get-it-done
Skill13 starsChanged 27 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Pursue an agreed goal to a working outcome without waiting: decompose it, re-prioritise as evidence arrives, branch, gate, get an independent review (a different model or a fresh reviewer subagent — the writer never approves), merge, prune, and bank the operator's decisions in STATUS.md instead of blocking on them. Trigger on \"get it done\", \"don't wait for me\", \"proceed autonomously\", or when an epic or roadmap objective is handed over. Not a close-out: this work set is expected to grow.
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- n1kben/agentstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- zznabil/lean-agent-skill-collectiontheir own version, first seen Aug 26, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 2
- zznabil/lean-agent-skill-collection★ 1same name
- n1kben/agents★ 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 repository26 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adk-expertSkill
- adversarial-gateSkill
- cloud-checkupSkill
- cloud-expertSkill
- cost-guardrailSkill
- cxo-oversightSkill
- delivery-orchestratorSkill
- domain-validatorSkill
- frontend-performance-auditSkill
- github-managerSkill
- governance-guardrailSkill
- mcp-server-scaffoldSkill
- operating-model-bootstrapSkill
- plugin-submissionSkill
- product-ownerSkill
- pr-reviewerSkill
- release-managerSkill
- release-readinessSkill
- sitrepSkill
- spec-first-deliverySkill
- system-performance-guardrailSkill
- test-strategySkill
- the-architectSkill
- using-the-harnessSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈5
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 85
Branch: Never commit to the trunk.
- Distinctive: line 92
The writer never approves the work: If the candidate changes after review, the review is void — re-run it.
- Distinctive: line 95
Prune: only this lane's clean worktree and merged local/remote branch after verifying merged PR state and integration on main.
- Distinctive: line 105
Use worktrees and subagents where the work is genuinely disjoint.
- Distinctive: line 129
Never claim a gate passed that you did not run, and never inherit a figure from an earlier session: re-derive it, or label it unverified.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Get it done
The planning, the talking, the debating are over. The plan is agreed — execute it. Do not re-open scope, do not re-surface options already ruled on, do not ask for reassurance. The only reason to interrupt is a decision from the short "Theirs, always" list below; everything else is action.
The operator has left. Finish the phase. Do not stall on anything you can decide, evidence, or work around — and do not silently decide anything that is genuinely theirs.
The whole skill is one judgement: what is mine to call, and what is theirs? Get that wrong in the timid direction and the work sits idle for hours. Get it wrong in the reckless direction and you spend their money, their credibility, or their consent on a call they never made.
The boundary — this pursues a goal, it does not close a queue
The unit here is a goal: an epic, a roadmap objective, a phase, a thing that must end up working. The work set is derived from that goal and is expected to grow — you decompose, you discover, you re-prioritise as evidence arrives, and you update the delivery tracker as you go rather than at the end. Done means the goal is functional, not that a list is empty.
A close-out is the opposite shape: its work set is frozen at invocation and never grows, and it ends in a release advisory. If the operator asked you to close out what is in flight, do that job, not this one. Running this skill against a closing set is how a close-out quietly turns into a new sprint.
The contract
- Do not wait. No "shall I proceed?", no "let me know". If you can act, act.
- Bank, don't block. A decision that is genuinely theirs goes into
STATUS.mdwith a recommendation — not into a message that stops the work. - Land it. A phase is not done because the code is written. It is done when
it is merged to
main, the branch and worktree are pruned, and the tracked documents match reality. - Never fabricate authority. Blanket "go" covers ordinary work. It does not convert into permission for the four things below.
Theirs, always — bank these, never assume them
Even under an explicit "don't wait for me":
- Money. Raising a spending limit, a plan, a paid tier, a metered vendor.
- Consent, credentials, retention, permissions. Anything a user agreed to, anything that reads or keeps their data, anything holding a secret.
- One-way doors. Tags, releases, published artefacts, external submissions, force-pushes, deleting a ref whose commits are not reachable from the trunk.
- Self-approval of a governance record. An ADR is never accepted by the agent that wrote it. Draft it, evidence it, and flag it.
Everything else — ordinary code, tests, docs, refactors, issue filing, branch hygiene — is yours. Do it.
When a dependency is missing, route around it and say so
A blocked gate is not a reason to stop; it is a reason to substitute and record the substitution.
| Unavailable | Substitute | Record |
| Hosted CI (quota, outage, no runner) | Run the local equivalent of each required check | Name each check and its local equivalent, with exit codes |
| Hosted code review (quota) | An independent reviewer: a different model or a fresh reviewer subagent | Which reviewer, what verdict, what it found |
| The first reviewer unavailable | An alternative only within the project's authorised review policy; otherwise stop the affected gate | Availability, authority and unresolved evidence |
| A required check that cannot execute | Merge on the local evidence if the repo permits it | Say "past checks that could not run", never "past checks" |
The distinction in that last row is the whole point. A check that failed and a check that could not start are different facts, and conflating them is how an unreviewed merge gets laundered into a reviewed one.
Never route around a guard that exists to stop you. A denied push, a protected branch, a consent gate — those are the operator's intent expressed in config. Routing around them is permission laundering, not resourcefulness.
The loop
For each unit of work:
- Branch. Never commit to the trunk.
- Build, with the project's own gates run as you go — not saved for the end.
- Prove it bites. Break the source deliberately and confirm the test fails. A green suite you have not seen go red is a hypothesis.
- Review independently. A fresh reviewer context running
pr-reviewer, with optional provider diversity under local policy;adversarial-gatefor design. Follow the Council contract for bounded loops. The writer never approves the work. If the candidate changes after review, the review is void — re-run it. - Merge using the project's authorised merge strategy after exact-candidate gates.
- Prune only this lane's clean worktree and merged local/remote branch after verifying merged PR state and integration on main. Squash/rebase changes commit IDs; ancestry alone is insufficient. If integration or ownership is uncertain, preserve the work and explain why. Fetch and fast-forward clean main safely; never reset another lane's checkout or discard uncommitted/unintegrated changes.
- Reconcile. STATUS, CHANGELOG, ROADMAP, ADRs, issues. Findings that live only in a chat message evaporate; file them.
Parallelism
Use worktrees and subagents where the work is genuinely disjoint. Two agents editing the same file is not parallelism, it is a merge conflict with extra steps — and most "parallel" refactors of one subsystem collide. Say so rather than parallelising for appearances.
The handover
STATUS.md is what they read when they return, so write it for someone who was
not in the room. It carries:
- What landed, with evidence — a SHA, an exit code, an issue number.
- The decisions waiting on them, each with: a recommendation (a verb and an
object, never "consider the options"), what it unblocks, what it costs if
they call it wrong, and whether it is reversible —
cheap,costly, orone-way. Sort so the compounding ones are first. - What you did not do, and why. Especially anything you declined as theirs.
- What is still open, including defects you found and chose not to fix.
Reporting back
Lead with the outcome, not the narrative. State what merged, what the evidence was, what you routed around, and what is waiting on them. Report failures plainly — a phase that half-landed is reported as half-landed.
Never claim a gate passed that you did not run, and never inherit a figure from an earlier session: re-derive it, or label it unverified.
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.

