backend
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Implement the server behind the contract — APIs, domain logic, OLTP persistence, auth, async/jobs, caching, security controls, integration, and tests — across REST/GraphQL/gRPC/realtime/serverless-edge/agentic backends in Node/Python/Go/Rust/JVM. Use to build an endpoint, add auth, write a migration, set up a job queue or outbox, add caching/rate limiting, harden (OWASP), integrate a webhook, bridge a voice call's audio, or expose an agent/MCP endpoint. Not for system/contract design (→ architecture), client/SSR (→ frontend), OLAP (→ data), agent core (→ ai), cross-vendor workflows (→ automation), deploy/monitoring (→ operate), or independent QA (→ quality).
19 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- hushh-labs/hushh-researchtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- darknecrocities/SkillBuildertheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- marcusbelz/di2-starter-kittheir own version, first seen Oct 31, 2026
- hilmifawwazsaad/NextJS-js-Boilerplatetheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- langwatch/langwatchtheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- vietnamtrainingpilot-oss/ateliertheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use security, devops and 5 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.
0xSeroSkillsecurity
Also in 5 projects that use this
mrgoonieSkilldevops
Deploy to Cloudflare (Workers, R2, D1), Docker, GCP (Cloud Run, GKE), Kubernetes (kubectl, Helm). Use for serverless, containers, CI/CD, GitOps, security audit.
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillhelp
Entry point for the MedImageInsight plugin, covering the getting-started walkthrough, how the skills work, what MI2 is, and troubleshooting.
Also in 3 projects that use this
OpenAISkillsupabase
Use when doing ANY task involving Supabase. Triggers: Supabase products (Database, Auth, Edge Functions, Realtime, Storage, Vectors, Cron, Queues); client libraries and SSR integrations (supabase-js, @supabase/ssr) in Next.js, React, SvelteKit, Astro, Remix; auth issues (login, logout, sessions, JWT, cookies, getSession, getUser, getClaims, RLS); Supabase CLI or MCP server; schema changes, migrations, security audits, Postgres extensions (pg_graphql, pg_cron, pg_vector).
Also in 3 projects that use this
VercelSkilldeploy
Deploy applications to Vercel. Use when the user says "deploy", "deploy to Vercel", "push to production", "deploy my app", or "go live".
Also in 3 projects that use this
NVIDIASkilltesting
Run Python and Rust tests for physicsnemo-curator using uv + pytest with coverage reporting via pytest-cov, and cargo-nextest for Rust tests. Includes benchmark workflows with pytest-benchmark and criterion.
Also in 4 projects that use this
Other versions19 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 19
- langwatch/langwatch★ 5ksame name
- AlexPEClub/ai-coding-starter-kit★ 382same name
- hushh-labs/hushh-research★ 40same name
- ElmatadorZ/skynetclaw★ 16same name
- DojoCodingLabs/code-sensei★ 14same name
- darknecrocities/SkillBuilder★ 13same name
- udaysharmadev/Skills★ 12same name
- mnzralee/claude-multi-agent-architecture★ 8same name
- darker2016/WorkbuddySkillGroups4DSH★ 6same name
- MarvelCollin/agent-skills★ 5same name
9 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.
In this repository13 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- site/llms.txtllms.txt
- mediabunnySkill
- remotion-best-practicesSkill
- remotion-captionsSkill
- remotion-createSkill
- remotion-docsSkill
- remotion-interactivitySkill
- remotion-markupSkill
- remotion-renderSkill
- remotion-saasSkill
- remotion-upgradeSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 7 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 16 edited versions we read keep these.
2
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 34
Add at most one base surface — the runtime/system type reshapes how every job applies.
- Very specific: line 35
The agentic overlay is additive: When the system is *also* an LLM/agent system, stack surface-agentic on top of the chosen base surface — …
- Very specific: line 39
Retrieval-first: before generating any framework/ORM/DB-specific code, fetch the current official docs/types for the target version — …
- Distinctive: line 41
Read each selected reference completely before producing the affected artifact.
- Very specific: line 74
When downstream build/verify work is expected (operate will deploy/monitor, quality will independently verify, frontend is coding to the …
- Very specific: line 122
Run the prove-it-works verification loop (✓/✗ per phase).
- Very specific: line 128
Every backend artifact must record: the decision made and the options considered.
- Very specific: line 144
When downstream build/verify work is expected, emit the handoff.yaml companion with artifact paths, decisions, constraints, risks, and the …
- Very specific: line 147
Never silently invoke a build skill.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 16 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
Backend Engineering
Mission and boundary
Implement the production server that sits behind the contract — the APIs, domain logic, OLTP persistence, authentication/authorization, async work, caching, security controls, outbound integrations, and the tests that prove it runs. Own the running server: the implementation craft inside the decided shape, not the shape itself.
Own the code, not the decision behind it. The border — with architecture (boundaries, contract
shape, NFR budgets, threat model) and with frontend/data/ai/operate/quality — is enumerated
in the invariants below; consume their artifacts and implement inside them rather than overriding.
Operate independently when invoked alone; when compatible upstream artifacts exist (a
solution-architecture doc, contracts, an NFR budget, a threat model, a handoff.yaml), build against
them rather than re-deriving. Recommend adjacent skills when useful; never invoke them automatically
unless the user explicitly requested a composition workflow.
Route before acting
- Pick the one primary job the request needs (≥1 row below — most requests are one; name it).
- Add at most one base surface — the runtime/system type reshapes how every job applies.
- The agentic overlay is additive. When the system is also an LLM/agent system, stack
surface-agenticon top of the chosen base surface — it does not replace it. A serverless agent backend issurface-serverless-edge+surface-agentic; a realtime one addssurface-realtimetoo. - Retrieval-first: before generating any framework/ORM/DB-specific code, fetch the current official docs/types for the target version — backends ship breaking changes fast (see invariants).
- Read each selected reference completely before producing the affected artifact. Load 2–3 at most; never preload the pack.
Primary job (pick one)
| User intent | Read | Contribution |
| Build/scaffold/extend endpoints, handlers, routers, resolvers, or RPC methods behind a contract; pick REST/GraphQL/gRPC/tRPC; set pagination, versioning, error shape | api-implementation | Transport pick, request-lifecycle wiring, single-source schema, uniform error shape, cursor pagination, in-code versioning |
| Add/refactor business logic, a service or use-case layer, or domain models; apply DDD tactical / clean / hexagonal; stop rules leaking into handlers | domain-logic | Layered domain/application/infra structure, aggregates/entities/VOs, anti-anemic litmus, dependency rule |
| Design schema/indexes, choose ORM vs raw SQL, write a migration, get transactions/isolation right, size a pool, kill N+1, or push Postgres further | persistence | Schema+index+expand/contract migration, isolation decision, pooling matched to runtime, DB-license flag |
| Add login/signup/sessions, protect a route, add OAuth/SSO/"sign in with X", store passwords, or decide who-can-do-what | auth | Session-vs-JWT decision, OAuth2/OIDC+PKCE flow, Argon2id config, RBAC/ABAC/ReBAC model + library pick |
| Background jobs, queues, workers, event-driven services, pub/sub, CDC, outbox, saga, idempotency, delivery semantics, durable workflows (Temporal/Hatchet), or an external action that must not double-fire on retry | async-and-messaging | Broker/queue pick, idempotency-key path, operation ledger for external effects, transactional outbox, saga+compensations, delivery stance, durable-execution decision with one execution owner |
| Add a cache and invalidate it, implement rate limiting, or diagnose a slow endpoint/query | caching-and-performance | Cache strategy by staleness/loss tolerance, invalidation mechanism, distributed-correct token bucket, measured bottleneck + fix |
| Secure the API, add security headers, fix CORS, prevent injection, store secrets, add CSRF/mTLS — implement a threat model's controls | server-security | Uniform OWASP controls table (control→impl→verify) with self-audit count, mapped to Top 10:2021 / ASVS |
| Call a third-party API, receive/deliver webhooks, add a gRPC/HTTP client, tune a circuit breaker, or integrate a payment/AI/email provider or model gateway | service-integration | Resilient client wrapper (retry reused from async + circuit breaker), verified idempotent webhooks in/out, model-gateway wiring |
| Write/run/fix backend tests, or "prove this works" — unit / integration (testcontainers) / producer-contract + a runnable verification loop | backend-testing | Layered test suite, real-dependency integration tests, contract-producer check, ✓/✗ verification report |
Surface overlay (add at most one base surface)
Pick the one base surface that matches the runtime/system type; surface-agentic stacks additively on
top of it (step 3 above). Surfaces reshape how the jobs apply — they point to the job references,
they don't redefine them.
| System type | Read | Reshapes |
| Standard long-running request/response service — modular monolith or a few services, HTTP + relational store (default / fallback) | surface-rest-crud | Concern-scoping model pick, adapter-isolates-runtime seam, per-language idioms, 12-factor scaffold |
| Serverless / edge — Workers, Lambda, Bun-edge, Vercel/Netlify functions; cold start, scale-to-zero, per-invocation billing | surface-serverless-edge | Statelessness, the connection-pooling failure mode (txn-mode pooler or HTTP-native driver), D1/KV/R2/Durable-Objects mapping |
| Realtime — WebSocket/SSE/pub-sub, stateful connections, presence, rooms; chat, collaboration, live dashboards, multiplayer; a voice agent's audio path (WebRTC, SIP, telephony media streams) | surface-realtime | SSE-vs-WS transport, actor-per-connection/room, presence abstraction, per-message reliability, fan-out/scaling, replayable run-event stream, voice media transport (codec, barge-in flush, capped-session reconnect) |
| Event-driven microservices — independently deployed polyglot services over gRPC + an event backbone (Kafka/NATS), service mesh | surface-event-driven-microservices | Modular-monolith-first gate, database-per-service consequences (saga/CQRS), inter-service contract evolution, sync-vs-async classification |
| Agentic ⭐ — backend serving an LLM/agent system: tool/MCP endpoints, RAG plumbing, agent-legible contracts. Additive — stacks on top of the base surface, does not replace it. | surface-agentic | Durable execution as default control plane, tool/MCP endpoints, agent-legible typed contracts + errors, RAG plumbing (not core), agent-scoped tokens (MCP audience, no passthrough), approval-as-paused-run, per-run version pins + budget reservation |
Handoff
When downstream build/verify work is expected (operate will deploy/monitor, quality will
independently verify, frontend is coding to the same contract), read
handoff and emit the handoff.yaml companion. Skip it for a standalone
request nothing downstream will read.
Universal invariants
- Implement inside the decision. Own the running server, not what to build and why, its
acceptance criteria, or its priority (→
product), the boundary/contract-shape/NFR-budget/ threat-model decision (→architecture), OLAP/pipelines (→data), the LLM/agent core (→ai), deploy/CI/monitoring (→operate), the independent load-test/scan/gate (→quality), or a business process spanning vendors you cannot deploy to (→automation). Consume upstream artifacts; when they don't exist (standalone run), say so explicitly rather than inventing a contract or threat model to fill the gap. - Your substrate is one you control.
async-and-messaging's saga, idempotency and outbox assume the other participant is your own service, or a webhook you can dedupe against. When the participant is opaque, un-scriptable, and partly human — no rollback because the vendor has no un-send, credentials expiring across a vendor fleet, a human approval step, or drift that only a reconciliation loop against the vendor's own state will catch — that isautomation. The primitives here still apply; the operating discipline around them is theirs. - Retrieval-first / anti-staleness. Backend frameworks/ORMs/DBs ship breaking changes fast (Prisma 7, Drizzle 0.x→1.0, Go 1.22 routing, Kafka 4.0 KRaft-only, Redis licensing, PG19). Before generating any framework/ORM/DB-specific code, fetch the current official docs/types and version-gate idioms to the target release — never rely on memorized APIs for a fast-moving target.
- Default-stack, then deviate. Name the current modal default per stack, but every recommendation is a concrete pick + what NOT to build + the trade-off, weighted by reversibility. Anchor the fundamentals (SQL-before-ORM, modular-monolith-first, at-least-once + idempotent consumers, parameterized queries). Adoption numbers are engagement, not gospel — don't trend-chase. Cap each pass at 3–5 decisions.
- Exhaustive checklists use a uniform table + self-audit count, never a narrative. For any "cover N controls/items" task (OWASP controls, API-contract review, 12-factor audit, ASVS mapping), fill one row per item and count covered rows against the total before calling it done — a single narrative pass reliably drops rows.
- Prove it works before done. Ship the verification loop (lint → migrate → test → hit the
endpoint → diff-review) as the completion gate, reporting ✓/✗ per phase — distinct from
quality's independent gate; never assert it from memory. - Distinguish facts, decisions, assumptions, and proposals. Preserve upstream decisions and user constraints or flag the conflict explicitly; prefer repository and artifact evidence over generic defaults; state unknowns as TBD rather than inventing a value.
Core workflow
- Inspect the request, the codebase, and any upstream artifacts (contracts, NFR budgets, threat
model, ADRs, a
handoff.yaml); record material assumptions and unresolved inputs with owners. - Route (see above): one primary job, ≤1 base surface,
surface-agenticstacked additively if the caller is an agent. Retrieval-first before any framework/ORM/DB code; read selected refs fully. - Produce the artifact grounded in the framework the reference names — concrete pick + what-NOT + trade-off, capped at 3–5 decisions per pass.
- Run the prove-it-works verification loop (✓/✗ per phase); emit
handoff.yamlwhen downstream build/verify work is expected.
Artifact contract
Each reference defines its own artifact — a running implementation plus the decision record behind it.
Every backend artifact must record: the decision made and the options considered; the trade-off
accepted; facts/decisions/assumptions distinguished; and, for any framework/ORM/DB-specific code, that
current docs were checked for the target version. Exhaustive-coverage artifacts (OWASP controls, API
review, 12-factor) are a uniform table with a self-audit count, never a narrative. A full backend pass
produces up to five kinds of artifact — the running service, the contract as implemented, its own
tests, telemetry hooks, and the fillable checklists in assets/ — plus the machine-readable
handoff.yaml companion whenever downstream work is expected; see handoff.
Completion and handoff
Before completion:
- Confirm every requested artifact exists and its acceptance criteria are checkable.
- Confirm the prove-it-works loop was actually run (✓/✗ per phase), not asserted.
- Confirm every exhaustive-checklist artifact is a table with a self-audit count, not a narrative.
- Record decisions, assumptions, risks, and unresolved questions with named owners.
- When downstream build/verify work is expected, emit the
handoff.yamlcompanion with artifact paths, decisions, constraints, risks, and the recommended next skill — and, if a threat model was consumed, state the border between backend-implemented controls and quality-verified controls. Never silently invoke a build skill; name it inrecommended_next.
Resources
Load only what the selected route requires; never preload. The routing tables above name each reference's contribution — this is the index.
- Primary jobs (references/): api-implementation · domain-logic · persistence · auth · async-and-messaging · caching-and-performance · server-security · service-integration · backend-testing.
- Surface overlays (references/): surface-rest-crud (default) · surface-serverless-edge · surface-realtime · surface-event-driven-microservices · surface-agentic ⭐ (additive).
- Pipeline: handoff — standalone vs pipeline behavior and the
handoff.yamlcompanion consumed byoperate,quality,frontend,data, andai. - Assets (assets/): backend-service scaffold (12-factor) · zero-downtime migration
checklist · auth-implementation checklist · OWASP backend-controls checklist ·
idempotency-and-outbox recipes · API-contract review checklist · verification-loop template ·
handoff.yamlenvelope.
Artifact home
Deliverables this skill produces default to digital-product/backend/ at the working repository's
root, with cross-skill state in digital-product/LEDGER.md — created on first use and committed
with the repo. The digital-product composer skill owns this convention; solo use writes to the
same place. Never write into .orchestrate/ — that folder belongs to an orchestration run's
execution state, not to this family's deliverables.
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.

