brief
Skill86 starsChanged 9 days agoMITView on GitHub
Generate a compiled decision brief from the current sprint's claims.
78 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- serhiileniv/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- serhiileniv/ccstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- fjwood69/moritheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- cathyzhang0905/agent-cockpittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- nisarth/claude-skills-storetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- JohnnyMcGee/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use capture, strategy and 10 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.
toneron2Skillcapture
Capture thoughts to inbox with automatic classification
Also in 6 projects that use this
EpistatesSkillstrategy
Plan weekly or monthly X content strategy. Use when the user wants to plan their content calendar, set growth goals, build a content pipeline, or think strategically about their X presence.
Also in 4 projects that use this
aleksander-dytkoSkilldecision
Make a product decision with full context from the vault and available sources
Also in 3 projects that use this
dirienSkilldecide
Three-agent adversarial debate protocol for strategic decisions. Two advocates steelman opposing positions while a moderator identifies risks and synthesizes a binding consensus. Use when choosing between alternatives, evaluating tradeoffs, or making high-stakes decisions.
Also in 5 projects that use this
JaimeGBASkillingest
Digest an external source (article, paper, transcript, URL, book chapter) and integrate its content into the knowledge base
Also in 7 projects that use this
howellsSkillreconcile
Audit a project against current plugin conventions and offer to update structure.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions78 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 78
- anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins★ 35ksame name
- suboss87/FDEOps★ 940same name
- with-pebbly/aseprite-ai-artist★ 473same name
- educlopez/ui-craft★ 441same name
- github/lever★ 279same name
- dylanroscover/Embody★ 213same name
- yofine/skills★ 154same name
- g2i-ai/agents★ 52same name
- gregmos/memoforge★ 38same name
- manusco/resonance★ 38same name
68 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 repository20 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- analyticsSkill
- blind-spotSkill
- calibrateSkill
- challengeSkill
- feedbackSkill
- fetchSkill
- grainulatorSkill
- healthcheckSkill
- initSkill
- orchestrateSkill
- presentSkill
- pullSkill
- researchSkill
- resolveSkill
- routerSkill
- setupSkill
- statusSkill
- syncSkill
- witnessSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 71 edited versions we read keep these.
2
Distinctive
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 33
If compilation reports unresolved conflicts, resolve them using available evidence within the existing authorization.
- Distinctive: line 36
Check whether the evidence supports the requested decision and scope.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 71 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
/brief -- Generate a decision brief
The user wants a compiled output document from the current sprint.
Arguments
$ARGUMENTS
Optional: output format (pdf, html, md). Default: html.
Instructions
- Run
grainulator.compileto ensure compilation is current and there are no blocking conflicts.- If compilation reports unresolved conflicts, resolve them using available evidence within the existing authorization. Request user input only for a decision that cannot be inferred; do not present blocked findings as settled.
- Check sprint readiness via
grainulator.status:- Check whether the evidence supports the requested decision and scope.
- Investigate material gaps; do not require a claim count or topic quota.
- Describe remaining uncertainty honestly.
- Read
compilation.json-- this is the source of truth, never read claims.json directly for output. - Read the template at
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/sidebar-brief.htmlfor the canonical accessible HTML structure. Follow its structure and accessibility markup; vary the content, not the shell. Note: the path uses${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}because the template lives in the Grainulator plugin directory, not the user's repo. Generate the brief with
grainulator.exports_convert, using the actual catalog IDs rather than filename extensions:Requested output Converter format Output path HTML (default) html-reportoutput/brief.htmlMarkdown / md markdownoutput/brief.mdPDF html-report, then local PDF renderingoutput/brief.pdfFor example, call
exports_convertwith:{"dir":"<sprint>","format":"html-report","source":"compilation.json","output":"output/brief.html"}The converter does not accept a template argument. Use the generated artifact as a starting point, then customize its HTML with the sidebar-brief template: executive summary, findings by topic, risks, recommendations and an evidence appendix. Preserve claim IDs and verify the accessibility requirements below. For another supported output, discover its exact ID through
exports_formats.For PDF, finish the HTML first. Use an available local renderer; for example, when Playwright and Chromium are installed, load the local HTML, emulate print media, and call
page.pdf({path: <absolute-pdf-path>, printBackground: true}). If no PDF renderer is available, deliver the HTML and state that PDF rendering remains unavailable; the user can use their browser’s Print → Save as PDF. Do not callexports_convertwith formatpdf, or claim a PDF exists before verifying the file.- WCAG compliance checklist -- first read and apply every item from
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/templates/wcag-shared.md, then verify these brief-specific items:<nav aria-label="Table of contents">wrapping sidebar linksaria-current="page"on active sidebar link (JS IntersectionObserver updates this)- Heading hierarchy:
<h1>page title,<h2>sections,<h3>subsections -- never skip levels - All
<table>elements have<caption>and<th scope="col|row"> - Mobile sidebar uses
<details><summary>disclosure, notdisplay: none - Tags include text prefix (e.g., "Tested: verified"), never color alone
- Write output to
output/brief.<ext>in the sprint directory. Print summary:
Brief generated: output/brief.<ext> Claims: <count> active, <count> topics Strongest evidence: <tier> Auto - <authorized next action> Manual - <action requiring the user, or None.>
Host access
Use available grainulator MCP tools, passing the active sprint dir explicitly for evidence operations. If a tool is unavailable, use the local grainulator CLI (or node <checkout>/bin/grainulator.js). Read sibling skill files directly when slash commands are unavailable. Resolve template paths relative to this skill’s checkout when CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT is unset. Optional external connectors are not required for local work; use local code, supplied documents, or available web tools. Do not write managed ledger files directly to bypass a missing MCP connection.
Next-step output
For standalone fetch, setup, or read-only orchestration without an evidence sprint, derive next steps from that task. Do not initialize or compile an unrelated ledger just to produce this footer.
When working in an evidence sprint, use the current compiler's next_actions to present exactly two bullet lists labeled Auto and Manual. Auto is work the agent can continue under existing authorization. Manual is only work requiring the user's decision, access, or action. Classify using the current request and constraints; compiler suggestions never grant permission. Continue authorized Auto work without asking again.
Keep 2–3 useful actions total when available, use short concrete labels and commands where useful, and show None. for an empty group. Do not invent work to fill a quota. Never omit next steps merely because compilation is ready or the answer should be brief. Refresh stale compilation first and exclude work the user removed from scope. When the user asks only for next steps, output only these two lists: no findings recap, counts, reasons, or offer to continue.
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.

