preflight
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
7-question clarity exercise before any AI session or major decision. Pen-and-paper discipline adapted for interactive use. Activates on "preflight", "before we start", "clarify my thinking", "what am I trying to do", "help me think through this", "I'm about to start", or "pre-session checklist."
47 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- sohaibt/product-modetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- KadirHarmanc/nazar-skilltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- zedarvates/frugal-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- codiume/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- me2resh/apexyardtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- vzhukovs/podman-desktop-kittheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use adr, ship and 9 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.
asterkinSkilladr
Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) following project standards. Guides template usage, process, and best practices for documenting architecturally significant decisions.
Also in 3 projects that use this
AWSSkillship
Finalize dev work on an issue branch — update docs, push, and open a PR.
Also in 5 projects that use this
MicrosoftSkillreport
Turn an exploration (threads, findings, charts) into a single Markdown report — note, blog post, executive summary, KPI dashboard, slide brief, or multi-section analytical report, with embedded charts.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Google CloudSkilltriage
Gather context on a change or bug and plan the implementation.
Also in 4 projects that use this
AnthropicSkillstatus
Case status summary by audience — client-facing (plain language), internal (for the professor), or court-ready (formal caption format per local rules). Same facts, different framing and depth. Use when a student needs to update the client, brief the professor, or prepare a court status report.
Also in 3 projects that use this
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
Other versions47 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 47
- webiny/webiny-js★ 8ksame name
- CrowdDotDev/crowd.dev★ 3.4ksame name
- tphakala/birdnet-go★ 2.4ksame name
- openfootmanager/openfootmanager★ 1.2ksame name
- mohebifar/tooscut★ 716same name
- me2resh/apexyard★ 542same name
- linuxfoundation/insights★ 288same name
- sohaibt/product-mode★ 176same name
- unlearndev/skills★ 101same name
- ogulcancelik/agent-skills★ 81same name
37 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 repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- ai-graduationSkill
- arbitrage-auditSkill
- assumption-mapperSkill
- b2b-idea-vettingSkill
- codifySkill
- decision-briefSkill
- design-thinking-liteSkill
- grill-meSkill
- grill-with-docsSkill
- innovation-diagnosticSkill
- kill-goSkill
- problem-framingSkill
- pull-frameworkSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 42 edited versions we read keep these.
9
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 18
Ask for the outcome, not the task.
- Distinctive: line 20
If the user gives a task, ask: "That's what you're doing.
- Distinctive: line 26
Ask: "What happens if you succeed?
- Distinctive: line 32
If it's not specific enough to verify, push back: "How would someone else know this was done?"
- Distinctive: line 38
Ask: "If this goes badly, what does that look like?
- Distinctive: line 46
Ask: "What would a new person on this project not know that would bite them?"
- Distinctive: line 52
Ask: "If you had to break this into chunks, what are they?
- Distinctive: line 58
Ask: "What part of this keeps you up at night?
- Distinctive: line 62
After all 7 questions, produce a preflight brief:
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 42 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
The 7 Questions
Walk the user through each question sequentially. Do NOT skip ahead. Do NOT accept vague answers. Push back on anything that isn't specific enough to act on.
1. What am I actually trying to accomplish?
Ask for the outcome, not the task. "Build a dashboard" is a task. "Enable regional managers to compare quarterly performance without waiting for the analytics team" is an outcome.
If the user gives a task, ask: "That's what you're doing. What changes in the world when it's done?"
2. Why does this matter?
Consequence of success AND failure. Both sides. If the user can't articulate why failure matters, the work might not matter enough to do.
Ask: "What happens if you succeed? What happens if you don't do this at all?"
3. What does "done" look like?
Specific, observable description. Not "a good dashboard" but "a self-serve report that 5 regional managers use weekly without asking the data team for help."
If it's not specific enough to verify, push back: "How would someone else know this was done?"
4. What does "wrong" look like?
This is the most important question. Name the failure modes. What would make this a waste of time? What would make it actively harmful?
Ask: "If this goes badly, what does that look like? What's the worst version of 'done'?"
CRITICAL: Most people skip this question. Don't let them. Failure modes are where the real thinking happens.
5. What do I already know that I haven't written down?
Institutional knowledge, context, prior attempts, political dynamics, constraints nobody documents.
Ask: "What would a new person on this project not know that would bite them?"
6. What are the pieces?
Decomposition and dependencies. What are the 3-7 major components? What depends on what? What's the critical path?
Ask: "If you had to break this into chunks, what are they? Which ones can't start until others finish?"
7. What's the hard part?
Where does uncertainty live? What haven't you figured out yet? What scares you about this?
Ask: "What part of this keeps you up at night? Where's the risk you can't control?"
Output
After all 7 questions, produce a preflight brief:
# Preflight Brief: [Topic]
Date: [date]
## Outcome
[Answer to Q1 — one sentence]
## Stakes
- Success: [Q2 success side]
- Failure: [Q2 failure side]
## Definition of Done
[Q3 — specific, observable]
## Failure Modes
[Q4 — numbered list]
## Context & Constraints
[Q5 — what's not written down]
## Components & Dependencies
[Q6 — decomposition with critical path noted]
## Hard Parts
[Q7 — where uncertainty lives]
## Recommended First Step
[Your recommendation based on the hard parts]Principle
Clarity you bring to AI > clarity AI can generate for you. This exercise forces the user to think before the AI thinks for them.
Based on Nate Jones' Human Prompt Preflight framework.
Next step
Plan is clear → run grill-me to pressure-test it. Problem still fuzzy → run problem-framing to diagnose before you scope.
Part of the ThinkHaven Method Kit by Kevin Holland. Full Board of Directors experience: ThinkHaven
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.

