poc-development
Skill4 starsChanged 52 days agoMITView on GitHub
Build a clearly identified .NET proof of concept or experiment to test technical feasibility. Use only when the user or repository context explicitly marks the work as POC, spike, prototype, or experimental.
In this repository37 other files it gives its agents.
- global-instructions/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- api-contract-safetySkill
- api-endpoint-deprecationSkill
- aspnet-core-api-developmentSkill
- background-services-dotnetSkill
- bug-investigationSkill
- code-qualitySkill
- code-reviewSkill
- context-resetSkill
- dependency-managementSkill
- deployment-readiness-dotnetSkill
- diff-reviewSkill
- distributed-workflowsSkill
- dotnet-architectureSkill
- dotnet-implementationSkill
- dotnet-securitySkill
- ef-core-safetySkill
- exception-handlingSkill
- git-workflowSkill
- google-bigquery-dotnetSkill
- google-cloud-pubsub-dotnetSkill
- google-firestore-dotnetSkill
- http-client-integrationsSkill
- integration-testing-dotnetSkill
- observability-dotnetSkill
- performance-diagnostics-dotnetSkill
- production-debuggingSkill
- production-hotfixSkill
- production-loggingSkill
- redis-dotnetSkill
- relational-database-dotnetSkill
- retry-resilienceSkill
- safe-terminalSkill
- shared-code-impactSkill
- targeted-validationSkill
- task-routerSkill
- unit-testingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are 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.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 14
If the result is promoted to production, reassess architecture and contracts, remove shortcuts, add normal automated tests and validation, …
≈ “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
POC development
Define the hypothesis, success criteria, time/scope boundary, and what evidence the experiment must produce. Build the smallest representative vertical slice and keep experimental code isolated from production paths where practical.
Unit tests and production hardening are optional for a POC. Prioritize executable evidence, integration feasibility, important constraints, and reproducible setup. Still avoid credentials, unsafe destructive actions, and unrelated repository changes.
Label shortcuts and unknowns: security, resilience, error handling, scalability, observability, migration, compatibility, operations, and test gaps. Do not silently classify ordinary work as a POC to avoid tests.
If the result is promoted to production, reassess architecture and contracts, remove shortcuts, add normal automated tests and validation, and review the result as production code rather than incrementally blessing the prototype.
Record hypothesis, setup, observed result and promotion blockers in a reproducible handoff. Reassess any shortcut before production adoption.
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.