agentleFS
Sign inStart free
kv0906kv0906/pm-kit/.claude/skills/explain/SKILL.md

explain

Skill138 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Explains concepts, product decisions, formulas, and systems at the user's requested depth and language. Use for /explain, how or why questions, first principles, or ELI5.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 93 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Use the current topic when the user asks a follow-up.

    line 15
  2. Distinctive:

    Use notation when it clarifies a formula.

    line 27
  3. Distinctive:

    If a definition is missing, state the assumption.

    line 34
  4. Very specific:

    Keep the answer in chat by default, regardless of length.

    line 38
  5. Very specific:

    When saving, follow /doc paths, frontmatter, links, and logging.

    line 39
  6. Very specific:

    Use /show-me when a small visual makes the mechanism clearer.

    line 40
  7. Distinctive:

    Ask comprehension questions only when the user requests tutoring.

    line 41

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 93 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

/explain — Working Understanding

Answer first, then give the smallest mental model that helps the user apply it. Adapted from the personal explain-to-me skill; keep /explain as the existing entry point.

Input

/explain [concept, formula, decision, system, or pasted material]

Use the current topic when the user asks a follow-up. Read referenced material before explaining it. Apply _core/knowledge.md to source claims and _core/judgment.md when explaining a product tradeoff.

Depth and Language

  • Simple question: answer directly; do not force a tutorial or fixed sections.
  • Working understanding: explain the mechanism, necessary terms, and one useful example.
  • First principles: work backward from the result to inputs, rules, constraints, and what breaks without each part.
  • Technical depth: inspect the source; trace responsibilities, state, boundaries, and failure modes.
  • ELI5: use everyday language without hiding a material exception or constraint.

Reply in the user's language. Preserve identifiers and useful technical terms; define unfamiliar terms when needed. Use notation when it clarifies a formula. An analogy should reduce effort; explain its limits if they matter.

Evidence and Decisions

Distinguish implemented behavior, observed results, assumptions, and interpretation. Cite inspected sources for claims about a specific product, document, or codebase. For a decision, explain the criteria, alternatives, uncertainty, and what would change the recommendation. If a definition is missing, state the assumption. Ask only when it prevents a useful or safe answer.

Output

Keep the answer in chat by default, regardless of length. Save a note only when the user asks. When saving, follow /doc paths, frontmatter, links, and logging; keep the explanation's natural structure. Use /show-me when a small visual makes the mechanism clearer. Ask comprehension questions only when the user requests tutoring. Stop when the question is answered.

Download now (ZIP)

  • Other versions108 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 108

    1. Z3Prover/z3★ 13ksame name
    2. crbnos/carbon★ 2.8ksame name
    3. poshan0126/dotclaude★ 871same name
    4. hsantanna88/clo-author★ 262same name
    5. hugosantanna/clo-author★ 262same name
    6. VinkyDev/vibestart★ 247same name
    7. entireio/skills★ 223same name
    8. first-fluke/fullstack-starter★ 223same name
    9. sammcj/agentic-coding★ 164same name
    10. SerhiiKorniienko/bullshit-detector★ 151same name

    98 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.

  • Used alongsideProjects with it also use debug-fix, root-cause and 8 more.

    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.
    • zebbernSkill

      debug-fix

      Find and fix a bug or issue — from any source (GitHub issue, error message, user report, or observed behavior)

      Also in 3 projects that use this

    • Ingramradical235Skill

      root-cause

      Structured root cause analysis using WHERE (MECE decomposition) then WHY (causal structure diagrams) pipeline. Includes coin-flip detection, logical-leap detection, and vicious cycle intervention. Use when buffer enters YELLOW/RED, when metrics stall, or when Actions execute but don't produce results.

      Also in 5 projects that use this

    • Hugging FaceSkill

      self-review

      Use before opening a PR, or whenever asked to self-review a diffusers contribution. Applies the same rubric as the `@claude` CI (checks the diff against references/review-rules.md, traces call paths for dead code). Reports findings grouped by severity, flagging what to fix before submitting (blocking issues + dead code) vs what to leave for the actual review. Report-only — does not edit files.

      Also in 5 projects that use this

    • thoughtbotSkill

      challenge

      Pressure-test an assumption, decision, or inherited constraint — Socratic cross-examination that forces you to defend or abandon your position

      Also in 4 projects that use this

    • neurofooSkill

      socratic

      Socratic questioning to examine beliefs, uncover assumptions, and develop deeper understanding. Use to challenge thinking, evaluate proposals, or teach without lecturing.

      Also in 3 projects that use this

    • MicrosoftSkill

      second-opinion

      Independent review of current work or a past session. USE WHEN a user wants a second opinion. DO NOT USE WHEN ordinary code review is wanted — use code-review.

      Also in 5 projects that use this

  • In this repository41 other files it gives its agents.

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

Reviews can't be read right now.

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