plan-implement-verify-recover
Skill7 starsChanged 43 days agoMITView on GitHub
Execute repository code changes through risk-adaptive planning, targeted context reading, scoped implementation, verification, and a bounded evidence-driven correction loop. Use when the agent is asked to modify an existing codebase, fix a bug, implement a feature, refactor code, integrate an API, change a database, perform a migration, or make architectural or security-sensitive changes. Do not use for read-only explanations, analysis without changes, research, content writing, prompt creation, document summarization, or standalone examples that will not be applied to a repository.
In this repository83 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- accessibility-enforcerSkill
- access-policy-designerSkill
- adaptive-guardSkill
- agent-reviewerSkill
- anti-ai-slop-designSkill
- api-mock-designerSkill
- api-observability-plannerSkill
- app-store-reviewerSkill
- ask-first-act-laterSkill
- assumption-checkerSkill
- auth-flow-designerSkill
- b2b-founder-roadmapSkill
- brand-name-labSkill
- breaking-change-detectorSkill
- changelog-generatorSkill
- checkpoint-guardianSkill
- claude-style-codingSkill
- claw-integration-designSkill
- context-compressorSkill
- contract-first-designerSkill
- coolify-orchestratorSkill
- crash-analystSkill
- data-lineage-tracerSkill
- data-maskerSkill
- deep-link-architectSkill
- design-intelligenceSkill
- design-md-enforcerSkill
- ecosystem-apiSkill
- ecosystem-databaseSkill
- ecosystem-mobileSkill
- ecosystem-orchestrationSkill
- ecosystem-productSkill
- ecosystem-reasoningSkill
- ecosystem-securitySkill
- ecosystem-webSkill
- error-recoverySkill
- fth-design-crafterSkill
- geo-auditorSkill
- geo-optimizerSkill
- index-advisorSkill
- jev-orchestratorSkill
- mastermind-loggerSkill
- memory-ledgerSkill
- migration-strategistSkill
- mobile-perf-auditorSkill
- mobile-security-auditorSkill
- multi-brain-debateSkill
- multi-brain-expertsSkill
- multi-brain-scoreSkill
- multi-brainSkill
- offline-sync-designerSkill
- onboarding-designerSkill
- output-criticSkill
- parallel-plannerSkill
- pgbouncer-architectSkill
- plan-hardenerSkill
- proje-analizcisiSkill
- project-analyzerSkill
- project-focus-firstSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
37 rules. About 0 are common, 36 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈36
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
- Distinctive: line 10
Do not expose private reasoning.
- Distinctive: line 17
Read applicable AGENTS.md and repository instructions.
- Distinctive: line 21
Use targeted discovery; do not read the entire repository when a smaller context is sufficient.
- Distinctive: line 23
Do not modify files during initial discovery.
- Distinctive: line 25
Use repository-provided build, test, lint, formatting, and validation commands.
- Distinctive: line 26
Do not invent project commands when existing instructions are available.
- Distinctive: line 37
Keep this internal for small, clear changes.
- Distinctive: line 44
Use for clear, low-risk, localized, easily reversible changes that do not affect public contracts, data models, authentication, …
- Distinctive: line 48
Read the directly relevant implementation and nearby test or example.
- Distinctive: line 50
Run the fastest relevant validation.
- Distinctive: line 54
Do not create a written plan artifact.
- Distinctive: line 58
Use for normal multi-file features, bug fixes, and refactoring where the architecture remains stable.
- Distinctive: line 61
Create a concise implementation plan.
- Distinctive: line 63
Read relevant implementation, callers, and tests.
- Distinctive: line 65
Run targeted checks, then broader checks when justified.
- Distinctive: line 69
Do not add a plan file to the repository unless repository instructions, the user, or the task explicitly requires one.
- Distinctive: line 74
Use for architecture, security, authentication, authorization, payments, personal data, migrations, public API changes, difficult rollback, …
- Distinctive: line 83
Run verification appropriate to every affected risk domain.
- Distinctive: line 85
Use an independent review only when explicitly requested or when applicable project instructions require and permit it.
- Distinctive: line 110
Run this state loop:
- Distinctive: line 126
Do not repeat an unchanged command, action, hypothesis, or fix.
- Distinctive: line 130
Do not reload unchanged files unless new evidence requires it.
- Distinctive: line 133
Stop the loop when:
- Distinctive: line 137
No new testable hypothesis remains.
- Distinctive: line 145
Prefer the smallest safe solution.
- Distinctive: line 148
Avoid speculative code for possible future requirements.
- Distinctive: line 152
Do not hide failures with silent fallbacks.
- Distinctive: line 154
Do not hardcode credentials, environment values, URLs, mutable policies, domain limits, or repeated unexplained literals.
- Distinctive: line 156
Do not create configuration or abstraction for local, stable, self-explanatory literals.
- Distinctive: line 158
Do not overwrite or discard unrelated user changes.
- Distinctive: line 161
Stop for direction when work requires new authority, expands product scope, changes an external contract, unexpectedly changes the data …
- Distinctive: line 179
Treat git diff --stat as scope evidence, not functional verification.
- Distinctive: line 181
Never claim completion without relevant evidence.
- Very specific: line 185
When verification succeeds, continue to review.
- Distinctive: line 198
Add or update a regression test when appropriate.
- Distinctive: line 201
Do not apply unrelated speculative fixes.
- Distinctive: line 217
Keep the report proportional to the change.
≈ “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
Plan, Implement, Verify, Recover
Apply the smallest workflow that safely completes the requested code change.
Do not expose private reasoning. Communicate only decisions, plans, risks, blockers, verification evidence, and concise progress useful to the user.
Inspect Project Instructions
Before editing:
- Read applicable
AGENTS.mdand repository instructions. - Inspect repository status and preserve unrelated user changes.
- Locate relevant entrypoints, implementation files, nearby patterns, configuration, callers, and tests.
- Use targeted discovery; do not read the entire repository when a smaller context is sufficient.
- Do not modify files during initial discovery.
Use repository-provided build, test, lint, formatting, and validation commands. Do not invent project commands when existing instructions are available.
Define the Change
Establish:
- A one-sentence goal.
- In-scope and out-of-scope behavior.
- Observable completion criteria.
- Primary risks and affected boundaries.
Keep this internal for small, clear changes. Present it when ambiguity, risk, or scope makes user confirmation materially useful.
Select One Route
Fast
Use for clear, low-risk, localized, easily reversible changes that do not affect public contracts, data models, authentication, authorization, security, payments, or infrastructure.
- Read the directly relevant implementation and nearby test or example.
- Make the smallest correct change.
- Run the fastest relevant validation.
- Review the diff.
- Report evidence.
Do not create a written plan artifact.
Standard
Use for normal multi-file features, bug fixes, and refactoring where the architecture remains stable.
- Create a concise implementation plan.
- Identify files, sequence, risks, and verification.
- Read relevant implementation, callers, and tests.
- Implement the plan in scoped increments.
- Run targeted checks, then broader checks when justified.
- Review the complete diff.
- Report evidence and remaining limitations.
Do not add a plan file to the repository unless repository instructions, the user, or the task explicitly requires one.
Deep
Use for architecture, security, authentication, authorization, payments, personal data, migrations, public API changes, difficult rollback, large refactors, major dependencies, or high ambiguity.
- Perform targeted architectural discovery.
- Prepare a written plan with alternatives, tradeoffs, affected boundaries, rollback considerations, and a verification strategy.
- Resolve product decisions or missing authority before implementation.
- Implement in reviewable checkpoints.
- Run verification appropriate to every affected risk domain.
- Perform a fresh semantic review of the complete diff.
- Use an independent review only when explicitly requested or when applicable project instructions require and permit it.
- Report evidence, residual risks, and proof gaps.
Run the Bounded Execution Loop
Track these internal state values:
route:fast,standard, ordeep.state:discover,plan,implement,verify,review,recover,complete, orblocked.correction_cycles: completed Recovery-to-Verification cycles.replans: plan replacements caused by new evidence.last_failure: latest distinct failure.last_hypothesis: latest tested causal hypothesis.evidence: compact list of checks and results.
Apply these route budgets:
| Route | Maximum correction cycles | Maximum replans |
| Fast | 1 | 0 |
| Standard | 3 | 1 |
| Deep | 5 | 2 |
Run this state loop:
discover: Gather only enough relevant context to act safely.plan: Produce only the plan detail required by the selected route.implement: Apply the smallest planned increment.verify: Run the fastest relevant check before broader checks.- Move from
verifytoreviewwhen checks pass. - Move from
verifyorreviewtorecoverwhen evidence shows a defect. - In
recover, form and test a new causal hypothesis, correct the cause, incrementcorrection_cycles, and return toverify. - Return to
planand incrementreplansonly when evidence invalidates the current plan. - Move from
reviewtocompletewhen the diff is clean and completion criteria have evidence. - Move to
blockedwhen a stop condition applies.
Do not repeat an unchanged command, action, hypothesis, or fix. Treat the same failure after the same attempted correction as no progress. Change the hypothesis or stop.
Do not reload unchanged files unless new evidence requires it. Maintain a compact state summary instead of restating the full history each cycle.
Stop the loop when:
- Completion criteria have sufficient evidence.
- The selected route budget is exhausted.
- No new testable hypothesis remains.
- Required access, credentials, or external availability is missing.
- New authority or a user-owned product decision is required.
- Scope materially expands or an external contract changes unexpectedly.
- Continuing could overwrite unrelated user work or make recovery unsafe.
Apply Implementation Principles
- Prefer the smallest safe solution.
- Apply KISS and YAGNI before introducing abstractions.
- Reuse established project patterns when they fit.
- Avoid speculative code for possible future requirements.
- Stay within the accepted user-visible and architectural scope.
- Match nearby naming, structure, comments, and idioms.
- Preserve backward compatibility unless the request requires otherwise.
- Do not hide failures with silent fallbacks.
- Make necessary fallbacks observable, bounded, and justified.
- Do not hardcode credentials, environment values, URLs, mutable policies, domain limits, or repeated unexplained literals.
- Do not create configuration or abstraction for local, stable, self-explanatory literals.
- Do not overwrite or discard unrelated user changes.
Allow technical implementation details to evolve within the accepted scope. Stop for direction when work requires new authority, expands product scope, changes an external contract, unexpectedly changes the data model, or introduces a material architectural decision.
Verify
Select checks by change type and risk. Read
references/verification-matrix.md when the right checks are unclear or the
change affects multiple domains.
Prefer this order:
- Syntax or formatting check.
- Targeted test for changed behavior.
- Module-level typecheck, lint, or test.
- Build or broader integration checks when justified.
- Semantic diff review.
Treat git diff --stat as scope evidence, not functional verification.
Never claim completion without relevant evidence. When a check cannot run, report the exact unverified behavior, why it could not be verified, available evidence, and the next check required.
When verification succeeds, continue to review. When it fails, preserve the
failure evidence and enter recover.
Recover from Failure
Enter Recovery when implementation or verification produces an unexpected
failure. Read references/debugging-protocol.md, then:
- Reproduce or isolate the failure.
- Record expected and observed behavior.
- Form a testable root-cause hypothesis.
- Gather evidence before applying a fix.
- Apply the smallest causal correction.
- Add or update a regression test when appropriate.
- Increment
correction_cyclesand return toverify.
Do not apply unrelated speculative fixes.
Obey the correction and replan budgets for the selected route. Stop earlier when the loop makes no progress or any global stop condition applies.
Report Completion
Report:
- What changed.
- Why it was the smallest suitable solution.
- Files or components affected.
- Checks executed and their results.
- Checks not executed and why.
- Remaining risks, limitations, or proof gaps.
Keep the report proportional to the change.
🔗 Next Steps & Handoffs
<!-- BEGIN GENERATED: handoffs (generated from the ecosystem workflow map by build_ecosystems.py — do not edit by hand) -->Ecosystem: @ecosystem-orchestration — Agent Orchestration.
Workflows:
- Repository Change Flow (
orch-code-change, step 2 of 3): next →@checkpoint-guardian(optional).
Handoff contract: pass results to the next skill through an inline Handoff block in your reply with the fields skill, workflow, created_at, inputs, summary, and next (the handoff contract of @ecosystem-orchestration). If a next skill is not installed, continue with its step from the ecosystem map, or install it with npx skills add fatih-developer/fth-skills --skill <name> after the user agrees.
<!-- END GENERATED: handoffs -->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.

