readable-references
Skill0 starsChanged 2 months agoNo licenceView on GitHub
Replace opaque spec/plan/requirement pointers with self-describing, linked references whenever writing for a human. Use this skill whenever you are about to write an identifier that points into a spec, plan, requirements doc, design doc, or task breakdown — a section number like 3.1 or 4.2.1, a requirement ID like FR001 / NFR-12 / RD-XAT1 / REQ-045, a phase or milestone like Phase 2B / P3b / Milestone 3, or a task like "P3b Task 3" — into a PR description or review comment, a source-code comment or docstring, a commit message, a task or ticket update, an ADR / README / generated doc, or any Slack/email/chat message to a person. Instead of emitting the bare code (which forces the reader to leave and hunt for its meaning), expand it to include its human-readable title and hyperlink it to the source it came from — e.g. "[Requirement 3.1: User Login via Social](link) is satisfied by this design" rather than "3.1 is satisfied by this design". Trigger even when the user never mentions links or references — any time a bare plan identifier would otherwise land in human-facing output.
In this repository4 other files it gives its agents.
- no-slop-grenadeSkill
- pjfSkill
- simplified-technical-englishSkill
- task-status-updateSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈5
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
No licence file, so all rights are reserved — read it at the source. We count its rules but don't quote them. Read them on GitHub.
≈ “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.
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.