public-artifact-lane
Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Turn real work into public-ready artifacts such as build diaries, release notes, launch posts, case studies, or demo scripts. Use when the goal is a public or shareable artifact grounded in completed work.
In this repository37 other files it gives its agents.
- adr-logSkill
- adversarial-reviewSkill
- ai-writing-detoxSkill
- autonomous-video-pipelineSkill
- browser-tutorial-videoSkill
- codex-execution-packSkill
- continuity-ledgerSkill
- github-mobile-opsSkill
- github-seoSkill
- idea-validationSkill
- illustration-promptSkill
- issue-control-loopSkill
- justdoitSkill
- lazy-seniorSkill
- long-context-dispatchSkill
- openclaw-councilSkill
- parallel-worktreesSkill
- playwrightSkill
- product-councilSkill
- product-shapingSkill
- readme-generatorSkill
- screenshotSkill
- session-to-postSkill
- spec-bundleSkill
- spreadsheetSkill
- spreadsheet-tabular-analysisSkill
- spreadsheet-xlsx-editSkill
- tool-scoutSkill
- transcribe-basicSkill
- transcribe-diarizeSkill
- transcribeSkill
- triage-findingSkill
- video-builderSkill
- video-render-runSkill
- video-spec-builderSkill
- visual-explainerSkill
- work-shapingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
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 10
Do not use when: the work is not real yet, the artifact would leak private context, or the user only wants a private note.
- Distinctive: line 23
Do not invent results, usage, or metrics.
≈ “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
Public Artifact Lane
Metadata
- Trigger when: the work is real and the user wants a public or shareable artifact rather than more code.
- Do not use when: the work is not real yet, the artifact would leak private context, or the user only wants a private note.
Skill Purpose
Convert real work and evidence into a public-facing artifact that is concrete, trustworthy, and safe to share.
Instructions
- Collect the real evidence first: diffs, issue notes, decisions, screenshots, metrics, or demo results. Then choose the artifact type. Read
~/.codex/skills/public-artifact-lane/references/artifact-types.mdfor artifact selection and~/.codex/skills/public-artifact-lane/references/storage.mdfor default save locations only when needed. - Draft the artifact from evidence outward. Keep the first screen useful, label goals as goals, and remove private implementation chatter or backstage jargon. If the text feels synthetic afterward, route through
$ai-writing-detox; if visuals would help, route through$visual-explaineror$illustration-prompt. - Validate the draft for privacy, truthfulness, and clarity before delivery. If the work is not public-safe, say so and stop instead of forcing a shareable version.
Non-Negotiable Acceptance Criteria
- Evidence beats narrative polish.
- Do not invent results, usage, or metrics.
- Private or sensitive details are removed or the artifact is withheld.
- The artifact type matches the underlying work instead of padding a small change into a fake “launch.”
Output
- A public-ready draft or saved artifact path.
- The chosen artifact type.
- Any follow-up lane needed before publishing, such as detox, visual support, or legal/privacy review.
Next skill options(only if needed):$ai-writing-detox— remove generic AI tone before publishing;$visual-explainer— produce a supporting HTML explainer;$illustration-prompt— create image direction for the artifact;$session-to-post— turn the same work into a session-style diary draft instead of a public artifact.
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.

