route
Skill23 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use at the start of a task that spans multiple files, touches unfamiliar areas of a codebase, or where it isn't obvious what to load or where to begin. Skips itself for a one-line change or an already-scoped task.
17 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- jerseycheese/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 28, 2026
- Hugovdd/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 25, 2026
- rehantariq121/claude-skills-publictheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- RumbleJack56/skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- 0xcvaliente/claude-code-orchestrationtheir own version, first seen Oct 17, 2026
- anton-dergunov/agentic-org-plannertheir own version, first seen Oct 13, 2026
Other versions17 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 17
- ypollak2/llm-router★ 123same name
- ItsssssJack/seven-skills★ 19same name
- purpleeddy/cladding★ 16same name
- dawidtomaszewskipl/route-skill★ 4same name
- gabriellst/codm★ 4same name
- jerseycheese/agent-skills★ 4same name
- xiaolongnk/SuperHarness★ 4same name
- 0xcvaliente/claude-code-orchestration★ 2same name
- Deepanshu418/claude-code-elysia★ 2same name
- RumbleJack56/skills★ 2same name
7 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- analyzeSkill
- assessSkill
- blueprintSkill
- breakdownSkill
- buildSkill
- checklistSkill
- clarifySkill
- constitutionSkill
- convergeSkill
- debugSkill
- deepenSkill
- deprecateSkill
- double-checkSkill
- explainSkill
- handoffSkill
- helpSkill
- initSkill
- interviewSkill
- learnSkill
- levelupSkill
- lintSkill
- living-docsSkill
- performanceSkill
- personaSkill
- promptSkill
- prototypeSkill
- qaSkill
- quarantineSkill
- reportSkill
- roadmapSkill
- signatureSkill
- specifySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 16 edited versions we read keep these.
3
Distinctive
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
Right-size the map: If it's a one-line diff, a typo, or obviously covered by what's already in context: say *"no map needed, just do it"* …
- Distinctive: line 44
One per task, maximum: If two fit, offer the one with the larger consequence and stay quiet about the other.
- Distinctive: line 69
Load a file for a reason you can name: Every entry earns its tokens or it's cut.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 16 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.
Files
MasterMind: Wayfinder
The front door of substantive work: decide what to load before you start, so you pull the 1–2 things a
task needs instead of reading the whole brain. It's the skill that operationalizes MasterMind's
token economy (~/.mastermind/engineering/active-field.md): and it knows when not to run.
Method
- Name the destination. One line: what is this task actually producing? Scope before routing.
- Right-size the map. If it's a one-line diff, a typo, or obviously covered by what's already in
context: say "no map needed, just do it" and exit. Ceremony on a trivial task is waste (this is
the same instinct as
~/.mastermind/engineering/core/rigor.md's refuse-list and "keep the always-on layer tiny"). - Detect the field:
package.json/configs/file types (usually free and decisive). - Build the load manifest: links only, no summaries. Consult
~/.mastermind/engineering/ROUTER.mdand pick, by matching the task to each node'sroute_when:- which field-pack file(s) to load (and their token cost: budget it),
- which skill(s) fit: pick from the index at
~/.mastermind/skills/README.md(which also names the isolated-context agents in~/.mastermind/agents/): read that index, since memory goes stale, - which core docs the task genuinely needs (
mindset/principles/rigor/agent-loop/product-sensein~/.mastermind/engineering/core/), - which codebase areas to read first. The manifest points to files to open; it links instead of paraphrasing (so it can't drift out of sync).
- Load progressively. For a big/foggy task, load the entrance set only; name the next files after the first decisions resolve. Front-load only the context this step uses.
Offer what fits: at most once, and only when it changes the outcome
Most users know three or four skills and never discover the rest, so a capability they already own stays invisible until it's too late to help. Routing is the one moment you can see the whole task and the whole library, so it's the right place: and the only place: to say something.
Offer only when every gate holds:
- It changes the outcome, not the ceremony. "This is a risky unknown, want a throwaway prototype first?" earns its line. "You could also run qa" does not.
- They didn't already ask for it, and haven't turned it down this session. One decline retires that offer for good.
- One per task, maximum. If two fit, offer the one with the larger consequence and stay quiet about the other.
- Say the value, not the tool. "There's client data in this repo. I can quarantine it so it can't be committed" lands; "invoke the quarantine skill" is homework.
Then continue with your own recommendation either way: an offer is a sentence they can ignore, never a question that blocks the work. Silence is the default: when it's a close call, skip it. A suggestion that isn't obviously worth its line costs attention, tokens, and trust, and those are the things the routing step exists to protect.
Seat the task as well as the knowledge (model economics)
Routing decides what to load; spend one extra second deciding what should run it. Four task shapes
are small-model work billed at top rate only by inertia: classify, extract fields, rename, summarise.
Name the shape when you see it: on Claude Code that means suggesting the cheap seat (/model, or an
agent whose file pins one); on Cursor/Codex it's advice the user applies. The inverse holds too:
planning is one expensive call at the top, not something to repeat mid-task on the execution seat.
And grading is its own seat: code-reviewer pins a fixed model so the judge's seat doesn't follow
the writer's (a guarantee of fresh context always, and of a different grader whenever the session runs
another tier). Upgrading the execution seat to the planning seat doubles the bill and changes nothing.
Rules
- The manifest is a list of things to load, not a plan of work. Wayfinder chooses what knowledge to
bring; the actual building is
build(which can call this first). - Load a file for a reason you can name. Every entry earns its tokens or it's cut.
- If
ROUTER.mdis missing/stale, fall back to the active field'sengineering/fields/<field>/field.mdload-on-demand map: routing is a speed-up over a fallback that already works.
Gotchas
- A load manifest, not a ticket/issue system. Wayfinder routes knowledge for one session; it is not a project tracker. Keep it to a load manifest.
- Over-routing is as bad as under-routing. A three-file task needs no map: the right-size step is a feature, not a formality.
- Points to the source. The moment the manifest starts summarizing a doc's contents, it will drift and lie. Link to the file; let the reader load the source of truth.
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.

