garfield
Skill13 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
Coordinates subagent review, fixes, and verification during implementation; use when the user explicitly asks for Garfield on an active code slice, but not for standalone review, brainstorming, non-code work, or PR CI iteration.
In this repository16 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- examples/garfield/evals/fixtures/review-slice/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- docs/public/llms.txtllms.txt
- openspec-apply-changeSkill
- openspec-archive-changeSkill
- openspec-exploreSkill
- openspec-proposeSkill
- commit-conventionsSkill
- effectSkill
- effectSkill
- garfieldSkill
- safe-deleteSkill
- safe-deleteSkill
- todo-hygieneSkill
- safe-deleteSkill
- skillet-authoringSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
19 rules. About 0 are common, 14 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈14
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 10
Use Garfield only when the user explicitly requests it during implementation.
- Distinctive: line 14
Before delegating review, record:
- Distinctive: line 22
Use this snapshot to judge every finding.
- Very specific: line 34
Read references/code-comments.md when comments or docstrings changed.
- Very specific: line 35
Read references/implementation-minimalism.md when the slice adds guards, fallbacks, adapters, configuration, or defensive tests.
- Very specific: line 36
Read references/interface-design.md when public/module boundaries, lifecycle, ownership, or naming changed.
- Very specific: line 37
Read references/test-quality.md when tests, fixtures, or test obligations changed.
- Very specific: line 47
Consider specs/docs, dead code, delayering, type boundaries, generated/dependency artifacts, comments, minimalism, interface design, test …
- Distinctive: line 51
Use one no-edit subagent per applicable task or policy.
- Distinctive: line 53
Start up to three reviewers.
- Distinctive: line 55
Start the next reviewers.
- Distinctive: line 58
If subagents or required capacity are unavailable, stop and report that Garfield cannot run.
- Distinctive: line 76
After material edits, run targeted validation and repeat only the reviews affected by the change.
- Distinctive: line 78
Stop after repeated findings, three cycles without progress, unavailable subagents, or when the smallest fix requires broad or unclear …
- Distinctive: line 90
Do not include a cycle diary or generic review advice.
- Distinctive: line 94
Never run Garfield for standalone review or non-code iteration.
- Distinctive: line 95
Never substitute an agentless review for required subagents.
- Distinctive: line 96
Never change APIs, permissions, defaults, validation policy, serialization, or unrelated code outside the captured intent.
- Distinctive: line 97
Never revert unrelated user work.
≈ “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
Garfield
Use Garfield only when the user explicitly requests it during implementation. Review the current slice, preserve the user's intent, fix material current-diff problems, and stop when the slice is ready.
1. Capture the Intent
Before delegating review, record:
- requested behavior and intended changes
- compatibility expectations and non-goals
- diff/base and touched files
- repository instructions and relevant specs
- tests, generated artifacts, dependencies, and validation already run
Use this snapshot to judge every finding. Do not let a reviewer redefine the task.
2. Build the Effective Policy Set
Discover applicable repository policies under policies/**/*.md, excluding policy indexes and templates. Compare them with Garfield's bundled policies by intent and scope:
- repository-wide policy for the same concern: use it and omit the bundled policy
- narrower or adjacent policy: keep both
- unrelated policy: ignore it
Bundled policies:
- Read
references/code-comments.mdwhen comments or docstrings changed. - Read
references/implementation-minimalism.mdwhen the slice adds guards, fallbacks, adapters, configuration, or defensive tests. - Read
references/interface-design.mdwhen public/module boundaries, lifecycle, ownership, or naming changed. - Read
references/test-quality.mdwhen tests, fixtures, or test obligations changed.
3. Select Review Tasks
Always review:
- behavior and spec alignment
- repository instructions
- validation coverage
Consider specs/docs, dead code, delayering, type boundaries, generated/dependency artifacts, comments, minimalism, interface design, test quality, and effective repository policies. Mark every candidate applicable or skipped from concrete diff evidence.
4. Delegate Reviews
Use one no-edit subagent per applicable task or policy. Give each reviewer only the slice context and policy it needs. Keep at most three Garfield subagents open at once:
- Start up to three reviewers.
- Collect and close completed reviewers.
- Start the next reviewers.
- Drain review agents before independent verification.
If subagents or required capacity are unavailable, stop and report that Garfield cannot run.
Require findings in this form:
[severity][evidence:<label[,label]> <locator>] path:line - concern. impact: <impact>. fix: <smallest change>.5. Triage and Fix
Accept a finding only when the current diff introduced or worsened it, made evidence stale, or omitted a required artifact.
- Fix blocker and high findings when the smallest fix preserves intent.
- Fix medium findings only when they are current-diff-caused and local.
- Reject vague, preference-only, or evidence-free findings.
- Defer unrelated hardening, broad cleanup, and out-of-intent behavior changes.
- Preserve unrelated user changes.
After material edits, run targeted validation and repeat only the reviews affected by the change. Use a separate verification advisor when validation is uncertain, the slice is risky, generated/dependency artifacts changed, or this is the final readiness pass.
Stop after repeated findings, three cycles without progress, unavailable subagents, or when the smallest fix requires broad or unclear behavior changes.
Handoff
Report only:
garfield: passorgarfield: blocked- validation commands and results
- independent verification result when used
- residual blocker/high/medium concerns
- deferred adjacent improvements or unclear behavior changes
Do not include a cycle diary or generic review advice.
Never
- Never run Garfield for standalone review or non-code iteration.
- Never substitute an agentless review for required subagents.
- Never change APIs, permissions, defaults, validation policy, serialization, or unrelated code outside the captured intent.
- Never revert unrelated user work.
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.

