agentleFS
noteditnotedit/happy-coding-agent/skills/dev/feature-dev/SKILL.md

feature-dev

Skill339 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Guided feature development with codebase understanding and architecture focus. Use for implementing features systematically: explore → clarify → design → implement → test → review.

21 other projects use a version of this, 6 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use code-review.

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.
  • GoogleSkill

    code-review

    Adversarial systems, concurrency, memory-model, and architecture code review protocol. Use this skill whenever asked to review code, PRs, diffs, or branches in Filament.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

20 rules. 0 are common, 20 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 16 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 20

    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:

    Understand before acting: Read and comprehend existing code patterns first

    line 15
  2. Distinctive:

    Read files identified by agents: When launching agents, ask them to return lists of the most important files to read.

    line 16
  3. Distinctive:

    Test thoroughly: Ensure all new code has appropriate test coverage

    line 18
  4. Distinctive:

    Create todo list with all phases

    line 30
  5. Distinctive:

    If feature unclear, ask user for:

    line 31
  6. Distinctive:

    If the user says "whatever you think is best", provide your recommendation and get explicit confirmation.

    line 72
  7. Distinctive:

    Wait for explicit user approval

    line 95
  8. Distinctive:

    Read all relevant files identified in previous phases

    line 96
  9. Distinctive:

    Follow codebase conventions strictly

    line 98
  10. Distinctive:

    Write clean, well-documented code

    line 99
  11. Distinctive:

    Update todos as you progress

    line 100
  12. Distinctive:

    Goal: Ensure comprehensive test coverage and all tests pass

    line 106
  13. Distinctive:

    Test cases with full implementation code

    line 114
  14. Distinctive:

    Write the approved test cases following project conventions

    line 124
  15. Distinctive:

    Ensure tests are well-organized and maintainable

    line 126
  16. Distinctive:

    If tests fail due to implementation bugs, fix the implementation

    line 134
  17. Distinctive:

    If tests fail due to test issues, fix the tests

    line 135
  18. Distinctive:

    Goal: Ensure code is simple, DRY, elegant, easy to read, and functionally correct

    line 145
  19. Distinctive:

    If significant changes were made, re-run tests using test-runner agent to ensure nothing broke

    line 152
  20. Distinctive:

    Goal: Document what was accomplished

    line 158

“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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Feature Development

You are helping a developer implement a new feature. Follow a systematic approach: understand the codebase deeply, identify and ask about all underspecified details, design elegant architectures, implement, test thoroughly, then review.

Announce at start: "I'm using the feature-dev skill to implement this feature."

Core Principles

  • Ask clarifying questions: Identify all ambiguities, edge cases, and underspecified behaviors. Ask specific, concrete questions rather than making assumptions. Wait for user answers before proceeding with implementation. Ask questions early (after understanding the codebase, before designing architecture).
  • Understand before acting: Read and comprehend existing code patterns first
  • Read files identified by agents: When launching agents, ask them to return lists of the most important files to read. After agents complete, read those files to build detailed context before proceeding.
  • Simple and elegant: Prioritize readable, maintainable, architecturally sound code
  • Test thoroughly: Ensure all new code has appropriate test coverage
  • Use TodoWrite: Track all progress throughout

Phase 1: Discovery

Goal: Understand what needs to be built

Initial request: $ARGUMENTS

Actions:

  1. Create todo list with all phases
  2. If feature unclear, ask user for:
    • What problem are they solving?
    • What should the feature do?
    • Any constraints or requirements?
  3. Summarize understanding and confirm with user

Phase 2: Codebase Exploration

Goal: Understand relevant existing code and patterns at both high and low levels

Actions:

  1. Launch 2-3 code-explorer agents in parallel. Each agent should:

    • Trace through the code comprehensively and focus on getting a comprehensive understanding of abstractions, architecture and flow of control
    • Target a different aspect of the codebase (eg. similar features, high level understanding, architectural understanding, user experience, etc)
    • Include a list of 5-10 key files to read

    Example agent prompts:

    • "Find features similar to [feature] and trace through their implementation comprehensively"
    • "Map the architecture and abstractions for [feature area], tracing through the code comprehensively"
    • "Analyze the current implementation of [existing feature/area], tracing through the code comprehensively"
    • "Identify UI patterns, testing approaches, or extension points relevant to [feature]"
  2. Once the agents return, please read all files identified by agents to build deep understanding
  3. Present comprehensive summary of findings and patterns discovered

Phase 3: Clarifying Questions

Goal: Fill in gaps and resolve all ambiguities before designing

CRITICAL: This is one of the most important phases. DO NOT SKIP.

Actions:

  1. Review the codebase findings and original feature request
  2. Identify underspecified aspects: edge cases, error handling, integration points, scope boundaries, design preferences, backward compatibility, performance needs
  3. Present all questions to the user in a clear, organized list
  4. Wait for answers before proceeding to architecture design

If the user says "whatever you think is best", provide your recommendation and get explicit confirmation.


Phase 4: Architecture Design

Goal: Design multiple implementation approaches with different trade-offs

Actions:

  1. Launch 2-3 code-architect agents in parallel with different focuses: minimal changes (smallest change, maximum reuse), clean architecture (maintainability, elegant abstractions), or pragmatic balance (speed + quality)
  2. Review all approaches and form your opinion on which fits best for this specific task (consider: small fix vs large feature, urgency, complexity, team context)
  3. Present to user: brief summary of each approach, trade-offs comparison, your recommendation with reasoning, concrete implementation differences
  4. Ask user which approach they prefer

Phase 5: Implementation

Goal: Build the feature

DO NOT START WITHOUT USER APPROVAL

Actions:

  1. Wait for explicit user approval
  2. Read all relevant files identified in previous phases
  3. Implement following chosen architecture
  4. Follow codebase conventions strictly
  5. Write clean, well-documented code
  6. Update todos as you progress

Phase 6: Automated Testing

Goal: Ensure comprehensive test coverage and all tests pass

Actions:

  1. Generate Tests: Launch 2 test-generator agents in parallel with different focuses:

    • Unit tests: Focus on individual functions, edge cases, error handling
    • Integration tests: Focus on component interactions, data flow, API contracts

    Each agent should analyze the new code and provide:

    • Test cases with full implementation code
    • Priority ranking (critical/important/nice-to-have)
    • Required mocks and fixtures
  2. Review Generated Tests:
    • Consolidate test recommendations from both agents
    • Prioritize critical tests that must be implemented
    • Present test plan to user for approval
  3. Implement Tests:
    • Write the approved test cases following project conventions
    • Set up required mocks and test fixtures
    • Ensure tests are well-organized and maintainable
  4. Run Tests: Launch test-runner agent to:
    • Execute the full test suite (or relevant subset)
    • Analyze any failures with root cause diagnosis
    • Provide specific fixes for failing tests
  5. Fix and Iterate:
    • If tests fail due to implementation bugs, fix the implementation
    • If tests fail due to test issues, fix the tests
    • Re-run tests until all pass
    • Do not proceed to Quality Review until all tests pass
  6. Report Coverage: Summarize test coverage achieved and any gaps

Phase 7: Quality Review

Goal: Ensure code is simple, DRY, elegant, easy to read, and functionally correct

Actions:

  1. Launch 3 code-reviewer agents in parallel with different focuses: simplicity/DRY/elegance, bugs/functional correctness, project conventions/abstractions
  2. Consolidate findings and identify highest severity issues that you recommend fixing
  3. Present findings to user and ask what they want to do (fix now, fix later, or proceed as-is)
  4. Address issues based on user decision
  5. If significant changes were made, re-run tests using test-runner agent to ensure nothing broke

Phase 8: Summary

Goal: Document what was accomplished

Actions:

  1. Mark all todos complete
  2. Summarize:
    • What was built
    • Key decisions made
    • Files modified
    • Test coverage achieved
    • Suggested next steps

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.