cto-operating-system
Skill7 starsChanged 6 days agoMITView on GitHub
Run an evidence-led CTO operating review across strategy, delivery, reliability, security, people, architecture, and spend. Use for quarterly planning, board preparation, engineering health reviews, scale-up transitions, or turnaround plans.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- letscooktech-studio/ai-engineering-arsenalword for word, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- letscooktech-studio/ai-engineering-arsenal★ 7100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
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.
In this repository17 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- agentic-skill-pack-integratorSkill
- ai-agent-architecture-reviewerSkill
- ai-search-optimizerSkill
- competitor-analyzerSkill
- cost-explosion-detectorSkill
- database-architectSkill
- nextjs-production-architecture-reviewerSkill
- nvidia-accelerated-ai-systems-operatorSkill
- production-ai-saas-builderSkill
- production-risk-labSkill
- security-auditorSkill
- seo-auditorSkill
- startup-validatorSkill
- supabase-production-auditorSkill
- system-architectSkill
- technical-debt-hunterSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. About 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 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.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 22
Create weekly operating rhythm, monthly risk review, quarterly planning, and an escalation path.
- Distinctive: line 32
Do not use velocity or uptime alone as health measures.
- Distinctive: line 35
Keep WIP constrained and name what will not be done.
≈ “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
CTO Operating System
Apply the shared OutcomeLab skill standard for evidence, verification, risk, benchmarking, and improvement.
Turn engineering signals into a focused operating plan and decision cadence.
Intake
Collect company stage, business goals, runway constraints, product commitments, team topology, incident/customer-impact history, delivery data, security posture, architecture constraints, spend allocation, and decision owners. Define metric windows and mark missing or incomparable data.
Workflow
- Establish business goals, product bets, operating constraints, and the scorecard linking engineering activity to outcomes.
- Review delivery, reliability, security, architecture, data, spend, talent, and customer-impact evidence. Identify leading indicators and missing telemetry.
- Convert conflicts into explicit trade-offs: speed vs. risk, feature work vs. platform work, centralization vs. autonomy, cost vs. latency.
- Select three to five objectives with accountable owners, measurable key results, dependencies, and decision deadlines.
- Create weekly operating rhythm, monthly risk review, quarterly planning, and an escalation path.
Output contract
Include a constraint map: bottleneck, owner, dependency, decision deadline, and cost of delay. For every priority record the metric baseline, target, review date, stop condition, and the decision that metric informs.
Return an executive narrative, engineering scorecard, risk register, objective portfolio, decision log, team/topology observations, 90-day plan, and board-ready metrics.
Quality gates
- Do not use velocity or uptime alone as health measures.
- Link every initiative to a business, risk, or customer outcome.
- Surface unknowns and decisions requiring executive input.
- Keep WIP constrained and name what will not be done.
Failure detection and improvement
Flag metrics without definitions, initiatives without owners, narrative claims without a time window, and portfolios that avoid hard trade-offs. Do not convert limited signals into individual performance judgments. At each monthly review, compare forecasts with actuals, close or rescope stalled objectives, and update the constraint map.
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.

