agentleFS
jisuzzzzjisuzzzz/haechi/skills/feature/SKILL.md

feature

Skill17 starsChanged 14 days agoMITView on GitHub

Develop requirements, dependencies and an implementation approach for new or deliberately changed behavior. Use for /haechi:feature or when those methods help an authorized product change.

71 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use bugfix, adopt and 8 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.
  • team-attentionSkill

    bugfix

    Root cause based one-shot bug fix. debugger diagnosis → requirements.md generation → /execute. /bugfix "error description" Full investigation pipeline: debugger + gap-analyzer + standard verify. QA suggestion after successful fix.

    Also in 7 projects that use this

  • codebycoreySkill

    adopt

    Adopt an existing plan from conversation context into delta-spec format. Use when importing a plan, adopting planning that already happened, capturing plan mode output, or bringing in prior design work.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • Google CloudSkill

    fix

    Plan a remediation strategy after a test failure.

    Also in 10 projects that use this

  • marylinSkill

    recover

    Recover work from a crashed or interrupted session. Use when Claude crashed mid-task, after an unexpected exit, when you see 'stale sessions detected', or when you lost context and need to figure out what was happening.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AWSSkill

    map

    Map verified service capabilities against customer-provided control framework and threat model. Produces mapping-results.json, controls-catalog.md, and framework-mapping.md. Supports pluggable frameworks: CCMv4, NIST 800-53, CIS Benchmarks, ISO 27001, etc. Split into 4 focused sub-skills for better accuracy; this skill orchestrates them.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • corygabrielsenSkill

    spike

    Implement N approaches as separate branches, then compare side-by-side. Removes "implementation effort" as a variable from the decision.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 65 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    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
  1. Very specific:

    Check external contracts: Verify that the backend/API/dependency supports required fields, parameters and states.

    line 14
  2. Distinctive:

    Use the common contract's Check section and relevant review/screen methods to decide completion.

    line 18

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 65 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

Develop a change

Apply the common work contract within the authorized scope. It owns required implementation, verification, review and completion obligations; this skill supplies methods. Use /haechi:delegate for a bounded worker task when independent execution helps. Existing step names below are compatible delegation entry points, not an exclusive workflow state.

Methods

  1. Establish the intended behavior. Identify who uses it, the trigger, expected result, relevant exceptions and behavior to preserve. Reuse accepted requirements. Use /haechi:spec when synthesis of interacting requirements helps; an existing sufficiently complete account needs no new document or approval.
  2. Establish the design reference. For visible UI or interaction changes, use an accepted and checked reference that covers the need. Use /haechi:preview for missing states or design choices before dependent implementation. Retain the selected reference and checked interactions for the real application comparison.
  3. Check external contracts. Verify that the backend/API/dependency supports required fields, parameters and states. Use the installed version's source or authoritative documentation. Identify missing support and resolve any consequential change of scope before relying on a workaround.
  4. Choose units and interfaces. Inspect entry points, existing components, tokens, consumers and tests. Prefer reuse or a compatible extension when it fits. Settle shared interfaces before dependent work; separate file ownership when delegation helps. A file count alone does not justify parallel work.
  5. Implement the authorized change. Work directly or assign bounded implementation through /haechi:delegate. Use another task method when a finding changes the next action; do not restart completed requirements or design work merely to enter that method.

Use the common contract's Check section and relevant review/screen methods to decide completion. New behavior and preservation evidence must both cover the final relevant change.

Delegation contracts

These compatible entries identify delegated methods, not an exclusive workflow or a mandatory agent sequence. Packet assembly also supplies the canonical common work contract. The main session fills the named context fields and task-specific acceptance criteria; detailed procedures and principle bodies stay in their referenced files. read-only means repository files remain unchanged; authorized temporary or report outputs must be named separately in artifactPaths.

{
  "implement": {
    "skills": [
      "implement-work"
    ],
    "principles": [
      "dry",
      "yagni",
      "kiss",
      "boundary-validation",
      "root-cause",
      "failing-test-first",
      "behavior-tests"
    ],
    "checks": [],
    "writeScope": "scoped",
    "contextRequired": [
      "repository",
      "requirements",
      "acceptanceChecks",
      "ownership"
    ],
    "completion": [
      "Report the assigned implement work, its observed results and any remaining scope limitations."
    ]
  },
  "attack": {
    "skills": [
      "attack-tests",
      "sibling-path-map",
      "mutation-check"
    ],
    "principles": [
      "sibling-paths",
      "behavior-tests"
    ],
    "checks": [],
    "writeScope": "scoped",
    "contextRequired": [
      "repository",
      "requirements",
      "changedFiles",
      "ownership"
    ],
    "completion": [
      "Demonstrate that tests detect the targeted defects without weakening expected behavior."
    ]
  },
  "review": {
    "skills": [
      "verify-work",
      "review-diff",
      "impact-map"
    ],
    "principles": [
      "evidence-levels",
      "behavior-tests"
    ],
    "checks": [
      "agent-defects",
      "sibling-paths",
      "dry",
      "yagni",
      "kiss"
    ],
    "writeScope": "read-only",
    "contextRequired": [
      "repository",
      "requirements",
      "base",
      "changedFiles",
      "priorEvidence"
    ],
    "completion": [
      "Report concrete defects with expected and observed behavior and affected consumers.",
      "Distinguish passing checks, failures, missing proof and unresolved expectations."
    ]
  },
  "design": {
    "skills": [
      "screen-design"
    ],
    "principles": [
      "real-artifact"
    ],
    "checks": [],
    "writeScope": "read-only",
    "contextRequired": [
      "repository",
      "designSource",
      "urls",
      "states",
      "artifactLocation",
      "loginContext"
    ],
    "completion": [
      "For a supplied design, return MATCH or MISMATCH with actual rendered comparisons, or BLOCKED with missing evidence."
    ]
  },
  "parity": {
    "skills": [
      "screen-parity"
    ],
    "principles": [
      "real-artifact"
    ],
    "checks": [],
    "writeScope": "read-only",
    "contextRequired": [
      "repository",
      "beforeUrl",
      "afterUrl",
      "states",
      "intendedDifferences",
      "artifactLocation",
      "loginContext"
    ],
    "completion": [
      "Return PASS or FAIL against real rendered comparisons and the noise baseline, or BLOCKED."
    ]
  }
}

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.