agentleFS
Sign inStart free
krutikJainkrutikJain/android-agent-skills/.github/skills/android-permissions-activity-results/SKILL.md

android-permissions-activity-results

Skill14 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use modern permission requests, Activity Result APIs, and capability-gated UX in Android flows.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈6

    Distinctive · estimate

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Use this skill when the request is about: android permission request flow, activity result api android, camera permission in android app.

    line 17
  2. Very specific:

    Read references/patterns.md when you need the picker-vs-permission matrix or API-level behavior checklist.

    line 19
  3. Very specific:

    Read references/scenarios.md for photo picker, notification permission, and limited media access examples.

    line 20
  4. Distinctive:

    Start with the capability the user needs, not the permission name: photo picker, document picker, camera capture, or notification opt-in …

    line 26
  5. Distinctive:

    Treat loading, empty, error, offline, and permission-denied states as first-class UI states.

    line 33
  6. Distinctive:

    Do not launch permission or picker contracts directly from composition without a user action or explicit side effect.

    line 34
  7. Distinctive:

    Prefer the narrowest capability surface available, such as Photo Picker or SAF, over broad storage permissions.

    line 35
  8. Distinctive:

    Keep permission recovery testable: rationale, settings redirect, denied state, and post-return revalidation.

    line 36

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Android Permissions Activity Results

When To Use

  • Use this skill when the request is about: android permission request flow, activity result api android, camera permission in android app.
  • Primary outcome: Use modern permission requests, Activity Result APIs, and capability-gated UX in Android flows.
  • Read references/patterns.md when you need the picker-vs-permission matrix or API-level behavior checklist.
  • Read references/scenarios.md for photo picker, notification permission, and limited media access examples.
  • Handoff skills when the scope expands:
  • android-media-files-sharing
  • android-testing-ui

Workflow

  1. Start with the capability the user needs, not the permission name: photo picker, document picker, camera capture, or notification opt-in often avoids broader runtime permissions.
  2. Choose the right Activity Result contract and keep the launcher in a stable lifecycle owner such as an activity, fragment, or remembered Compose launcher.
  3. Model the full permission state space explicitly: granted, denied, permanently denied, limited/selected access, one-time access, and settings-based recovery.
  4. Account for API-level differences such as POST_NOTIFICATIONS on Android 13+, approximate vs precise location, background location as a separate flow, and Android 14 selected-photos access.
  5. Re-check capability on return from settings or picker flows, then validate rotation, process death, and denial recovery instead of assuming the happy path.

Guardrails

  • Treat loading, empty, error, offline, and permission-denied states as first-class UI states.
  • Do not launch permission or picker contracts directly from composition without a user action or explicit side effect.
  • Prefer the narrowest capability surface available, such as Photo Picker or SAF, over broad storage permissions.
  • Keep permission recovery testable: rationale, settings redirect, denied state, and post-return revalidation.

Anti-Patterns

  • Assuming the happy path is enough for product flows.
  • Repeatedly re-prompting after denial instead of offering a clear settings or alternate-path recovery.
  • Requesting media or storage access when the Photo Picker or document contracts are enough.
  • Treating Android 14 selected-photos access as full media-library access.

Review Focus

  • Can the feature use a picker or contract instead of a runtime permission?
  • Does the flow handle denial, limited access, and return-from-settings correctly?
  • Are permission launches owned by the right lifecycle scope and initiated at the right time?
  • Are platform-specific behaviors called out for Android 13+ and Android 14+ where relevant?

Examples

Happy path

  • Scenario: Find the repo's Activity Result and permission surfaces before proposing a flow change.
  • Command: rg -n "rememberLauncherForActivityResult|RequestPermission|RequestMultiplePermissions|PickVisualMedia|OpenDocument|TakePicture" examples

Edge case

  • Scenario: Review notification and media access paths for API-level-specific behavior.
  • Command: rg -n "POST_NOTIFICATIONS|READ_MEDIA_|READ_EXTERNAL_STORAGE|PickVisualMedia" examples

Failure recovery

  • Scenario: Differentiate permission prompts from media-sharing and testing requests.
  • Command: python3 scripts/eval_triggers.py --skill android-permissions-activity-results

Done Checklist

  • The chosen contract or picker is narrower than a broad permission where possible.
  • Denied, permanently denied, limited, and settings-return states are all modeled.
  • API-level differences are called out for the affected Android versions.
  • Recovery UI and observability are explicit instead of implied.

Official References

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.

Check your setup, free