quick
Skill128 starsChanged 29 days agoMITView on GitHub
Quick mode for the rest of the session. Instead of CI's full checks, a change runs only the checks it can affect (format, lint, types and build, its own tests, and every unit, integration, flow and browser test that reaches the code it touched), and the rest of the suite is left for a full run such as a pull request's CI. Runs only when the user types it, and `/first-pass:quick off` turns it off.
18 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- fab-codes/agent-workflow-templatetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- AlleyBo55/no-overthinktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- edwinidrus/dragonhoardtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- notque/vexjoy-agenttheir own version, first seen Nov 7, 2026
- buildomator/buildomatortheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- 0kim0bos/yamtheir own version, first seen Oct 29, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use plant-seed, discuss and 5 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.
notqueSkillplant-seed
Capture forward-looking idea as a seed for future feature design.
Also in 3 projects that use this
markmdevSkilldiscuss
Discuss a problem with other AI agents before implementing. Spawns one or more autonomous claude -p conversations with different perspectives (architect, critic, domain expert), runs multi-round discussions, and synthesizes findings. Use when facing design decisions, architecture tradeoffs, knowledge organization questions, or any problem that benefits from multiple viewpoints before committing to an approach. Also use proactively when you're uncertain about a direction.
Also in 4 projects that use this
VercelSkillnext
Next.js renderer for json-render that turns JSON specs into full Next.js applications with routes, layouts, SSR, and metadata. Use when working with @json-render/next, building Next.js apps from JSON specs, or creating AI-generated multi-page applications.
Also in 3 projects that use this
NVIDIASkillresearch
Before designing a feature, research how comparable libraries solve the problem, check best practices, known pitfalls, and upstream changes. Use when starting a new feature, investigating an unfamiliar area, or the user asks to research something.
Also in 4 projects that use this
AWSSkillship
Finalize dev work on an issue branch — update docs, push, and open a PR.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Hugging FaceSkillimplement
Make tests pass. Invoke after /write-tests produces failing tests.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions18 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 18
- notque/claude-code-toolkit★ 448same name
- notque/vexjoy-agent★ 448same name
- govctl-org/govctl★ 276same name
- buildomator/buildomator★ 102same name
- rizukirr/vibekit★ 20same name
- jamillazarev/multica-ops★ 11same name
- codebycorey/delta-spec★ 4same name
- Yafan-Yang/ai-trading★ 4same name
- AlleyBo55/no-overthink★ 3same name
- beeltec/skills★ 2same name
8 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 repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- fix-the-classSkill
- habit-wordsSkill
- hulkSkill
- jevSkill
- premortemSkill
- reviewSkill
- setup-first-passSkill
- sharpenSkill
- ship-checkSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 15 edited versions we read keep these.
3
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
- Very specific: line 14
If the block above says off, or the user's message with this command does, quick mode is off from now on: write "Checks: full" in the task …
- Distinctive: line 32
every test the change adds or changes, and the tests of every file it changes.
- Distinctive: line 33
every unit, integration, flow and end-to-end (browser) test file that reaches the changed code, directly or through its callers: the …
- Very specific: line 39
when the change touches jobs, payments, publishing, deletion or auth, the whole integration suite, as ship-check step 4 asks.
- Distinctive: line 78
Write "Checks: quick" in the plan, and in the task list as an item kept open while the mode is on, so it survives a compacted context.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 15 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
quick
<args>
$ARGUMENTS
</args>If the block above says off, or the user's message with this command does, quick mode is
off from now on: write "Checks: full" in the task list, and every change runs CI's full checks
as the rules say, a change already built included, before it is called done. Otherwise quick
mode is on, for the rest of this session, until the user types /first-pass:quick off. Asking
for CI's whole suite on one change runs it for that change and leaves the mode on; words like
"check everything", "cover all cases" or "full review" do not: they ask for full checks inside
the task's scope, which the chosen checks are. Only this typed command turns it on: "be quick",
"hurry" or "fast" in a prompt does not.
Quick mode changes which tests run here, nothing else: committing, pushing, pull requests, merging and deploying stay as the rules say, each only when the user asks.
With quick mode on, wherever the rules, ship-check and review's fixes (its step 8) ask for
CI's checks (in the clean checkout while the reviews run, and once more on the final change), the
checks the change can affect run instead, in the same clean checkout, within the same machine
limits, and under the same yes rules for runs that reach real people:
- the format, lint, type and build checks of every package the change touches;
- every test the change adds or changes, and the tests of every file it changes;
- every unit, integration, flow and end-to-end (browser) test file that reaches the changed code, directly or through its callers: the feature's own flow, and every other feature that reads or writes the same data or calls the same code (the pre-mortem's neighbors);
- a part it reaches through shared code runs whole when the change alters what that other code sees (a shared package's exports, a migration, a config value, a route's or event's shape);
- when the change touches jobs, payments, publishing, deletion or auth, the whole integration
suite, as
ship-checkstep 4 asks;
Find them in two steps: first follow the callers of each changed module, function, route, event
and table, caller by caller, until each path reaches something a test can drive (a route, a
job, an event, a command or a screen); then search the tests for the change, those callers and
those entry points. Where the test runner lists the tests related to changed files (Jest's
--findRelatedTests, Vitest's related), add its list too. Write the list in the plan. Run the
chosen files with the commands CI uses for their suites, with the servers and databases those
suites need. In a repo with a parts recipe, they run through the runner (ship-check step 4):
each part whose steps take a test list (parts <repo> check says takes --tests) gets the
chosen files its test-list steps (those with {{tests}}) run, with --tests <part>=<file>,<file>,
the other chosen parts run whole by name, and
nothing runs by hand outside it. When no test that a part's test-list steps (those with
{{tests}}) would run reaches the change, while that part also holds chosen checks (format,
lint, type and build checks kept in one part with unit tests), it runs with --no-tests <part>:
those steps do not run, its other steps run whole as always, and the report says that part ran
without its tests. A part the list above runs whole (one reached through shared code when the
change alters what that code sees, or the integration suite of a change to jobs, payments,
publishing, deletion or auth) runs whole instead of with --tests or --no-tests. A chosen file the runner refuses (a path a test runner would
read as a pattern, or one outside the folder the part's tests run in) means that part runs
whole, never that the file is left out. After a run, check that each chosen file shows in the
test runner's own result lines in that part's log, named from the folder the runner ran in and
with either slash (Jest's PASS and FAIL lines, Playwright's lines for that file, the names of
node --test's tests from it), never in the command line pnpm or npm repeats above them: one that
does not, did not run. A test run that selects no tests (the test-list steps a
--no-tests run skips do not count as one) is not a pass: fix the selection, or run that part whole. When unsure whether a test reaches the change, it runs. Everything else, test files that
reach nothing the change touched, is not run here.
Nothing else changes: the test that fails first, the fresh review, looking at the UI running, and the words, monitoring and invariants checks all run as the rules say. A later edit reruns the checks it can affect, as always, and once the last edit is in, the chosen checks run once more on the final change unless each of them already ran after it.
Once the chosen checks pass (failures the base has too named) and every other step is done, the change is done. The report says "Full checks on the final change: not run (quick mode)" with what ran instead, so the user knows the rest of the suite is still to run, on a pull request's CI or when they ask for it.
Write "Checks: quick" in the plan, and in the task list as an item kept open while the mode is on, so it survives a compacted context; after a compaction, a task list without it means the full checks.
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.

