agentleFS
matthew-kissingermatthew-kissinger/agentcore-skills/skills/agentcore-operations/SKILL.md

agentcore-operations

Skill1 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub

Review, release, troubleshoot or retire an AgentCore deployment using exact image/runtime identity, configuration ownership and scoped operational evidence. Use for deployment drift, stale secrets, readiness or cleanup; not for routine agent prompt development.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈4

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Read configuration and release identity for stale settings and drift, or retirement and recovery for cleanup.

    line 16
  2. Distinctive:

    Keep those evidence levels separate.

    line 27
  3. Distinctive:

    Stop retrying unchanged infrastructure after a repeated failure at the same boundary.

    line 32
  4. Distinctive:

    Do not export raw secrets, user data or invocation bodies into diagnostic artifacts.

    line 34

≈ “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

Operate the version that is actually running

Establish deployment ownership and the requested operation first. Read-only review is not a request to redeploy; existing explicit deployment approval need not be requested again. Preserve the project's release and rollback process.

Read configuration and release identity for stale settings and drift, or retirement and recovery for cleanup.

Evidence to collect

  • Source revision and isolated image-test result.
  • Registry digest and deployed runtime version/endpoint binding.
  • Configuration source and adoption time, without secret values.
  • One check of the disputed live behavior, where authorized.
  • Remaining uncertainty and the next observation that can resolve it.

Keep those evidence levels separate. A historical document, green source CI or a mutable image tag cannot independently establish the deployed behavior.

Inspect only what resolves the current question. Reuse unchanged valid checks; repeat a check when its inputs changed or a failure calls its result into question. Stop retrying unchanged infrastructure after a repeated failure at the same boundary.

Do not export raw secrets, user data or invocation bodies into diagnostic artifacts. Prepare exact changes before a mutation and retain rollback/recovery information appropriate to the operation.

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.