agentleFS
lalulalilalulali/vespyr/.agents/skills/shape-up/SKILL.md

shape-up

Skill11 starsChanged 9 days agoMITView on GitHub

Structure and stress-test a semi-cooked idea into a design-ready brief with a fixed appetite, fenced scope boundaries, and named rabbit holes. No prerequisites — works at any point in the pipeline. Use when the user says "shape this up", "turn these notes into a brief", "I have a rough pitch", "scope this down", "what should I cut", or invokes /shape-up. Emits shaped-brief.md with the shaping gate. Do NOT use to stress-test whether a concept should exist at all (/validate-idea), to research market or competitors (/explore-idea), to frame a problem you have not stated yet (/unpack-problem), or to turn research into specs (/design).

2 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈3

    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:

    No explicit modes. The skill checks what artifacts exist and adapts:

    line 22
  2. Very specific:

    Every assumption is marked verified / plausible / unverified, and every verified one carries the evidence it was verified against

    line 47
  3. Distinctive:

    Every gap found in Step 3 is either closed with evidence or carried forward as a named open question with a disposition

    line 49
  4. Very specific:

    Every decision written to active-decisions.md passes memory_check.js (written via memory_write.js, not hand-edited)

    line 50
  5. Distinctive:

    Follow the step sequence exactly.

    line 55

≈ “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

Shape Up

<!-- router-skill -->

Takes a semi-cooked idea — a plan, pitch, doc, or set of notes — and shapes it into a structured, loophole-tested, design-ready brief. No prerequisites. Works whether the user skipped early phases entirely or completed them and needs a shaping checkpoint before design.

Supported flows

  • validate-idea → explore-idea → **shape-up** → design — post-research synthesis
  • **shape-up** → design — standalone shaping (skip validation + research)
  • **shape-up** → explore-idea → design — pre-research structuring
  • unpack-problem → **shape-up** → design — problem-first: explore problem → shape solution → design
  • Double-run: shape-up → explore → shape-up → design — shape, research, re-shape

Context detection

No explicit modes. The skill checks what artifacts exist and adapts:

  • Nothing exists → full shaping from user input
  • Validation brief exists (01-discovery/validation-brief.md) → incorporates premises, skips re-framing
  • Problem brief exists (02-research/problem-space-brief.md) → uses problem definition as intake, shapes the selected solution concept
  • Research artifacts exist (02-research/*.md) → synthesizes findings into the brief
  • Shaped brief already exists (01-discovery/shaped-brief.md) → re-shape mode (post-research re-run)

When to invoke

  • The user has a semi-cooked idea — a plan, pitch, doc, or scattered notes — and wants it shaped into a brief that /design can consume
  • /explore-idea has returned findings that need consolidating before specs
  • The user says "shape this up", "turn these notes into a brief", "I have a rough pitch", or invokes /shape-up
  • The user wants to re-shape an existing shaped-brief.md against new research evidence

When NOT to invoke

  • There is a validated concept and market evidence already exists — go to /explore-idea or /design directly
  • The input is a problem rather than a proposed solution — use /unpack-problem; shaping a solution before the problem is framed launders the assumption

Halt conditions

  • Stress-test reveals the idea is fundamentally unviable -> recommend validate-idea instead
  • Gap analysis surfaces 5+ blocker-severity gaps with no path to resolution
  • User abandons shaping mid-flow (decisions logged, partial brief saved)

Done when

  • artifacts/output/01-discovery/shaped-brief.md exists with the shaping gate recorded in the document — plain sentence first, then the bracketed card (VERDICT: [GO] — When: <NOW|GATED|NEXT-CYCLE> / VERDICT: [RESHAPE] / VERDICT: [NO-GO]; format in .agents/references/vespyr-dna.md §Decision Gate). The chat reply carries only the plain wording.
  • The brief states Appetite (a timebox budget, not an estimate), Scope In / Scope Out, and Rabbit Holes explicitly fenced — a brief with non-goals but no fenced rabbit holes will get them re-litigated mid-build
  • Every assumption is marked verified / plausible / unverified, and every verified one carries the evidence it was verified against
  • The shaping gate is honest about the distinction: this skill gates shaping readiness, not concept viability. [GO] on shaping readiness is unavailable while any assumption is unverified — that is [RESHAPE] (needs evidence). Concept viability belongs to /validate-idea.
  • Every gap found in Step 3 is either closed with evidence or carried forward as a named open question with a disposition
  • Every decision written to active-decisions.md passes memory_check.js (written via memory_write.js, not hand-edited)
  • The handoff step names the next skill and the artifact it consumes
  • @memory-controller session-write has run

Harness adherence (non-negotiable)

  • Follow the step sequence exactly. Do NOT skip steps or reorder them.
  • Each step file is a contract. Read it fully before executing.
  • Context detection is automatic — adapt step depth based on existing artifacts. Do NOT ask the user which mode to use.

Prerequisites

None. This is a flexible entry point.

Step sequence

  1. Context Scan → steps/step-01-context-scan.md
  2. Intake & Structure → steps/step-02-intake-structure.md
  3. Gap Analysis → steps/step-03-gap-analysis.md
  4. Stress-Test → steps/step-04-stress-test.md
  5. Decision Alignment → steps/step-05-decision-alignment.md
  6. Handoff → steps/step-06-handoff.md

Output artifacts

The document surface — the machine record lives here, and the gates read these files.

  • artifacts/output/01-discovery/shaped-brief.md
  • artifacts/memory/active-decisions.md (appended)

The chat reply is the human surface: plain wording and a link, never a token or card field (.agents/references/vespyr-dna.md §Two surfaces).

State & memory integration

At start, run: node .agents/scripts/orchestrator_state.js status

At start: Load context before context scan (step-01):

@memory-controller load founder [shape-up — {idea or feature name}]

At end: node .agents/scripts/orchestrator_state.js complete --agent founder --artifact 01-discovery/shaped-brief.md Memory: Final step closes with @memory-controller session-write — mandatory per GUARDRAILS §Session Continuity.

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.