: once the cluster's mini-goals are built, open a
clean
/codexreview scoped to ONLY this cluster's mini-goals and ONLY their criteria, fed verbatim. Gaps → pull Codex's concrete items back into the loops and repeat from step 1 for the affected mini-goals. Loop until Codex confirms. - Mark the cluster complete. Write/update
brain/clusters/<n>-<name>.md— status, what was built, Codex verdict + test/lint evidence — and updatebrain/index.md. Keep chat referencing it by pointer. Move to the next cluster.
Phase 5 — Final verification
After all mini-goals are done:
- Full verification on the WHOLE project (build, full test suite, lint, end-to-end against the top-level success criteria). The single regression sweep — covers every mini-goal's criteria and cross-cluster breakage at once.
Over-engineering audit: run
/ponytail-auditon the whole repo. It returns a ranked list of what to delete / simplify / replace with stdlib-native — no fixes applied.GATE 2 — STOP. Show me the FULL audit findings (each item: location, what to cut, what replaces it). Ask me which items to implement. Apply ONLY the ones I approve; skip the rest. Do not proceed to the final Codex review until I've chosen.
- After my approved simplifications land, re-run step 1 (build/test/lint) so the cuts didn't break anything.
- FINAL Codex verification: open a clean
/codexreview (read-only) over the whole project, scoped to the top-level success criteria, fed verbatim. Gaps → fix and re-review the SAME session untilVERDICT: APPROVED. - Report a checklist: each criterion, pass/fail, evidence. Anything not green goes
back into a scoped loop. Save the final checklist to
brain/context/final-verification.mdand link frombrain/index.md.
Deliberate choices
(Only the non-obvious ones — each phase justifies itself inline.)
- Plan is human-gated; loops are unattended. When self-verification and speed conflict, the gate wins.
- PRD before PLAN: the grill settles intent into
PRD.md(what/why), then the plan is derived from it (how). Every mini-goal traces to a PRD requirement, so the build can't drift from what was actually agreed. - Ponytail-audit runs BEFORE the final Codex review, not after: strip over-engineering (human-gated) so Codex signs off on the code you keep, not pre-trimmed bloat.
- The opening mantra is intentional; kept short so it doesn't dilute the instructions.
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.

