feedback
Skill86 starsChanged 9 days agoMITView on GitHub
Record stakeholder input — new constraints, corrections, or direction changes.
26 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- menot-you/n-soultheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- LightconeResearch/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- tydev-new/10xjobs-careercoachtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- ratomirjovanovic/pandawardtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- grace-method/grace-plugintheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- graphed-inc/marketing-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use refactor, debug and 4 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.
GitHubSkillrefactor
Surgical code refactoring to improve maintainability without changing behavior. Covers extracting functions, renaming variables, breaking down god functions, improving type safety, eliminating code smells, and applying design patterns. Less drastic than repo-rebuilder; use for gradual improvements.
Also in 3 projects that use this
AnthropicSkilldebug
Structured debugging session — reproduce, isolate, diagnose, and fix. Trigger with an error message or stack trace, "this works in staging but not prod", "something broke after the deploy", or when behavior diverges from expected and the cause isn't obvious.
Also in 3 projects that use this
BlockSkillplan
Draft a TDD, PRD, or lightweight plan in the conversation without committing it.
Also in 3 projects that use this
SentrySkillreview
Fixture review skill.
Also in 4 projects that use this
AWSSkillship
Finalize dev work on an issue branch — update docs, push, and open a PR.
Also in 3 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillhandoff
Compact the current conversation into a handoff document for another agent to pick up.
Also in 4 projects that use this
Other versions26 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 26
- spotify/portal-ai-plugins★ 2.8ksame name
- suboss87/FDEOps★ 940same name
- davekilleen/Dex★ 509same name
- austintgriffith/ethskills★ 303same name
- manager-dot-dev/manager-skills★ 114same name
- BaseInfinity/claude-sdlc-harness★ 53same name
- ratomirjovanovic/pandaward★ 50same name
- graphed-inc/marketing-skills★ 30same name
- kennethleungty/claude-music★ 23same name
- coltonjosephdean-rgb/Hyperframes-colton.ai.dean★ 19same name
16 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
- briefSkill
- calibrateSkill
- challengeSkill
- 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
1 rule. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 24 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
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
- Very specific: line 39
Run grainulator.compile to surface any new conflicts.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 24 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
/feedback -- Record stakeholder input
The user is relaying feedback from stakeholders that should be incorporated into the sprint.
Arguments
$ARGUMENTS
Instructions
- Parse the feedback: Identify what the stakeholder said. This could be:
- A new constraint ("CTO says prioritize speed over cost")
- A correction ("compliance says we need SOC2 Type II, not Type I")
- A direction change ("skip the custom build, focus on Auth0 vs Clerk")
- A new question ("what about latency in EU regions?")
- Create feedback claims as
f###claims:- Type:
constraintfor hard requirements,feedbackfor opinions/preferences - Evidence tier:
stated(stakeholder said it, not independently verified) - Tag with the stakeholder's name or role
- Type:
- Check for conflicts: Does this feedback contradict existing claims? If a stakeholder says "budget is $10K max" but research shows a solution at $15K, that's a conflict. Set
conflicts_withon the new feedback claim only; one edge is sufficient for the compiler. Preserve the original record. - Run
grainulator.compileto surface any new conflicts. Print result:
Feedback recorded: - <f001>: <summary> - <f002>: <summary> Conflicts introduced: <N> 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.

