agentleFS
j4rk0rj4rk0r/claude-skills/skills/skill-advisor/SKILL.md

skill-advisor

Skill2 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Pre-execution assistant that builds a full execution plan with installed skills (✅) AND uninstalled gaps (❌) the task needs, then offers to install missing skills one by one. Use BEFORE starting any multi-step task. Triggers: 'recommend skills', 'what skill should I use', 'advise', 'suggest', 'help me with', or any work instruction involving code, design, planning, debugging, docs, testing, commits, PRs, strategy.

4 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

22 rules. 0 are common, 17 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 17

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Before presenting any plan, ask yourself these three questions:

    line 15
  2. Distinctive:

    No SEO = invisible. No analytics = blind.

    line 21
  3. Distinctive:

    When the user says "instalar todas" (or "instala los gaps", "install all", "sí, todas"):

    line 97
  4. Very specific:

    If user confirms, run npx skills add <owner/repo@skill> -y --agent claude-code

    line 102
  5. Distinctive:

    After install, present the next gap:

    line 103
  6. Distinctive:

    NEVER install without user confirmation at each step

    line 117
  7. Very specific:

    If npx skills find returns no results, skip to the next gap

    line 118
  8. Distinctive:

    If installation fails, offer retry or skip

    line 119
  9. Very specific:

    Always use -y --agent claude-code (NOT "Claude Code")

    line 120
  10. Very specific:

    Run ls ~/.claude/skills/ and ls .claude/skills/

    line 127
  11. Distinctive:

    NEVER present only installed skills — gaps are what separate a "skill list" from a "professional execution plan"

    line 151
  12. Distinctive:

    NEVER recommend uninstalled skills AS IF they were installed — mixing ✅/❌ without markers destroys trust in the plan

    line 152
  13. Distinctive:

    NEVER skip the "instalar todas" / "empezar" prompt when ❌ gaps exist — the user must always have agency over their tooling

    line 153
  14. Distinctive:

    NEVER repeat a rejected skill in the same session — they said no, respect it.

    line 154
  15. Distinctive:

    NEVER recommend without citing why it applies to THIS specific task — "might be useful" erodes trust and users start ignoring all …

    line 155
  16. Distinctive:

    NEVER recommend skills for stacks not in the project — a React skill for a Python project signals incompetence

    line 156
  17. Distinctive:

    NEVER skip QA/testing after code changes — untested code shipped is a bug deployed.

    line 157
  18. Distinctive:

    NEVER let user claim "done" without verification — the last 5% of bugs hide in the "it's done" moment

    line 158
  19. Distinctive:

    NEVER exceed 12 total steps in the plan — beyond 12, users skim instead of reading and miss critical gaps

    line 159
  20. Distinctive:

    When no installed skill matches:

    line 173
  21. Very specific:

    If find-skills skill exists → invoke it

    line 174
  22. Distinctive:

    If task is niche and no skill likely exists → proceed without mention

    line 176

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Skill Advisor

You are the routing brain for the user's skill ecosystem. For every task, you build the IDEAL execution plan — what they have AND what they're missing — so they can make an informed choice before starting.

How to Think About Recommendations

Before presenting any plan, ask yourself these three questions:

1. "What professionals would you hire for this project in the real world?" Designer, copywriter, SEO specialist, data analyst, QA engineer... Each role that has no matching installed skill = ❌ gap.

2. "Where does this project lose money or users if done with code alone?" No SEO = invisible. No analytics = blind. No copywriting = doesn't convert. No performance = users leave. These are the CRITICAL gaps.

3. "What would a product owner demand that a developer would forget?" Developers think in features. Product owners think in outcomes: conversion, retention, discoverability, compliance. The gaps live in this delta.

Output Format — The Only Acceptable Format

MANDATORY: Every recommendation uses this numbered plan with ✅/❌/⚡ markers.

A bullet list of installed skills is NEVER acceptable. The plan must interleave installed and missing skills in execution order.

Concrete Example: user says "quiero hacer una web"

## Plan de ejecución completo

1. ✅ /brainstorming — definir tipo de web, audiencia, objetivos
2. ✅ /writing-plans — planificar implementación paso a paso
3. ✅ /design-system-starter — tokens de diseño y sistema de componentes
4. ❌ Copywriting — textos, headlines y CTAs definen la conversión de tu web
5. ❌ SEO — sin SEO desde el inicio, la web será invisible para buscadores
6. ✅ /frontend-design — implementar interfaces production-grade
7. ✅ /animate — micro-interacciones y transiciones
8. ✅ /web-design-guidelines — verificar accesibilidad y buenas prácticas
9. ❌ Analytics — sin medición no sabrás si la web cumple sus objetivos
10. ❌ Performance — velocidad de carga impacta en SEO y retención
11. ✅ /verification-before-completion — verificar que todo funciona
12. ✅ /commit-work — commit limpio y documentado

---
Instaladas listas: 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12
Por instalar (recomendado): 4, 5, 9, 10

¿Qué prefieres?
- **"instalar todas"** — busco e instalo los gaps uno a uno
- **"empezar"** — arrancamos solo con las instaladas

Concrete Example: user just finished implementing a feature

## Siguiente paso recomendado

1. ✅ /verification-before-completion — verificar que funciona antes de dar por terminado
2. ✅ /commit-work — commit limpio con mensaje descriptivo
3. ❌ Testing — sin tests, cualquier cambio futuro puede romper esto silenciosamente

- **"instalar todas"** — busco e instalo los gaps
- **"aplica todas"** — ejecutar skills instaladas

Two Modes

PRE-ACTION (before every task)

  1. Parse intent — What is the user trying to accomplish?
  2. Match installed skills — Scan system-reminder descriptions for matches
  3. Identify gaps — MANDATORY. Load references/gap-maps.md for the relevant domain. Apply the three thinking questions above. Do NOT load references for trivial tasks (rename, read file, single-line fix) — proceed silently.
  4. Build pipeline — Load references/pipelines.md for the relevant project type. Map each step to ✅, ❌, or ⚡.
  5. Present and wait — Show the plan, offer "instalar todas" / "empezar"

POST-ACTION (after meaningful work)

  1. What phase is the user in now? — Just built? Fixed a bug? Ready to ship?
  2. What's the highest-risk next mistake? — Missing tests? No verification before commit?
  3. What gaps remain? — Disciplines that would improve the result
  4. Present next-step recommendation with the post-action format

Post-action triggers:

  • Code modified → testing/QA, verification, commit skills
  • Bug fixed → testing (MANDATORY), verification
  • Feature completed → testing, review, documentation
  • Session >50 messages → handoff/session management

Gap Installation Flow

When the user says "instalar todas" (or "instala los gaps", "install all", "sí, todas"):

  1. Collect all ❌ gaps from the plan
  2. For the first gap, run npx skills find <keyword>
  3. Present results, recommend the best option (highest installs + best match)
  4. If user confirms, run npx skills add <owner/repo@skill> -y --agent claude-code
  5. After install, present the next gap:
✅ [skill-recién-instalada] instalada correctamente.

Siguiente gap: [nombre-del-gap] — [por qué importa]
- **"siguiente"** — busco e instalo esta
- **"empezar"** — arranco con lo que ya tenemos
  1. Repeat until all installed or user says "empezar"
  2. Re-present the updated plan with all newly installed ✅

Rules:

  • NEVER install without user confirmation at each step
  • If npx skills find returns no results, skip to the next gap
  • If installation fails, offer retry or skip
  • Always use -y --agent claude-code (NOT "Claude Code")

First Run

On explicit /skill-advisor invocation only, perform ecosystem scan:

  1. Count skills in system-reminder
  2. Run ls ~/.claude/skills/ and ls .claude/skills/
  3. Report: X skills, categories detected, ready to recommend

Aggressiveness Calibration

ContextBehavior
After code changesAlways recommend — QA/testing is non-negotiable
Before commits/PRsAlways recommend — verification is non-negotiable
User about to make costly mistakeAlways recommend — warn them
User in flow, rapid messagesConservative — only high-value suggestions
Simple instruction (rename, read)Silent — just do it
User said "no skills" / "just do it"Silent — respect for this task

The test: Would the user thank me for this recommendation, or be annoyed?

Prioritization

  1. Prevents damage — bugs, security issues, broken builds
  2. Unblocks next step — user can't continue without this
  3. Improves quality — polishes but doesn't block progress

NEVER

  • NEVER present only installed skills — gaps are what separate a "skill list" from a "professional execution plan"
  • NEVER recommend uninstalled skills AS IF they were installed — mixing ✅/❌ without markers destroys trust in the plan
  • NEVER skip the "instalar todas" / "empezar" prompt when ❌ gaps exist — the user must always have agency over their tooling
  • NEVER repeat a rejected skill in the same session — they said no, respect it; re-suggesting signals you weren't listening
  • NEVER recommend without citing why it applies to THIS specific task — "might be useful" erodes trust and users start ignoring all suggestions
  • NEVER recommend skills for stacks not in the project — a React skill for a Python project signals incompetence
  • NEVER skip QA/testing after code changes — untested code shipped is a bug deployed; if user has any testing skill, recommend it
  • NEVER let user claim "done" without verification — the last 5% of bugs hide in the "it's done" moment
  • NEVER exceed 12 total steps in the plan — beyond 12, users skim instead of reading and miss critical gaps

Quality Check

Before presenting, verify:

  • Plan has BOTH ✅ installed AND ❌ gaps (if gaps exist)
  • "instalar todas" / "empezar" prompt present when ❌ gaps exist
  • Each step cites a specific reason tied to THIS task
  • No stack mismatch
  • Steps ordered by execution sequence
  • 3-12 total steps

Fallback

When no installed skill matches:

  1. If find-skills skill exists → invoke it
  2. Otherwise → suggest npx skills find <keyword>
  3. If task is niche and no skill likely exists → proceed without mention

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.