session-report
Skill1 starsChanged 3 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Write the status report this session sends back to the main session that delegated the work - the scope it was given, what it accomplished, exactly what changed on disk, how that was verified, what remains outstanding, and how the remainder connects to the tasks the receiving session is managing - in one fenced code block. Use whenever a delegated, side, or parallel session has to report up, or the user says "session report", "report back", "write up what you did", "status synopsis", "summarize this session for the main session", or "what do I paste back". Written for a reader that already has the project in context and merges into a session that keeps running, so use handoff instead when the next session starts empty.
10 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Mark-Life/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- buildomator/buildomatortheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- vredin/vredin-CC-Harnesstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- davidanthonyn/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- anthropics/claude-plugins-officialtheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- amit-nayar/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 11, 2026
Other versions10 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 10
- anthropics/claude-plugins-official★ 46ksame name
- buildomator/buildomator★ 102same name
- cline/skills★ 35same name
- Codagent-AI/agent-skills★ 31same name
- vredin/vredin-CC-Harness★ 9same name
- Mark-Life/agent-skills★ 4same name
- Tamircohen28/tamirs-superpowers★ 2same name
- gcapodeferro02/my-agent-skills★ 1same name
- amit-nayar/skills★ 0same name
- davidanthonyn/claude-skills★ 0same name
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 repository24 other files it gives its agents.
- audit-fixSkill
- auditSkill
- commitSkill
- deps-auditSkill
- digestSkill
- flowchartSkill
- git-undoSkill
- handoffSkill
- hone-skillSkill
- kickoffSkill
- math-researchSkill
- new-skillSkill
- next-stepsSkill
- prompt-engineerSkill
- prune-test-suiteSkill
- release-notesSkill
- repo-adoptSkill
- repo-issue-scoutSkill
- resolve-tester-bugsSkill
- scaffold-auditSkill
- sidebarSkill
- sync-profile-readmeSkill
- rename-to-match-folderSkill
- worktree-cleanupSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 8 edited versions we read keep these.
4
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
- Distinctive: line 9
Write the report THIS session sends back up to the session that delegated the work.
- Distinctive: line 20
Every line should be something the reader could not already know.
- Distinctive: line 59
Never let an unverified claim sit next to a verified one unmarked — a reader merging this into live context will act on both equally.
- Distinctive: line 87
If this session was never given a scope — the user just started working — say that in Scope rather than inventing a mission after the fact.
- Very specific: line 89
If there is no delegating session at all, say so and stop.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 8 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
session-report
Write the report THIS session sends back up to the session that delegated the work. The reader is a running Claude Code session that already has the project in context — it does not need orienting, only updating.
Anything the user wants emphasized: $ARGUMENTS
What this is not
The reader already knows the project. Do not restate its shape, re-derive its
architecture, explain decisions it made itself, or open with a preamble. No
orient-first block — that is handoff's job, for a successor starting empty.
Every line should be something the reader could not already know.
Instructions
Re-check reality before writing. Report the repo, not your memory of it.
- Uncommitted work:
git status --shortandgit diff --stat HEAD. - Committed work needs a base commit, so establish one: the merge-base with
the default branch (
git merge-base HEAD origin/main, substituting the repo's actual default branch) when this session worked on its own branch, otherwise the newest commit ingit log --oneline -20that predates the session. Thengit log --oneline {base}..HEADandgit diff --stat {base}..HEAD. If no base can be established, say that in the report rather than guessing at what this session committed. git branch --show-current, un-pushed commits (git status -sb), and open PRs.- Anything created outside git — scratch files, generated artifacts, installed tooling — with absolute paths.
A file you changed and forgot is the most damaging thing a report of this kind can omit.
- Uncommitted work:
Compose the report with these sections, in this order. Keep every one — an empty section is stated as empty, never dropped, because a missing section reads as "nothing to report" rather than "not checked."
- Scope — what this session was asked to do, in one or two lines, plus
anything in that ask it deliberately did not do and why. When
$ARGUMENTScarries the delegating ask itself, that text is the source of truth here; otherwise reconstruct it and say it was reconstructed. - Done — what was accomplished, against that scope. If the scope had five items and three landed, say so here rather than letting the reader infer it from what is missing.
- Changed on disk — an explicit list of paths, one per line, each with a few words on what changed. Paths, not prose; taken from git in step 1, not from recollection. Include what was committed vs. left dirty, the branch, and anything written outside the repo. Say "no files changed" outright when that is the case.
- Verified — for each claim of working, the evidence: the command run and its actual result. Anything not verified is listed as not verified. Never let an unverified claim sit next to a verified one unmarked — a reader merging this into live context will act on both equally.
- Outstanding — what remains, each item labelled with why it remains: blocked (on what), deferred (by whose call), out of scope, or tried and rejected (with why). That last label is not filler — an approach this session ruled out is the one thing that stops the main session spending its own context rediscovering it.
- Back to the main session — the connective tissue, and the reason this is a report rather than a summary: which outstanding items belong on the reader's task list, what it should stop doing or no longer assume, what moved under it (shared files, branches, schemas, state it also touches), and any decision now waiting on it, marked ⛳.
- Scope — what this session was asked to do, in one or two lines, plus
anything in that ask it deliberately did not do and why. When
- Output the whole report in a single fenced code block, copy-ready, so it can be pasted into the main session in one motion. Use a four-backtick outer fence if the report itself contains triple-backtick fences. Do not write it to a file unless asked.
- After the block, add at most one line, marked ⛳ — and only for something the owner must act on personally, not the receiving session.
Notes
- Terse beats complete. This lands in a context window that is already full; every line spent on what the reader knows costs a line it needed.
- Report failures and dead ends as plainly as successes. A session that tried an approach and abandoned it saves the main session from retrying it, but only if the report says so.
- If this session was never given a scope — the user just started working — say that in Scope rather than inventing a mission after the fact.
- If there is no delegating session at all, say so and stop. Offer
handoffwhen the next session starts empty, or a plain chat summary when the user just wants to know where things stand. Do not address a reader that does not exist. - Back to the main session comes last on purpose, even though it is what the reader acts on first. Writing it after the other five forces it to be derived from them rather than from memory, which is what keeps it honest.
- Where the session's own narrative and git disagree, git wins. Say what the repo shows and flag the discrepancy.
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.

