fable-wise
Skill6 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Low-level agentic design patterns and cognitive reflexes across Depth, Breadth, Coil, and Mesh. Turns senior engineering wisdom into reflexes that remove bloat, preserve truth, prevent drift, and compound learning (re0, readchk, autobahn, ssotize, detool, feynman, debloat, sip, hate, macrothink, prism). Use when refactoring complex systems, stripping AI slop, rewriting drifted artifacts from clean v0, consolidating truth into single sources, or evaluating architectural decisions against contrarian counter-arguments.
In this repository55 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .codex/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- docs/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/fable-tend/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- skills/fable-wise/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/fable-tend/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/fable-tend/site/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/fable-wise/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- public/llms.txtllms.txt
- get-fableSkill
- typesafe-aiSkill
- get-fableSkill
- get-fableSkill
- fable-architectureSkill
- fable-artifactSkill
- fable-configSkill
- fable-context-thriftSkill
- fable-councilSkill
- fable-coworkSkill
- fable-datavizSkill
- fable-delegateSkill
- fable-discoverSkill
- fable-domainSkill
- fable-ecoSkill
- fable-evalSkill
- fable-executeSkill
- fable-finish-your-turnSkill
- fable-handoffSkill
- fable-healSkill
- fable-judgeSkill
- fable-learningSkill
- fable-loopSkill
- fable-memorySkill
- fable-methodSkill
- fable-native-codeSkill
- fable-outcome-firstSkill
- fable-planSkill
- fable-prove-itSkill
- fable-recoverSkill
- fable-redteamSkill
- fable-releaseSkill
- fable-researchSkill
- fable-reviewSkill
- fable-runSkill
- fable-scope-disciplineSkill
- fable-securitySkill
- fable-simplifySkill
- fable-simulatorSkill
- fable-skill-creatorSkill
- fable-sparkSkill
- fable-tddSkill
- fable-tendSkill
- fable-verifySkill
- get-fableSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
9 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈8
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 76
Remove marketing buzzwords, promotional adjectives, and AI boilerplate.
- Distinctive: line 84
When multiple documents or modules declare conflicting parameters, designate one canonical authority.
- Distinctive: line 85
Update all satellite references to point to the single authority.
- Distinctive: line 101
Use standard file viewing and editing tools to consolidate duplicated code and configs.
- Distinctive: line 103
Do not introduce third-party helper dependencies when native standard library features suffice.
- Distinctive: line 108
Test suites passing with 100% parity before and after simplification.
- Distinctive: line 112
If a debloating refactor breaks existing tests, identify the hidden invariant, document it explicitly, and restore passing behavior.
- Very specific: line 113
If a contrarian hate check reveals an unfixable flaw in a plan, abort the plan and report the flaw.
- Distinctive: line 117
All redundant boilerplate, unnecessary layers, and duplicate configurations stripped.
≈ “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
Fable Wise
Low-level cognitive reflexes and architectural patterns that counteract AI slop, complexity bloat, and artifact drift. Instead of adding speculative code and boilerplate, enforce patterns that simplify, cut, consolidate, and ground decisions in observable reality.
Purpose
Enforce senior architectural wisdom through cognitive reflexes across Depth, Breadth, Coil, and Mesh. Replace bloated abstractions with direct mechanisms, consolidate single sources of truth, rewrite heavily patched artifacts from clean v0, and stress-test plans with contrarian critiques.
When to Use
- Rewriting a drifted, heavily patched artifact into a clean v0 (
/re0). - Checking the model's interpretation of a subtle request before executing (
/readchk). - Carving unsafe scope out up front so the safe remainder runs at full strength (
/autobahn). - Auditing scattered facts and consolidating them into a single source of truth (
/ssotize). - Replacing incidental framework/stack nouns with fundamental language mechanisms (
/detool). - Pressing a newly made technical decision until it is simple or exposed as weak (
/feynman). - Stress-testing an engineering plan with the one contrarian objection that could kill it (
/hate). - Splitting an artifact across independent evaluation lenses to expose hidden conflicts (
/prism). - Tasting proposed changes with the repository's clean-and-true checks (
/sip).
When NOT to Use
- Routine small bugfixes with zero structural complexity (use
fable-execute). - Automated dependency updates or standard CI repair (use
fable-tend). - High-level multi-host lifecycle routing (use
get-fable).
Inputs
engineering_artifact: Code file, architecture document, configuration, or plan.pattern_directive: Selected Paperthin cognitive reflex or command (e.g.re0,detool,ssotize,hate).
Expected Outputs
debloated_artifact: A simplified, drift-free artifact grounded in native language primitives.consolidated_truth: Single source of truth configuration eliminating duplicated parameters.
Procedure
- Stage 1 — Cardinality & Temporal Classification:
- Depth (One artifact, now): Is this single artifact clean, minimal, and true? Apply
re0,readchk,detool,debloat,feynman. - Breadth (Many artifacts, now): Is one truth consistent everywhere? Apply
ssotize,reorder. - Coil (One project, across iterations): Did each cycle teach the next? Apply
re0-loop,re0-memo,re0-work,catchup,nba. - Mesh (Many perspectives, across rounds): Does the group converge on truth? Apply
prism.
- Depth (One artifact, now): Is this single artifact clean, minimal, and true? Apply
- Stage 2 — Bloat Removal & Mechanism Substitution:
- Remove marketing buzzwords, promotional adjectives, and AI boilerplate.
- Replace incidental third-party library nouns with standard language mechanisms.
- Compress bloated artifacts to their load-bearing density: cut words, never rules.
- Stage 3 — Contrarian Testing & Cold Reads:
- Apply the Feynman check: explain the decision in simple terms without jargon.
- Apply the Hate check: find the single fatal flaw and devise the cheapest test to falsify it.
- Cold-read the artifact as a detached third party: does it stand alone without prior conversation context?
- Stage 4 — Single Source Consolidation (SSOT):
- When multiple documents or modules declare conflicting parameters, designate one canonical authority.
- Update all satellite references to point to the single authority; eliminate duplicative drift.
Decision Rules
| Tempting Rationalization | Hard Reality / Invariant | Why |
| "Adding more explanations makes the document clearer." | Violation. Explanations dilute core rules. | Bloated documents cause agents to miss critical instructions. |
| "We should patch this legacy file one more time." | Violation. When patches accumulate, rewrite to a clean v0 (re0). | Repeated patching conceals underlying design rot. |
| "The plan looks great to everyone; no need to object." | Forbidden. Always apply the contrarian test (hate). | Identifying fatal flaws early costs minutes; finding them in prod costs weeks. |
| "Duplicating this config in two places is harmless." | Forbidden. Consolidate to one SSOT immediately (ssotize). | Duplicate configurations inevitably drift out of sync. |
- Prioritize removal over addition: removing bloat, removing drift, removing unproven assumptions.
- An artifact is finished not when nothing more can be added, but when nothing more can be removed without losing required behavior.
Tool Policy
- Use standard file viewing and editing tools to consolidate duplicated code and configs.
- Execute project linters and tests to verify behavior is preserved after debloating.
- Do not introduce third-party helper dependencies when native standard library features suffice.
Evidence Requirements
- Diff showing net reduction in code lines or documentation complexity.
- Test suites passing with 100% parity before and after simplification.
Failure Handling
- If a debloating refactor breaks existing tests, identify the hidden invariant, document it explicitly, and restore passing behavior.
- If a contrarian
hatecheck reveals an unfixable flaw in a plan, abort the plan and report the flaw.
Completion Criteria
- All redundant boilerplate, unnecessary layers, and duplicate configurations stripped.
- Single source of truth established and verified across all referencing files.
- Behavioral correctness confirmed by passing test execution.
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.

