agentleFS
Sign inStart free
malinskibeniaminmalinskibeniamin/skills/prototype/SKILL.md

prototype

Skill4 starsChanged 10 days agoMITView on GitHub

Build disposable evidence for unresolved logic, interaction, or visual questions. Use when runnable evidence would resolve behavior or UI uncertainty before commitment.

194 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use playtest-report, soak-test and 10 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.
  • CoralGameSkill

    playtest-report

    Generates a structured playtest report template or analyzes existing playtest notes into a structured format. Use this to standardize playtest feedback collection and analysis.

    Also in 12 projects that use this

  • lilangMaxSkill

    soak-test

    Generate a soak test protocol for extended play sessions. Defines what to observe, measure, and log during long play sessions to surface slow leaks, fatigue effects, and edge cases that only appear after sustained play. Primarily used in Polish and Release phases.

    Also in 9 projects that use this

  • lilangMaxSkill

    team-live-ops

    Orchestrate the live-ops team for post-launch content planning: coordinates live-ops-designer, economy-designer, analytics-engineer, community-manager, writer, and narrative-director to design and plan a season, event, or live content update.

    Also in 9 projects that use this

  • CoralGameSkill

    team-polish

    Orchestrate the polish team: coordinates performance-analyst, technical-artist, sound-designer, and qa-tester to optimize, polish, and harden a feature or area for release quality.

    Also in 14 projects that use this

  • +5 more from lilangMax
  • +3 more from CoralGame

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

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

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 179 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    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
  • could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
  1. Very specific:

    Use .context/prototypes/<question>/, or target-adjacent only when real runtime must load it.

    line 12
  2. Distinctive:

    Keep runnable prototypes as primary sources.

    line 16
  3. Very specific:

    When the requested endpoint authorizes commits, use isolated prototype/<name> plus an issue/decision context pointer.

    line 18
  4. Very specific:

    Before trusting verdict, /dogfood once through decisive path and likely boundary, not every edit.

    line 30
  5. Distinctive:

    If evidence contradicts the plan, revisit that decision before production.

    line 33

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 179 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

For product/design forks, read Poteto.

Prove one named question, not an early production branch.

Choose cheapest faithful shape: logic/state executable model (LOGIC.md); UI several meaningful variants (UI.md); API/tool minimal sandbox/fixture call.

Use .context/prototypes/<question>/, or target-adjacent only when real runtime must load it; mark in-tree artifacts.

Retention

Keep runnable prototypes as primary sources; never merge prototype-only code to main.

  • When the requested endpoint authorizes commits, use isolated prototype/<name> plus an issue/decision context pointer.
  • Otherwise keep under .context/prototypes/<question>/, report path, and move/copy in-tree artifacts there before cleaning the ship diff. Do not delete.

Record the question, evidence, and verdict in an issue, ADR, implementation notes or commit. Main: only validated production decisions.

Constraints

Explicit interface workbenches: recommend variant (designs), state-machine (reachable states), or break (stress). Apply retention; user-only, never automatic dependencies.

  1. Standard library/existing deps; no unrelated scaffolding.
  2. One run command; scratch/in-memory persistence.
  3. Show relevant state/observations.
  4. Before trusting verdict, /dogfood once through decisive path and likely boundary, not every edit.
  5. Apply retention after the answer.

If evidence contradicts the plan, revisit that decision before production.

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.

Check your setup, free