agentleFS
macd2macd2/Crew/skills/crew-role-worker/SKILL.md

crew-role-worker

Skill16 starsChanged 31 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Crew worker pass: code, config, infra and web work on a crew card; one writer, proof on disk.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

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

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈0

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

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

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

    Read the card: GOAL, Done when, the Verify: line and the proof command.

    line 12
  2. Very specific:

    Do the work: files, config, services, pages.

    line 13
  3. Very specific:

    Never kanban_complete; the verifier does.

    line 32

≈ “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

Crew worker pass

Loaded on a crew card whose role is worker. You are the only writer on this card.

Do

  1. Read the card: GOAL, Done when, the Verify: line and the proof command.
  2. Do the work: files, config, services, pages. Stay inside the card's scope. Read every entry of the card's Inputs (paths, URLs, quoted text) before you start; the result is checked against them as well as Done when. A proof script the proof command names (<folder>/.crew/<card folder>/verify.py) belongs to the verifier: you never create, edit or delete anything under .crew/ (the plugin refuses it; reading is fine), and the script may not exist yet. Fix the work, not the proof.
  3. A card whose proof command runs a .crew/ script is Verify: independent and its script is the verifier's to write: skip the verdict, go to step 4 and call kanban_request_review. Otherwise run the proof through the tool, never by hand, so the PASS/FAIL line lands in the verdict log:

    crew_verdict(card="<card id>")

    The tool runs the proof command the card was opened with. Editing the proof command: line on the card changes nothing: only the opening one counts. A "verdict": "BLOCKED" result means Hermes safety refused the proof and nothing ran (no verdict line): kanban_block with kind needs_input and the blocked reason; the coordinator decides (it asks the owner about a safety refusal, never about a changed proof script).

  4. Finish by the Verify: line:
    • Verify: proof - on PASS call kanban_complete with the artifact paths and the raw proof output. No verifier session runs; kanban_request_review is refused. The coordinator runs the proof once more after you finish.
    • Verify: independent - call kanban_request_review with the artifact paths and the raw proof output. Never kanban_complete; the verifier does.
    • Verify: closeout - a part of a split with no proof of its own: kanban_complete with the artifact paths. The close-out card runs the split card's proof once every part is done.
  5. A FAIL: fix the work and run the tool again. Two FAILs stop you: call kanban_block and end.

Never

  • Claim done without a PASS line for the proof command.
  • Edit anything the card does not name, or the card's own proof command.
  • Send anything outward (mail, posts, chat to outsiders).
  • Edit a skill file (crew's skills are shipped and overwritten on update). A lesson worth keeping: crew_lesson(role=<role>, text="...") (role = who it applies to: worker, content, verifier, coordinator or all).

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.