brain
Skill828 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Ask an external AGY reasoning lead to originate the proposal while the host challenges it and owns delivery. Use when the user explicitly invokes /agy:brain or requests this division of responsibilities.
25 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- jzhao234/big-braintheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- jonmagic/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Aiqbee/aiqbee-aitheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- SeanningTatum/brain-axitheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- sophonfinance-wq/finance-automation-portfoliotheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- aidemd-mcp/servertheir own version, first seen Oct 28, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use research.
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.
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
Other versions25 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 25
- H-mmer/pentest-agents★ 815same name
- Anantys-oss/koan★ 48same name
- sophonfinance-wq/finance-automation-portfolio★ 16same name
- henriquecaner/brain-agent★ 13same name
- Aiqbee/aiqbee-ai★ 7same name
- jonmagic/skills★ 6same name
- tonydzi/second-brain-starter-kit★ 6same name
- aidemd-mcp/server★ 4same name
- gufranco/claude-engineering-rules★ 3same name
- sarthakgoel31/claude-skills★ 3same name
15 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 repository7 other files it gives its agents.
- askSkill
- implementerSkill
- jobsSkill
- leadSkill
- researcherSkill
- reviewerSkill
- stafferSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 20 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
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 31
When sending a counterexample, name the decision it challenges and ask what changes or still holds.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 20 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
agy brain
Use the supplied task or the current request. In /agy:lead the host sets direction; here the external brain frames the problem and owns the first proposal and major revisions. You still own the workspace, verification and delivery. Match the user's stage: a design discussion authorizes discussion, not implementation.
Get the first proposal
Give the brain the original goal, verbatim constraints, already-settled decisions, known facts with sources, uncertainty, and available resources. Do not draft a solution, shortlist approaches or conduct an exhaustive investigation before handing off. Keep instructions about invoking this skill out of the brief. Include any budget and deadline; leave time for acceptance. The brain can reuse evidence, request targeted facts or use native Flash for read-only reconnaissance.
Read ../jobs/SKILL.md for execution boundaries, waiting and recovery. Resolve <skill-dir> to the absolute directory containing this installed SKILL.md. It is a placeholder you replace before invoking the shell. From that directory, go up two levels to the plugin root and use its companion/agy-companion.mjs. Keep the command's working directory in the user's target workspace so the job belongs to that project. Substitute the actual brief file path as well:
node "<skill-dir>/../../companion/agy-companion.mjs" staffer --brain --prompt-file "<brief-path>"This background job defaults to Argon (gemini-4-argon-medium). Honor explicit model, timeout and permission choices. If the requested model is unavailable, surface the diagnostic; do not silently switch models or widen permissions. Keep the ID with the assignment and wait using jobs.
Challenge and deliver
Before substantive execution, independently check the proposal's consequential assumptions and trade-offs against the user's goal and concrete evidence. Small read-only probes need no gate. If it holds, state briefly what you checked and proceed within authorization. If a premise fails, pause that part and send the counterexample, its source and the decision it affects back to the brain:
node "<skill-dir>/../../companion/agy-companion.mjs" continue --job <brain-job-id> --prompt-file "<followup-path>"When sending a counterexample, name the decision it challenges and ask what changes or still holds. Check any new consequential claim in the revision before accepting it; a proposed default can be useful without being an existing requirement.
The host's intervening discussion is not visible to AGY. Include changed constraints and evidence in the follow-up and retain the newly returned job ID for the next turn. If a conversation must start fresh, supply the original goal, current proposal and reasons earlier routes were dropped. Keep references inline or in an existing project artifact when useful; no required decision log.
Decompose and dispatch accepted work through available workers, integrate their changes and verify the result. Handle local execution choices yourself. Bring back evidence that changes the technical direction; a successful check needs no ceremonial round trip. Ask the user only when a decision changes their goal, budget or authorization. Report the outcome with its evidence and any remaining uncertainty.
Example — a migration plan. The team believes every historical job records a conversation ID. Pass that belief to the brain as an unverified premise. If its proposal relies on that ID, check an older record. An ID-less record is a reason to continue the brain job with the evidence and ask for a revised fallback. If the proposal already covers that case, verify the fallback and deliver the plan. A design-only request ends there.
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.

