setup-goal
Skill5 starsChanged 11 days agoMITView on GitHub
Turns an idea into an approved goal package under ai-artifacts. Use when work needs clarified intent, scope, accepted facts, an implementation plan, and an explicit handoff.
In this repository23 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- architecture-knowledge-baseSkill
- audio-transcribeSkill
- better-uiSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- broSkill
- chatgpt-imagegenSkill
- coding-standardsSkill
- decision-roomSkill
- deslopifySkill
- domain-modelingSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- gemini-ttsSkill
- goalSkill
- readbackSkill
- rephraseSkill
- reply-broSkill
- skill-cleanerSkill
- strunk-writing-qualitySkill
- technical-writingSkill
- tech-specSkill
- tool-installSkill
- type-breakdownSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
15 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈10
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 12
Do not implement the goal while running this skill.
- Distinctive: line 26
Create files only as their phase is reached.
- Distinctive: line 34
If no question tool exists, present a short, answerable bundle in chat.
- Distinctive: line 37
Never require or install Plannotator.
- Distinctive: line 43
Ask the user to correct the restatement before continuing.
- Very specific: line 45
Create ai-artifacts/goals/<slug>/ after the outcome and slug are clear.
- Distinctive: line 63
Ask only questions whose answers could change scope, user-visible behavior, architecture, data, permissions, safety, rollout, or success …
- Distinctive: line 65
Prefer fewer high-leverage questions over exhaustive questionnaires.
- Distinctive: line 89
Do not leave a blocking question unresolved.
- Very specific: line 97
Write accepted facts to facts.md:
- Very specific: line 107
Write matching metadata to facts.meta.json:
- Very specific: line 121
Use stable IDs. recommendedAutomatedVerification records the agent's recommendation.
- Distinctive: line 148
Do not fabricate progress.
- Distinctive: line 170
Before finishing, verify that every link resolves, every fact has matching metadata, the plan covers every fact, and no blocking decision …
- Very specific: line 180
When intent or facts change, return the package to setup rather than silently changing the execution contract.
≈ “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
Setup Goal
Turn an idea into an execution-ready package at ai-artifacts/goals/<slug>/. Extract intent, resolve material uncertainty, agree on testable facts, and produce a concrete plan before implementation begins.
Do not implement the goal while running this skill.
Goal package
ai-artifacts/goals/<slug>/
├── intent.md
├── facts.md
├── facts.meta.json
├── plan.md
├── dev-log.md
└── goal.mdCreate files only as their phase is reached. Markdown files are the human-readable source of truth. Tool-specific working files may live beside them but must not become required inputs for execution.
Choose the interaction path
Inspect which question and review tools are available before asking the user anything.
- For several material decisions, prefer Plannotator when the
plannotatorCLI is available. Read PLANNOTATOR.md and use its interview and review adapters. - Otherwise, use the host's structured question or interview tool.
- If no question tool exists, present a short, answerable bundle in chat.
- For one quick decision, use the lightest available question tool instead of opening a full interview.
Never require or install Plannotator. The goal workflow must work without it.
1. Rearticulate the goal
State the intended outcome in two or three sentences. Include who benefits and what changes. If the request is vague, perform only enough repository exploration to ground the restatement.
Ask the user to correct the restatement before continuing. Do not ask them to repeat details already present in the conversation.
Create ai-artifacts/goals/<slug>/ after the outcome and slug are clear.
2. Extract intent
Inspect repository instructions, relevant code, docs, tests, configuration, prior decisions, and similar implementations. Answer factual questions from evidence instead of asking the user.
Separate what you learn into:
- Outcome: the observable result the user wants.
- Audience: who uses or operates it.
- Problem: why the change matters.
- Scope: behavior included in this goal.
- Non-goals: nearby behavior intentionally excluded.
- Constraints: technical, product, security, time, compatibility, or policy limits.
- Decisions: choices only the user can make.
- Assumptions: low-risk defaults accepted provisionally.
- Unknowns: unresolved items that could materially change the work.
Ask only questions whose answers could change scope, user-visible behavior, architecture, data, permissions, safety, rollout, or success criteria. Each question should include context, meaningful options when possible, and a recommended answer.
Prefer fewer high-leverage questions over exhaustive questionnaires. Do not use a relentless one-question loop. Bundle related decisions when the available tool supports it.
Write intent.md:
# Intent
## Outcome
## Audience and problem
## Scope
## Non-goals
## Constraints
## Decisions
## Assumptions
## Open questionsDo not leave a blocking question unresolved. The user may explicitly accept a named assumption instead.
3. Build the fact contract
Convert the approved intent into a flat list of concrete, testable facts. A fact describes observable behavior, a boundary, or a verifiable constraint. Keep implementation choices out unless they are themselves approved requirements.
Review the facts with the user. They must be able to accept, edit, or remove each fact. Do not proceed until the fact set is explicitly approved.
Write accepted facts to facts.md:
# Facts
- The system ...
- A user can ...
- The change does not ...Write matching metadata to facts.meta.json:
[
{
"id": "fact-1",
"text": "The accepted fact text.",
"comment": "",
"recommendedAutomatedVerification": true,
"automatedVerification": true
}
]Use stable IDs. recommendedAutomatedVerification records the agent's recommendation; automatedVerification records the user's accepted choice. Set them to true when a concrete automated check should prove the fact. Preserve user comments that affect interpretation.
4. Produce the plan
Explore the implementation path for every accepted fact. Trace existing code and name exact files or systems where possible.
Write plan.md with:
- a brief solution approach;
- ordered, bounded implementation steps;
- files or systems touched by each step;
- concrete verification for each step;
- coverage for every fact marked
automatedVerification: true; - risks, accepted assumptions, and remaining non-blocking unknowns.
Review the plan with the user using the best available review tool. Prefer Plannotator annotation when available; otherwise request explicit approval through the host's question tool or chat. If rejected, revise and review again.
5. Finalize the package
Create dev-log.md:
# Dev Log
Status: Not startedDo not fabricate progress. Execution appends work and evidence later.
Create goal.md:
# Goal
{One to three sentences describing the approved outcome.}
## Contract
- [Intent](./intent.md)
- [Facts](./facts.md)
- [Fact metadata](./facts.meta.json)
- [Plan](./plan.md)
- [Dev log](./dev-log.md)
## Done when
{Concise completion condition derived from the accepted facts and plan.}Before finishing, verify that every link resolves, every fact has matching metadata, the plan covers every fact, and no blocking decision remains.
Tell the user the package path and that it is ready for the goal execution skill. If the host exposes a /goal command, it may be launched as:
/goal ai-artifacts/goals/<slug>/goal.mdRevisions
When intent or facts change, return the package to setup rather than silently changing the execution contract. Update intent.md, review affected facts again, revise the plan, and preserve stable fact IDs where their meaning did not change.
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.

