agentleFS
lengjingxulengjingxu/pstack-for-codex/skills/figure-it-out/SKILL.md

figure-it-out

Skill1 starsChanged 25 days agoMITView on GitHub

Design an auditable playbook when no narrower one fits: a large migration, an ambitious multi-part change, or work a human reviews after stepping away. Scales rigor to the task, runs a hypothesis loop, and logs decisions. Use for $figure-it-out or 'figure it out'.

55 other projects use a version of this, 48 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use ketchup-video, maintain-formal-verification-skill and 2 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.
  • tristanphvnSkill

    ketchup-video

    Catch the user up like /keel:ketchup, with a short silent video of slides for what happened and the waiting calls as text under it. Use for /keel:ketchup-video.

    Also in 14 projects that use this

  • TheOnlyFusionCubeSkill

    maintain-formal-verification-skill

    Bring a project's formal verification back in line with the code after the code changes: find the commits that touched verified code, update the model, harness, or properties to describe the code as it is now, rerun, and say whether each failure is drift in the verification or a bug in the code. Use for /maintain-formal-verification-skill, \"is the model still true to the code\", or after merges and refactors that touched verified code without rechecking it.

    Also in 18 projects that use this

  • TheOnlyFusionCubeSkill

    statechart

    Draw what an app's user sees as a Mermaid statechart from a TLA+ model. States are gray if they work, red if still wrong, and green if fixed. Each bug TLC finds is a numbered path. Use for /statechart, \"show the PM the bug\", or to turn an agreed chart into a TLA+ skeleton.

    Also in 16 projects that use this

  • JoshueOsunaSkill

    Poteto Mode

    poteto's agent style for concise, detailed responses, deliberate subagents, unslopped prose, simple code, and verified work. Use for poteto, /poteto-mode, or requests to work in this style.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. 3 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 3

    Common

    Most of the 55 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    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:

    When the task matches no playbook, design one.

    line 8
  2. Common:

    Write the designed phase list down.

    line 31
  3. Common:

    Verify by inspecting the artifact, never a self-report.

    line 39
  4. Common:

    Check the whole against the Phase A predicate on the real product, not just the harness.

    line 49

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 55 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

Figure it out

When the task matches no playbook, design one. The deliverable before any code is the workflow itself: a sequence of phases that scales rigor to the task, runs the scientific method, and leaves a decision trail a human can audit after stepping away.

Start

Open a todolist whose first item is to read the Principles section of the poteto-mode skill. Then add the phases below as todos.

Phase A: Frame

Ground first, then commit. Don't start the run until you can state:

  • The definition of done as a falsifiable predicate (the prove-it-works principle skill).
  • Scope, quantified: rough units and effort, plus the blockers grounding surfaced.
  • The rigor level, biased high. One-way doors and high blast radius get more. Reversible low-stakes steps get less. Rigor is gates and artifacts, not "try harder".

Present the framing and tradeoffs before committing to a long run. Reversible work proceeds (the never-block-on-the-human principle skill), but a multi-hour run earns one checkpoint.

Phase B: Design the workflow

Decompose into atomic, independently-landable units. Sequence riskiest-unknown-first. Scaffold and verification come before features (the foundational-thinking principle skill).

  • Build the verification harness before the work, with the baseline captured from the pre-change state, so the check reads as "old value vs new value".
  • For one-way-door design decisions, run the architect skill (it runs arena). Skip it for mechanical work whose shape is already concrete. A second arena over a settled design is over-engineering (the laziness-protocol principle skill).
  • Decide what fans out. Parallelize only across seams, and give each worker its own worktree or branch (the separate-before-serializing-shared-state principle skill). Don't over-fan. Pick each subagent's reasoning effort for the job, per the Subagents section of the poteto-mode skill.
  • Write the designed phase list down. That list is what the human reviews.

Then execute the design. Add its steps to the todolist as concrete items between the Phase C and Phase D entries. Run each under the Phase C loop discipline, and weave the Phase D log through them, a row as each step lands, rather than saving the whole trail for the end.

Phase C: Run the loop

Each unit is an experiment. State the hypothesis, make the smallest change, measure against the predicate on the real artifact, keep it if it advanced, revert it if it didn't. Apply the sequence-verifiable-units principle skill, verifying each unit before starting the next instead of batching checks at the end.

  • Verify by inspecting the artifact, never a self-report. When something passes too easily, suspect the observation method before the system.
  • Pair delegated work with a judge. If a worker games the gate, reset and harden the contract. If the gate itself is wrong, fix the gate in its own change rather than routing around it.
  • A verdict is VERIFIED, NOT VERIFIED, or INCONCLUSIVE. Inconclusive is not a pass. Don't hide a negative.

Phase D: Keep the audit trail

Log the run via the show-me-your-work skill. figure-it-out's work is usually ambitious enough to commit the trail so the reviewer can read it in the PR. The trail plus the diff is what lets the human come back and trust the work.

Phase E: Verify and hand back

Check the whole against the Phase A predicate on the real product, not just the harness. Encode any recurring correction as a gate, a lint rule, a check, or a script (the encode-lessons-in-structure principle skill).

Reply: the playbook you designed, the rigor level and why, the decision-trail path, what's verified against the predicate, and what's still open.

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.