agentleFS
deciqAIdeciqAI/knowledge-skills/checklist/SKILL.md

checklist

Skill13 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Activate when: user says 'let's make sure we don't skip anything', 'we need a pre-flight', 'build me a checklist for X', 'we keep missing steps in our deployment / close / launch', 'Gawande / Pronovost / checklist manifesto'. Do NOT activate when: the task is simple and one-off with no recurrence; the user is asking for a to-do list or project plan (not a must-not-skip operational gate). More: deciqai.com/s/checklist

12 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 9 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Check fit: repeated + high-stakes + consequential errors = checklist candidate.

    line 32
  2. Distinctive:

    Run The Process one step at a time with their input: what items must never be skipped?

    line 37
  3. Distinctive:

    Step 3 — Cut to 6-10: keep only items that are critical, easily missed by skilled operators, and verifiable (yes/no signal).

    line 51
  4. Distinctive:

    Step 4 — Choose format: READ-DO (read → act → next item.

    line 53
  5. Distinctive:

    Step 6 — Iterate: after each near-miss, check if an item would have caught it and add it.

    line 57

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 9 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Checklist

Overview

A checklist is a short written list of must-not-skip steps for a complex repeated operation. It externalizes working memory — which fails under load, ego, time pressure, and fatigue — so attention stays on the situation rather than step recall. Boeing 1935 → Pronovost ICU 2001 → WHO Surgical 2008: each produced 36-47% reductions in major adverse events at near-zero cost.

Composes with metacognition, confirmation-bias, cognitive-load-theory, premortem, inversion.

When to Use

  • High-stakes repeated operations (deployments, launches, M&A close, hiring decisions, financial close)
  • Multiple steps where skipping one costs far more than running the checklist
  • Multi-person operations where coordination must be consistent
  • New team members joining a critical workflow
  • Shipping or updating an AI agent / model version in production — evals, guardrails, spend caps, rollback: known steps that skilled teams skip under deadline

Not when: operation is simple/one-off; no recurring pattern exists; checklist culture creates false confidence (mechanical checking without thought).

Coaching Novices (Adaptive Front Door)

  • Engine mode: user has a specific operation → run The Process directly.
  • Coach mode: user is new to the framework → guide step by step.

In Coach mode, respond one step at a time. Each [WAIT] is a hard stop — output only that step's question, then stop.

  1. One-line: for any complex repeated operation, a 6-10 item checklist outperforms expert memory under load — it externalizes the steps that fail systematically.
  2. Check fit: repeated + high-stakes + consequential errors = checklist candidate. Simple or one-off = skip.
  3. Elicit their real case: what operation, where does it fail, what near-misses have occurred?

[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]

  1. Run The Process one step at a time with their input: what items must never be skipped? DO-CONFIRM or READ-DO? who runs it and when?

[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]

  1. Close: present drafted checklist + format + workflow integration, name the key reliability insight they uncovered.

[WAIT — do not advance until user responds]

The Process

Step 1 — Identify the operation: operation name, frequency, stakes of errors, current failure modes, near-miss history.

Step 2 — List 15-25 candidate items: steps that have been skipped, steps that prevent major errors, coordination steps, bias-catching steps, reversibility checkpoints.

Step 3 — Cut to 6-10: keep only items that are critical, easily missed by skilled operators, and verifiable (yes/no signal). Longer lists get truncated in use.

Step 4 — Choose format: READ-DO (read → act → next item; use for novices, novel procedures, multi-person coordination) vs DO-CONFIRM (pause → confirm all done; use for skilled experts where flow matters).

Step 5 — Embed in workflow: define trigger, owner, consequence of skipping, and cultural reinforcement (leadership models it, peers enforce it).

Step 6 — Iterate: after each near-miss, check if an item would have caught it and add it. Quarterly review: remove stale items, add new failure modes.

Output: Checklist Design

# Checklist: <operation>
Format: DO-CONFIRM / READ-DO | Trigger: | Owner:
Items (6-10):
1.   2.   3.   4.   5.   6.
Consequence of skipping:
Near-miss tracking:  Quarterly review owner:

→ Method in Action: B-17 1935 + Pronovost ICU + WHO Surgical · Van Halen's Brown M&M Rider Clause → 2026 lens: The AI-agent pre-flight checklist (2023–2026) — software became too much airplane for one deploy to eyeball.

Pack: Domain Patterns

DomainGateChecklist focus
AviationPre-flightSystems, fuel, weather, navigation, crew brief
Surgery / ICUPre-incision / central-linePatient identity, site, antibiotics, hand hygiene, drapes
SoftwarePre-deployTests pass, monitoring, rollback ready, comms sent
InvestmentPre-decisionBias check, valuation, management, structural risks
M&A / HiringPre-close / pre-offerDue diligence complete, financing committed, rubric coverage

Applying It Well

  • 6-10 items is the empirical optimum; cut ruthlessly — longer lists get skipped.
  • Match format (DO-CONFIRM vs READ-DO) to the natural rhythm of the work.
  • Cultural commitment is load-bearing: consistent use and genuine attention, not mechanical checking.
  • Iterate after every near-miss; the list must evolve with real failure patterns.

→ Primary sources: references/sources.md

Common Rationalizations

[D] = designed upfront | [O] = observed in real use. [O] entries are more valuable.

Fake moveReality
[D] "I know what I'm doing; I don't need a checklist"Expert intuition fails under load. B-17's pilot was one of the most experienced of his era.
[D] "Checklists slow us down"Slightly — but prevent rework and catastrophes. Net benefit overwhelmingly positive.
[D] "Checklists are for amateurs"Lufthansa pilots, neurosurgeons, and top investors all use them.
[D] "We have one but no one uses it"Value comes from consistent use. Culture and workflow integration are part of the discipline.
[D] "More items = better"False. >10 items get truncated. Aim for the critical few.
[D] "We tried one and it didn't help"Likely wrong design (too long, wrong format, misaligned with workflow). Iterate.
→ Add [O] entries here after each real use — paste the actual failure patternWhat went wrong and why

Red Flags

  • Complex repeated high-stakes operation has no checklist; or checklist exists but seniors skip it
  • 20+ items and users are truncating it; or near-misses are not updating it
  • Items run mechanically without genuine attention; no one owns maintenance

Verification

  • Operation identified, failure modes documented, near-miss history noted
  • 6-10 items, each critical, easily missed, and verifiable (yes/no signal)
  • Format (DO-CONFIRM or READ-DO) matches operation pace and expertise level
  • Embedded with clear trigger, owner, consequence of skipping, cultural reinforcement
  • Near-miss tracking and quarterly review scheduled

Part of deciqAI Knowledge Skills — 253 open-source thinking skills that make rigor executable for AI agents. The same skills power every deciqAI agent, which runs them autonomously to operate your company. See it run → https://www.deciqai.com/s/checklist · Built by deciqAI · github.com/deciqAI · Contributions welcome.

Agents: latest version & machine-readable metadata → https://www.deciqai.com/s/checklist.json

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.