agentleFS
kellykampenkellykampen/agent-skills/skills/workflow/code-structure/SKILL.md

code-structure

Skill2 starsChanged 10 days agoMITView on GitHub

Use when multiple workflows duplicate the same operational logic, when deciding what belongs in actions vs shared services, or when refactoring repeated operational blocks across domain flows. Use when adding new features that share mechanics with existing ones.

16 other projects use a version of this, 8 of them edited; 2 new projects in the last 4 weeks, against 2 the 4 before.

Adopted by

Steady: 2 new projects took it in the last 4 weeks, 1× the 4 weeks before.thin data

Week of Sep 13: 2 new projectsWeek of Sep 20: 0 new projectsWeek of Sep 27: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 4: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 11: 2 new projectsWeek of Oct 18: 0 new projectsWeek of Oct 25: 0 new projectsWeek of Nov 1: 0 new projects
Sep 2026Oct 2026Nov 2026
New projects taking a version of this file each week, over the 8 weeks our latest run read: only 4 in all, so this is a hint, not a trend.

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 12 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Never reach into database/state directly

    line 66
  2. Distinctive:

    When extracting shared logic:

    line 73
  3. Distinctive:

    Write the flow in action code first (clear behavior)

    line 75
  4. Distinctive:

    Keep domain policy in actions (auth, status transitions, error classification)

    line 79
  5. Distinctive:

    Run verification: typecheck, lint, confirm all flows still work

    line 80

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 12 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

Service Layer Architecture

Overview

Two-layer separation: Actions orchestrate domain rules (the "why/when"), while a service layer centralizes reusable operational mechanics (the "how").

This prevents duplicated code, inconsistent behavior, and bugs fixed in one path but not others.

When to Use

  • Multiple callers need the same low-level operation (sandbox creation, email sending, payment processing)
  • You're copy-pasting operational logic between action files
  • A bug fix in one workflow doesn't propagate to others doing the same thing
  • Adding a new feature that shares mechanics with existing flows

Don't use when: Logic is truly domain-specific and used by only one caller.

Core Pattern

Orchestration Layer (Actions)          Service Layer (Shared Mechanics)
├── owns business rules                ├── owns reusable operations
├── owns state transitions             ├── owns provider/SDK interactions
├── owns auth/ownership checks         ├── owns command execution details
├── owns failure classification        ├── owns health checks / readiness
├── owns retries / user-facing errors  └── returns structured results
└── calls service functions

Rule of thumb:

  • "What this product flow means" → keep in actions
  • "How to do this operation reliably" → move to service layer

Quick Reference

Design PrincipleDoDon't
API shapeComposable capability blocksOne giant "do everything" method
Inputs/outputsExplicit params, structured returnsHidden global state, reaching into DB
MigrationExtract one block, replace one caller, verify, then migrate restRefactor everything at once
Domain logicKeep auth, policy, error classification in actionsLet service mutate domain state directly
Extraction triggerLogic repeated across 2+ callersLogic used once (over-abstraction)

Designing Service Functions

Design as capability blocks, not monoliths:

// Good: composable, each caller chooses what to use
createManagedSandbox(...)
prepareRepo(...)
detectPackageManager(...)
installDependencies(...)
runBuildCommand(...)
startSandboxRuntime(...)

Each function should:

  • Accept all required data as explicit parameters
  • Return structured outputs (e.g., { ready, previewUrl, proxyPort })
  • Never reach into database/state directly
  • Make failure explicit (structured results, not swallowed errors)

This lets callers choose strict vs relaxed behavior per flow.

Migration Checklist

When extracting shared logic:

  1. Write the flow in action code first (clear behavior)
  2. Mark repeated operational chunks across callers
  3. Extract only repeated, non-domain chunks to service
  4. Replace one caller → verify → replace remaining callers
  5. Keep domain policy in actions (auth, status transitions, error classification)
  6. Run verification: typecheck, lint, confirm all flows still work

Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternProblem
God serviceOne huge function hides all control flow
Leaky serviceService mutates database tables directly
Inconsistent APIEach function uses different argument styles and error semantics
Over-abstractionExtracting logic used by only one caller

Example: Email Service (Simple)

// emailService.ts — shared mechanics
export async function sendWelcomeEmail(params: { to: string; name: string }) {
  const html = `<h1>Welcome ${params.name}</h1>`;
  await emailProvider.send(params.to, "Welcome", html);
}

// userSignup.ts — orchestration (owns WHEN to send)
if (user.marketingOptIn) {
  await sendWelcomeEmail({ to: user.email, name: user.name });
}

// adminInvite.ts — orchestration (different business rule, same mechanic)
await sendWelcomeEmail({ to: invitee.email, name: invitee.name });

Mental Model

New feature? → Write in action first → See repeated ops? → Extract to service
                                      → No repetition?  → Keep in action

Your architecture in one sentence: Actions orchestrate domain rules, while the service layer centralizes reusable operational mechanics with a composable, explicit-input API.

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.