agentleFS
MicrosoftKnown publishermicrosoft/aibast-agents-library/solutions/engineering-standards-advisor/manual/skills/aibast_review-queue_04/SKILL.md

review-queue

Skill8 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when a standards engineer asks what is waiting for review or re-vetting.

5 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

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 5 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
  1. Distinctive:

    Use when a standards engineer asks what is waiting for review or re-vetting.

    line 7
  2. Distinctive:

    Use only the uploaded synthetic records and rules.

    line 11
  3. Distinctive:

    Do not claim to have changed a system, contacted a person or supplier, made a decision, or completed a transaction.

    line 24

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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

Standards review queue

Use when a standards engineer asks what is waiting for review or re-vetting.

Procedure

  1. Use only the uploaded synthetic records and rules.
  2. Lead with the specific evidence that answers the persona's question.
  3. Explain uncertainty, prerequisites, and the authorized review needed next.
  4. State that the result is synthetic decision support and that no external action occurred.

Deterministic pilot evidence

  • REV-0311
  • Pending reviews
  • QR-210-04

Safety gate

Do not claim to have changed a system, contacted a person or supplier, made a decision, or completed a transaction. Stop at a reviewable brief or draft.

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.