corporate-surface
Skill16 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Shape partner-facing and institutional surfaces so they read as credible operating systems rather than generic SaaS templates. Use for corporate landings, capability pages, partner sections, investor-facing surfaces, and other public pages that must feel clear, evidence-backed, and commercially serious.
In this repository94 other files it gives its agents.
- agent-friction-ledgerSkill
- agent-learning-layer-triageSkill
- agent-operations-contractSkill
- agents-best-practicesSkill
- agent-tool-contract-reviewSkill
- anti-slop-reviewSkill
- architecture-deepening-reviewSkill
- assumption-excavationSkill
- authorized-security-routerSkill
- book-to-skillSkill
- bounded-evaluationSkill
- bounded-growth-loopSkill
- bounded-orchestration-contractSkill
- brief-first-executionSkill
- browser-verificationSkill
- bug-evidence-protocolSkill
- codex-review-loopSkill
- compaction-survivalSkill
- complexity-optimizerSkill
- confidence-fragility-reviewSkill
- context-degradation-reviewSkill
- delivery-baseline-auditSkill
- delivery-preflight-gateSkill
- design-critique-polishSkill
- designmd-brand-kitSkill
- design-register-bootstrapSkill
- diagnoseSkill
- doc-grounded-grillingSkill
- doc-to-lora-evaluatorSkill
- durable-context-maintenanceSkill
- dynamic-workflow-packetsSkill
- editorial-surfaceSkill
- evidence-ledger-researchSkill
- filesystem-context-disciplineSkill
- fluid-interaction-reviewSkill
- frontend-product-builderSkill
- frontend-taste-layerSkill
- git-native-context-contractSkill
- goal-loop-designerSkill
- graph-guided-code-readingSkill
- handoffSkill
- happy-handoffSkill
- html-brief-artifactSkill
- html-diagram-artifactSkill
- hypothesis-diversificationSkill
- idea-to-ship-gatesSkill
- knowledge-base-enrichmentSkill
- lean-context-layoutSkill
- local-inference-tuningSkill
- loop-hardening-contractSkill
- loopops-protocolSkill
- loop-readiness-reviewSkill
- lottie-motion-builderSkill
- minimal-diff-builderSkill
- motion-review-gateSkill
- overengineering-reviewSkill
- personal-workspace-routerSkill
- phase-spec-executionSkill
- pipeline-readiness-gateSkill
- plan-to-issuesSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
10 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈10
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 15
Use this when a public business surface risks sliding into generic dark SaaS, empty architecture diagrams, abstract platform jargon, or …
- Distinctive: line 29
If the project has real interfaces, systems, publications, methods, or public outputs, they should carry more weight than abstract feature …
- Distinctive: line 40
Check for generic-template failure modes:
- Distinctive: line 52
Keep the page institutional:
- Distinctive: line 57
Verify desktop and mobile credibility:
- Distinctive: line 74
Do not invent new capabilities or clients.
- Distinctive: line 75
Do not replace approved corporate direction with startup trend styling.
- Distinctive: line 76
Do not let architecture diagrams outrank real products unless the page is explicitly methodology-first.
- Distinctive: line 77
Do not hide the contact or partner path behind decorative sections.
- Distinctive: line 78
Do not treat “premium” as permission for empty space without proof.
≈ “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
Corporate Surface
Make the page feel credible before trying to make it impressive.
Use this when a public business surface risks sliding into generic dark SaaS, empty architecture diagrams, abstract platform jargon, or decorative product cards without proof.
Best Fit
- corporate landings;
- institutional/product capability pages;
- partner-facing and investor-facing sections;
- ecosystem and product-overview pages;
- contact/CTA flows where seriousness matters more than novelty.
Core Rule
Lead with real operating proof.
If the project has real interfaces, systems, publications, methods, or public outputs, they should carry more weight than abstract feature boxes.
Workflow
- State the business job:
- what a serious partner should understand, trust, and do after the first screen.
- Identify proof surfaces:
- real product interfaces;
- real outputs or methods;
- real links to operating systems or publications;
- concrete capability labels.
- Check for generic-template failure modes:
- too many equal cards;
- pseudo-metrics with no business meaning;
- heavy jargon before outcomes are clear;
- architecture talk replacing real products;
- CTAs that look active but do not support the commercial path.
- Rebalance toward:
- clearer outcome language;
- fewer but stronger structural blocks;
- bigger visual weight for real product proof;
- tighter headline/subhead rhythm;
- explicit partner pathways.
- Keep the page institutional:
- restrained motion;
- deliberate spacing;
- strong alignment;
- no novelty-for-novelty styling.
- Verify desktop and mobile credibility:
- hierarchy still reads;
- proof assets remain visible;
- CTA path stays obvious.
Output Shape
Return:
business jobproof surfacesgeneric-template risks removedrebalanced hierarchydesktop/mobile credibility checks
Guardrails
- Do not invent new capabilities or clients.
- Do not replace approved corporate direction with startup trend styling.
- Do not let architecture diagrams outrank real products unless the page is explicitly methodology-first.
- Do not hide the contact or partner path behind decorative sections.
- Do not treat “premium” as permission for empty space without proof.
Final Report
Include:
- the primary business job;
- the proof surfaces promoted;
- the main template-risk correction;
- desktop/mobile credibility evidence;
- any remaining issue better handled by
wireframe-preflight,frontend-taste-layer, oranti-slop-review.
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.

