agentleFS
lgzarturolgzarturo/codeconductor/CLAUDE.md

codeconductor

CLAUDE.md0 starsChanged 25 days agoMITView on GitHub

These guidelines reduce common LLM coding mistakes. They bias toward caution over speed. For trivial tasks, use judgment. Don't assume. Don't hide confusion. Surface tradeoffs. Minimum code that solves the problem. Nothing speculative. Ask: "Would a senior engineer say this is overcomplicated?" If yes, simplify. Touch only what you must. Clean up only your own mess. The test: Every changed line should trace directly to the user's request. Define success criteria. Loop until verified. Transform tasks into verifiable goals: For…

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this CLAUDE.md into the rules it gives an agent

27 rules. About 0 are common, 19 are distinctive, and 8 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈19

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 8

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    If multiple interpretations exist, present them — don't pick silently.

    line 13
  2. Distinctive:

    If a simpler approach exists, say so.

    line 14
  3. Distinctive:

    If something is unclear, stop.

    line 15
  4. Distinctive:

    No features beyond what was asked.

    line 21
  5. Distinctive:

    No abstractions for single-use code.

    line 22
  6. Distinctive:

    No error handling for impossible scenarios.

    line 24
  7. Distinctive:

    If you write 200 lines and it could be 50, rewrite it.

    line 25
  8. Distinctive:

    Ask: "Would a senior engineer say this is overcomplicated?" If yes, simplify.

    line 27
  9. Distinctive:

    Don't "improve" adjacent code, comments, or formatting.

    line 33
  10. Distinctive:

    Don't refactor things that aren't broken.

    line 34
  11. Distinctive:

    If you notice unrelated dead code, mention it — don't delete it.

    line 36
  12. Very specific:

    Remove imports/variables/functions that YOUR changes made unused.

    line 37
  13. Distinctive:

    Don't remove pre-existing dead code unless asked.

    line 38
  14. Distinctive:

    Do not build features, abstractions, or "flexibility" that is not explicitly requested.

    line 63
  15. Very specific:

    Prefer the language's standard library over third-party packages.

    line 70
  16. Distinctive:

    Prefer editing over rewriting whole files.

    line 79
  17. Distinctive:

    Do not re-read files you have already read unless the file may have changed.

    line 80
  18. Distinctive:

    Test your code before declaring done.

    line 82
  19. Distinctive:

    No sycophantic openers or closing fluff.

    line 83
  20. Distinctive:

    Keep solutions simple and direct.

    line 84
  21. Distinctive:

    If the task type differs from the previous one, execute "/clear" before starting.

    line 89
  22. Very specific:

    Do NOT use npx cc-codeconductor for local testing.

    line 95
  23. Very specific:

    Use graphify path "<A>" "<B>" for relationships.

    line 119
  24. Very specific:

    Use graphify explain "<concept>" for focused concepts.

    line 120
  25. Very specific:

    If graphify-out/wiki/index.md exists, use it for broad navigation.

    line 121
  26. Very specific:

    Read graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md only for broad architecture review.

    line 122
  27. Very specific:

    After modifying code, run graphify update .

    line 123

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 26,980 CLAUDE.md 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
CLAUDE.md

CodeConductor — Agent Configuration

Behavioral Discipline

These guidelines reduce common LLM coding mistakes. They bias toward caution over speed. For trivial tasks, use judgment.

1. Think Before Coding

Don't assume. Don't hide confusion. Surface tradeoffs.

  • State your assumptions explicitly. If uncertain, ask.
  • If multiple interpretations exist, present them — don't pick silently.
  • If a simpler approach exists, say so. Push back when warranted.
  • If something is unclear, stop. Name what's confusing. Ask.

2. Simplicity First

Minimum code that solves the problem. Nothing speculative.

  • No features beyond what was asked.
  • No abstractions for single-use code.
  • No "flexibility" or "configurability" that wasn't requested.
  • No error handling for impossible scenarios.
  • If you write 200 lines and it could be 50, rewrite it.

Ask: "Would a senior engineer say this is overcomplicated?" If yes, simplify.

3. Surgical Changes

Touch only what you must. Clean up only your own mess.

  • Don't "improve" adjacent code, comments, or formatting.
  • Don't refactor things that aren't broken.
  • Match existing style, even if you'd do it differently.
  • If you notice unrelated dead code, mention it — don't delete it.
  • Remove imports/variables/functions that YOUR changes made unused.
  • Don't remove pre-existing dead code unless asked.

The test: Every changed line should trace directly to the user's request.

4. Goal-Driven Execution

Define success criteria. Loop until verified.

Transform tasks into verifiable goals:

  • "Add validation" → "Write tests for invalid inputs, then make them pass"
  • "Fix the bug" → "Write a test that reproduces it, then make it pass"
  • "Refactor X" → "Ensure tests pass before and after"

For multi-step tasks, state a brief plan:

1. [Step] → verify: [check]
2. [Step] → verify: [check]

YAGNI (You Aren't Gonna Need It)

Do not build features, abstractions, or "flexibility" that is not explicitly requested. If the user asks for a function, write a function — not a class hierarchy. If they ask for a string, return a string — not a Result type with 15 error codes. Every line you write must solve a problem that exists now.

Stdlib-First

Prefer the language's standard library over third-party packages. Before adding a dependency, ask: "Does node:fs, node:path, node:crypto, or a built-in module solve this?" If yes, use it. Every external dependency introduces maintenance burden, supply-chain risk, and version conflicts.

Approach

  • Think before acting. Read existing files before writing code.
  • Be concise in output but thorough in reasoning.
  • Prefer editing over rewriting whole files.
  • Do not re-read files you have already read unless the file may have changed.
  • Skip files over 100KB unless explicitly required.
  • Test your code before declaring done.
  • No sycophantic openers or closing fluff.
  • Keep solutions simple and direct.
  • User instructions always override this file.

Context Budget

  • If the task type differs from the previous one, execute "/clear" before starting.
  • Delegate verbose operations to sub-agents.

Local Development Execution Rule

Do NOT use npx cc-codeconductor for local testing. Use bun run dev instead to test all current flow before publishing version v1.0.0 to npm.

Production (npx)Local development (bun run dev)
npx cc-codeconductor seo audit --url …bun run dev seo audit --url …
npx cc-codeconductor goal "…"bun run dev goal "…"
npx cc-codeconductor ccep parse …bun run dev ccep parse …

Skills

Authorized security work uses /cc-security plus the matching .claude/skills/security-* skill (for example .claude/skills/security-web/SKILL.md). The OWASP application-security skill remains .claude/skills/security/SKILL.md.

graphify

This project has a knowledge graph at graphify-out/ with god nodes, community structure, and cross-file relationships.

Rules:

  • For codebase questions, first run graphify query "<question>" when graphify-out/graph.json exists.
  • Use graphify path "<A>" "<B>" for relationships.
  • Use graphify explain "<concept>" for focused concepts.
  • If graphify-out/wiki/index.md exists, use it for broad navigation.
  • Read graphify-out/GRAPH_REPORT.md only for broad architecture review.
  • After modifying code, run graphify update . to keep the graph current.

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.