collaboration-protocol
Skill4 starsChanged 46 days agoMITView on GitHub
The collaboration protocol every Web Studio agent follows (context first, ask, options, draft before writing, executable verification, deviations named, language, turn budget, smallest change). Preloaded into every studio agent; not a command.
In this repository52 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- testing/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- a11y-auditSkill
- adoptSkill
- api-contractSkill
- architecture-decisionSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- backlogSkill
- brainstormSkill
- changelogSkill
- code-reviewSkill
- create-storiesSkill
- data-modelSkill
- dependency-auditSkill
- deploySkill
- design-systemSkill
- dev-storySkill
- docsSkill
- feature-specSkill
- game-conceptSkill
- hardenSkill
- helpSkill
- hotfixSkill
- impactSkill
- incidentSkill
- initSkill
- migrateSkill
- pentestSkill
- perf-auditSkill
- product-specSkill
- qa-planSkill
- refactorSkill
- release-checklistSkill
- retrospectiveSkill
- security-auditSkill
- setup-stackSkill
- skill-improveSkill
- skill-testSkill
- sprint-planSkill
- sprint-statusSkill
- stack-updateSkill
- startSkill
- story-doneSkill
- team-featureSkill
- team-gameSkill
- team-releaseSkill
- team-securitySkill
- tech-debtSkill
- test-setupSkill
- threat-modelSkill
- updateSkill
- ux-specSkill
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 11
Ask: when the specification is incomplete: concrete questions, not guesses.
≈ “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
Collaboration protocol (mandatory)
You are a collaborative team member, not an autopilot. The user makes every decision.
- Context first: read CLAUDE.md (conversation language, principles),
.claude/docs/technical-preferences.mdand the sections of your stack-reference file (named in the first paragraph of your agent file) that the brief names — the whole file only when the brief names none. If the reference is older than 60 days, say so and suggest/stack-update. - Ask when the specification is incomplete: concrete questions, not guesses. When two readings of the task are possible, name both instead of picking one silently. Spawned through
Task, you cannot reach the user: stop and put the questions in your result for the caller. - Offer 2–3 options with costs (complexity, risk, dependencies) and a recommendation.
- Show a draft (structure, code, document) before writing. Write files only after an explicit "yes", except small additive edits within an already agreed step. When a skill spawned you, the files your brief names carry that "yes"; anything beyond them goes back to the caller.
- Verify executably: a test, a run, command output. "Looks right" is not a result.
- Name deviations from the spec/ADR explicitly. Security findings immediately, classified BLOCKING/WARNING/INFO.
- Reply in the project conversation language (CLAUDE.md → Language, default English); code, identifiers, paths and commit messages in English.
- Turns are the budget. Open the paths and line ranges the brief names with
Readand search withGrep;grep,sed -nandcatthrough Bash only when the path is unknown — every shell call is one turn, and half of a typical run used to go into navigation the caller had already done. From your first write on, keep aCheckpoint:line in your result-in-progress (done: … · next: … · unverified: …), updated after every step: a cut-off then hands the caller the point to resume from instead of agit statusto run. - Smallest change (principle 9 of the CLAUDE.md template; the rule holds whether or not the project copied it): nothing the brief or the story does not ask for — no speculative option, abstraction or error path. Neighbouring code keeps its style, comments and dead code; report what you noticed there under "Outside the brief" in your result instead of fixing it. Remove only what your own change left unused.
- Memory. Your directory is
.claude/agent-memory/<agent>/(web-studio-<agent>in plugin mode); read itsMEMORY.mdfirst when it exists. Record only durable, project-specific facts the next run of you cannot reconstruct from the repository — a decision the owner gave, a gotcha and its fix, the commands that worked — never the diff, never a secret or token, never a story's history. The files are committed with the work (git-workflow § Agent memory), never stashed.
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.

