localize
Skill2 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Resolve a change request into an EXACT edit target before touching code, then gate the edit on tests — the localize → edit → validate loop. Use for a bug fix, an issue, or a feature change where the right files/symbols are not already obvious, or when the user says "이거 고쳐줘", "어디를 고쳐야 해?", "fix this issue", "where does this live?". Produces a localization artifact (targets + evidence + uncertainty) first; edits only after it, validates with a focused test then a regression run.
22 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- optiflowic/keyturntheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Mharbulous/probanda-devtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudiostheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- JoblessJoe/local-llm-workertheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- berkayburakk/tubecrewtheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- JoblessJoe/localizetheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use soak-test, team-live-ops and 10 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.
lilangMaxSkillsoak-test
Generate a soak test protocol for extended play sessions. Defines what to observe, measure, and log during long play sessions to surface slow leaks, fatigue effects, and edge cases that only appear after sustained play. Primarily used in Polish and Release phases.
Also in 9 projects that use this
lilangMaxSkillteam-live-ops
Orchestrate the live-ops team for post-launch content planning: coordinates live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer, and narrative-director to design and plan a season, event, or live content update.
Also in 9 projects that use this
- +10 more from lilangMax
Other versions22 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 22
- Donchitos/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 27ksame name
- ryokun6/ryos★ 1.3ksame name
- pixel-cellar/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 324same name
- striderZA/OpenCodeGameStudios★ 118same name
- tranhieutt/software_development_department★ 71same name
- cenconq25/claude-code-app-studio★ 40same name
- rainday/smart-blog-skills★ 35same name
- CoralGame/Claude-Code-Game-Studios★ 19same name
- dawn840705/codex-code-studios★ 17same name
- lilangMax/ClaudeCodeGameStudios★ 8same name
12 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 repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- adrSkill
- assessSkill
- blast-radiusSkill
- coding-guidelinesSkill
- diagnoseSkill
- handoffSkill
- introspectSkill
- new-specSkill
- pickupSkill
- tddSkill
- worktreeSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
6 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 21 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 17
Do NOT start editing from the first plausible file.
- Very specific: line 30
Search from those signals: grep the error string / symbol.
- Distinctive: line 34
If tests exist, use the failing test (or write one that reproduces the symptom) to point at the fault — a failing test IS localization …
- Distinctive: line 53
Focused first: run the specific test covering the change (or the reproducer from step 1).
- Very specific: line 55
Regression next: run the stack's test command (the repo's detected test_cmd).
- Distinctive: line 68
No blind retries: if two edits don't pass, re-localize (the target was wrong), don't loop on the same site — broad retry loops compound …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 21 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
localize — localize → edit → validate
Do NOT start editing from the first plausible file. Empirically, a staged localize → repair → validate loop resolves real repository issues at a fraction of the cost of broad autonomous exploration (Agentless, arXiv 2407.01489), and the benchmark contract for "resolved" is a change whose tests pass (SWE-bench, arXiv 2310.06770). This skill enforces that discipline: name the target with evidence, make the minimal edit, then prove it with tests.
1. LOCALIZE — produce the target before editing
From the request, find the exact edit site(s). Do NOT edit in this phase.
- Extract the concrete signals from the request: error text, stack trace, symptom, endpoint / field / component name, the file it mentions.
- Search from those signals:
grepthe error string / symbol;globthe module; read the suspected files. For a symbol you will change, run/harness-kit:blast-radius <symbol>to enumerate everything that depends on it, so the edit scope is known up front (not discovered after a half-fix). - If tests exist, use the failing test (or write one that reproduces the symptom) to point at the fault — a failing test IS localization evidence.
Localization artifact (write it down, BLUF):
- Targets: each
file:line+ symbol you intend to change, with the evidence that put it there (the grep hit / the failing test / the reference). - Impact: the blast-radius set for any changed signature (callsites that must move together).
- Uncertainty: what you are NOT sure about + the candidate you'd check next. Non-empty is honest; a confident-but-wrong target is the failure mode here.
2. EDIT — minimal, scoped to the target
Make the smallest change that addresses the request at the localized site. Update every callsite the blast-radius set named — do not leave a half-migrated signature. Match the surrounding idioms.
3. VALIDATE — tests gate the change
- Focused first: run the specific test covering the change (or the reproducer from step 1). It must go from failing → passing.
- Regression next: run the stack's test command (the repo's detected
test_cmd). Report pass/fail counts. - Real-run evidence for a "feature works" claim: a real input → real output,
not just green unit tests (per the kit's
0.3 No premature done). - Record the commands run + outcomes in the handoff / verify artifact.
Constraints
- The localization artifact (step 1) is REQUIRED before any edit — no "edit first, find the rest later".
- A change is not done until its focused test passes AND the regression run is green (or the failures are pre-existing and named). "Compiles" / "200 OK" is not validation.
- No blind retries: if two edits don't pass, re-localize (the target was wrong), don't loop on the same site — broad retry loops compound error, they don't fix localization.
- Bounded autonomy: this is one change → one validation → the human gate, not an open-ended fix loop.
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.

