no-comments
Skill2 starsChanged 6 days agoMITView on GitHub
Keeps prose comments and docstrings out of code: where a fact goes instead and which tool directives stay. Use when writing a comment or docstring, or when the no-comments gate refuses a commit.
68 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- remotion-dev/remotiontheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- paramcodes/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- endqwerty/endstacktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- tristanphvn/keeltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- therealmarzouq/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- hidenobunagai/astacktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use poteto-help, setup-pstack 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.
ianclearySkillpoteto-help
Guides users through pstack setup, /poteto-mode, and picking the skill, playbook, or principle for a task. Type /poteto-help with a question.
Also in 13 projects that use this
bnemaSkillsetup-pstack
Configure which Pi models pstack uses per role. Detects available provider/model specs and writes pstack's user configuration. Use for /setup-pstack, "configure pstack models", or changing pstack model choices.
Also in 22 projects that use this
ianclearySkillprinciple-explain-the-number
Apply before you trust, report, or act on a number you measured: a speedup, a regression, a throughput, a latency, or an eval result. Find what limits it, and rule out that it measured something other than the work you think.
Also in 25 projects that use this
eryzerzSkillmake-bot-ui
Use when building a custom UI (page, dashboard, buttons) that should wake a Grok Bot over a webhook, when the user must provide a webhook sender key, or when exposing that UI on Tailscale.
Also in 16 projects that use this
TheOnlyFusionCubeSkillmaintain-formal-verification-skill
Bring a project's formal verification back in line with the code after the code changes: find the commits that touched verified code, update the model, harness, or properties to describe the code as it is now, rerun, and say whether each failure is drift in the verification or a bug in the code. Use for /maintain-formal-verification-skill, \"is the model still true to the code\", or after merges and refactors that touched verified code without rechecking it.
Also in 19 projects that use this
TheOnlyFusionCubeSkillcreate-formal-verification-skill
Generate a project-local skill that formally verifies the code where a bug costs the most and tests reach the least, in any language, with whichever verification tool fits. Use for /create-formal-verification-skill, \"model-check this race\", \"prove this invariant\", or when concurrency, retries, state machines, parsers, or unsafe code need more than tests.
Also in 21 projects that use this
- +1 more from TheOnlyFusionCube
Other versions68 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- niksavis/handily★ 275% same
Wrote their own version · 67
- remotion-dev/remotion★ 72ksame name
- backnotprop/pstack★ 3.8ksame name
- moeru-ai/xsai★ 667same name
- jtaroreh/agystack★ 128same name
- uzairansaruzi/p3-stack★ 126same name
- Dimon94/dverity★ 107same name
- Dimon94/skills★ 107same name
- dsebban/skills★ 71same name
- overextended/skills★ 22same name
- TheOnlyFusionCube/potetos-for-everyone★ 21same name
57 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 repository58 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- .claude/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .github/copilot-instructions.mdCopilot instructions
- best-practices-auditSkill
- catalog-authoringSkill
- cli-toolsSkill
- conventional-commitsSkill
- councilSkill
- decompose-planSkill
- falsify-firstSkill
- find-skillsSkill
- harness-clientSkill
- harness-loopSkill
- hill-climbSkill
- interface-factsSkill
- no-commentsSkill
- nodeSkill
- plain-englishSkill
- pythonSkill
- release-processSkill
- repair-in-placeSkill
- retention-probeSkill
- root-causeSkill
- session-finishSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- swarmSkill
- test-disciplineSkill
- tier-injectionSkill
- validate-as-consumerSkill
- work-trackerSkill
- worktree-isolationSkill
- best-practices-auditSkill
- catalog-authoringSkill
- cli-toolsSkill
- conventional-commitsSkill
- councilSkill
- decompose-planSkill
- falsify-firstSkill
- find-skillsSkill
- harness-clientSkill
- harness-loopSkill
- hill-climbSkill
- interface-factsSkill
- nodeSkill
- plain-englishSkill
- pythonSkill
- release-processSkill
- repair-in-placeSkill
- retention-probeSkill
- root-causeSkill
- session-finishSkill
- skill-creatorSkill
- swarmSkill
- test-disciplineSkill
- tier-injectionSkill
- validate-as-consumerSkill
- work-trackerSkill
- worktree-isolationSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 66 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 13
Run python3 .basicly/core/kit/comments/cli.py check <path> on each refused or edited file.
- Very specific: line 15
Before step 4, turn a plain licence header, such as # Copyright 2026 X, into SPDX-License-Identifier and SPDX-FileCopyrightText lines, …
- Very specific: line 17
Run python3 .basicly/core/kit/comments/cli.py fix <path> for the prose that is left.
- Very specific: line 69
Run languages for the current list.
- Very specific: line 74
When a repository explicitly selects policy = "no-comment-ratchet", leave unrelated legacy prose alone and add no new prose.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 66 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
<!-- Generated by `basicly skills-build` from skill.yaml. Do not edit; edit the source. -->No comments in code
The code is the only source of truth, so a change cannot leave a stale claim beside it.
Steps
- Run
python3 .basicly/core/kit/comments/cli.py check <path>on each refused or edited file. It lists each prose comment and docstring. - Move each fact to the place the table below names. Fix the code when the fact says what it does.
- Before step 4, turn a plain licence header, such as
# Copyright 2026 X, intoSPDX-License-IdentifierandSPDX-FileCopyrightTextlines, becausefixremoves a plain header. - Run
python3 .basicly/core/kit/comments/cli.py fix <path>for the prose that is left. Runcheckagain until it reports 0. - Stage the files and commit again.
Rules
- Put the fact where something checks it. A comment is a claim that nothing checks.
- Fix the code when it needs prose to say what it does. Rename it, split it, or give the condition a name.
- Do not write code that is harder to read. A short name, a function with nine branches or a bare magic number has no comment to excuse it.
- Keep each directive, with its code and a reason after it. A tool reads the directive, and the reason is part of it.
Where a fact goes
| The fact | Where it goes |
| A measurement: a count, a time, a rate | the commit message, and the issue or record of the change |
| What a function raises, changes or returns | a test that asserts it, and the type signature |
What a bare str can hold | a type, an enum or a validator |
| Why this branch and not the other | a name for the condition, or a test named after the case |
| Which incident a guard exists for | the issue id in the commit message, and the test that reproduces it |
| What the module is for | its README, or the design document |
| A fact you cannot place | it was not necessary. Drop it. |
Directives that stay
check never reports a directive, and fix never removes one. Among them:
noqa · nosec · type: ignore · pragma: no cover · fmt: off / fmt: on / fmt: skip
· a shebang · eslint-disable · prettier-ignore · @ts-expect-error · @ts-nocheck
· stylelint-disable · go:build · CHECKSTYLE: · NOSONAR · SPDX-License-Identifier
· SPDX-FileCopyrightText · a /*! licence banner · an HTML conditional comment.
.basicly/core/kit/comments/directives.py holds the full list.
Commands
python3 .basicly/core/kit/comments/cli.py check <path> # report; exit 1 when it finds prose
python3 .basicly/core/kit/comments/cli.py fix <path> # remove the prose
python3 .basicly/core/kit/comments/cli.py languages # each file extension it coverschecknever writes.fixwrites only a change it can prove. A secondfixrun must change nothing, and every string literal must stay. A Python file must parse to the same syntax tree.fixreports a file that it cannot read with certainty and leaves the file unchanged.
Scope
YAML, TOML, JSON and Markdown keep their comments, because no code beside them is the
source of truth. check and fix skip vendored directories such as vendor and node_modules.
Run languages for the current list.
Comment ratchet
Strict mode, [hooks.comments] policy = "no-comments", is the default and the goal.
When a repository explicitly selects policy = "no-comment-ratchet", leave unrelated legacy
prose alone and add no new prose. The hook compares complete parsed comments and docstrings
in HEAD and the staged index, so rewritten or duplicated prose is new prose.
python3 .basicly/core/hooks/comment_ratchet.py <path> runs that check in a basicly repository.
The kit check command stays strict. Remove the ratchet setting once no prose is left.
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.

