agentleFS
notquenotque/vexjoy-agent/skills/process/quick/SKILL.md

quick

Skill448 starsChanged 4 days agoMITView on GitHub

Tracked lightweight execution with composable rigor flags: --trivial, --discuss, --research, --full. Covers zero-ceremony inline fixes (typo, spelling fix, small mistake in a single file, ≤3 edits) through contained multi-file changes.

18 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use discuss, next and 3 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.
  • markmdevSkill

    discuss

    Discuss a problem with other AI agents before implementing. Spawns one or more autonomous claude -p conversations with different perspectives (architect, critic, domain expert), runs multi-round discussions, and synthesizes findings. Use when facing design decisions, architecture tradeoffs, knowledge organization questions, or any problem that benefits from multiple viewpoints before committing to an approach. Also use proactively when you're uncertain about a direction.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • VercelSkill

    next

    Next.js renderer for json-render that turns JSON specs into full Next.js applications with routes, layouts, SSR, and metadata. Use when working with @json-render/next, building Next.js apps from JSON specs, or creating AI-generated multi-page applications.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AWSSkill

    ship

    Finalize dev work on an issue branch — update docs, push, and open a PR.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • Hugging FaceSkill

    implement

    Make tests pass. Invoke after /write-tests produces failing tests.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • GoogleSkill

    tdd

    Test-driven development. Use when the user wants to build features or fix bugs test-first, mentions "red-green-refactor", or wants integration tests.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 14 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 6

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    All flags default off. Combine discussion, research, and verification as needed.

    line 55
  2. Distinctive:

    Read repository CLAUDE.md unless already loaded and current.

    line 75
  3. Very specific:

    Check the branch during setup.

    line 77
  4. Very specific:

    Use for --trivial or a clearly mechanical one-line change identified by the router.

    line 81
  5. Very specific:

    Read the targets and check scope.

    line 83
  6. Very specific:

    Use discussion for --discuss or material uncertainty about the requested change, approach, or acceptance criteria.

    line 92
  7. Very specific:

    Use YYMMDD-xxx, with a Base36 sequence: 001 through 009, 00a through 00z, then 010.

    line 99
  8. Very specific:

    Create or append to root STATE.md using the reference schema.

    line 121

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 14 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

/quick

Make contained changes in one execution thread. Use /do for multiple components, architectural changes, or parallel work. Keep plans inline; do not create task_plan.md.

Flags

All flags default off. Combine discussion, research, and verification as needed.

FlagEffect
--trivialMechanical fix: at most 3 edits across at most 3 files; no displayed plan, task ID, or subagents.
--discussResolve independent ambiguities together before planning.
--interviewResolve dependent decisions one question at a time, with a recommendation.
--researchInvestigate unfamiliar code before planning.
--fullVerify the plan, then run affected tests, configured lint, and diff review.
--no-branchStay on the current branch if repository branch rules permit it.
--no-commitLeave edits uncommitted, including in trivial mode.

Deep References

WhenLoadContent
Emitting banners, commit format, STATE.md entriesreferences/templates.mdOutput and tracking contracts

Setup

Read repository CLAUDE.md unless already loaded and current. Parse flags; the remaining text is the task. Follow existing authorization and repository constraints throughout.

Check the branch during setup. Never let --trivial or --no-branch bypass branch safety. For trivial work on main/master, create quick/<brief-description>; for standard work, create quick/<task-id>-<brief-kebab-description> after assigning the ID in step 2 and before editing, unless --no-branch is allowed. Preserve unrelated changes.

Trivial mode

Use for --trivial or a clearly mechanical one-line change identified by the router.

  1. Read the targets and check scope. Investigation or unfamiliar behavior requires /quick --research; more than 3 files, new package imports, or dependency-file changes require standard /quick. For ambiguity, ask one clarifying question; if unresolved, use /quick --discuss.
  2. Edit directly and count edits. If more than 3 are needed, preserve completed work and continue standard /quick. Explain the scope change and carry forward the original request and completed edits.
  3. Review the diff and run applicable repository checks. Stage only intended files with git add <specific-files> and commit using references/templates.md, unless --no-commit applies.
  4. Emit the trivial summary and stop. Report an omitted commit as skipped, never as successful.

Standard procedure

1. Resolve decisions and investigate

Use discussion for --discuss or material uncertainty about the requested change, approach, or acceptance criteria. Batch independent questions using the DISCUSS template. Wait for answers needed to proceed; do not ask again about decisions or actions already authorized.

For --research or unfamiliar code, read relevant source, tests, and configuration. Establish current behavior, where the change fits, and what could break. Summarize findings and their effect on the plan in 3–5 lines.

2. Plan and assign an ID

Use YYMMDD-xxx, with a Base36 sequence: 001 through 009, 00a through 00z, then 010.

date_prefix=$(date +%y%m%d)

Increment today's highest sequence in root STATE.md, starting at 001 if absent. If corrupted, recover the sequence from git log entries matching Quick task YYMMDD-. Increment again on branch-name collision.

Display the inline plan from references/templates.md: intended edits, files, rationale, and estimated edit count. Create the branch under the setup rules. With --full, verify that the plan meets acceptance criteria before editing. Recommend --full for security, payments, or data migration.

3. Execute and watch scope

Make the planned edits and track their count. Above 15 estimated edits, suggest /do. Warn at 10 actual edits and reassess at 15. These standard-mode thresholds are advisory; continue within established authorization when the work remains contained. Ask only when a scope decision is unresolved. Trivial mode's 3-edit limit remains strict.

For base verification, run an appropriate syntax/build check, such as python3 -m py_compile <files>, go build ./..., or tsc --noEmit, plus required repository checks.

With --full, run tests for affected packages/modules, configured lint on changed files, and git diff review for unintended changes, missing error handling, and broken imports. Run the full suite when required by the repository or requested by the user. Fix relevant failures before claiming completion; report unrelated blockers accurately.

4. Commit and log

Unless --no-commit, stage specific intended files with git add <specific-files>, use the conventional commit format from references/templates.md, and include Quick task <task-id> in the body. Verify with git log -1 --oneline.

Create or append to root STATE.md using the reference schema. Use tier trivial->quick after escalation; otherwise quick. Record skipped commits explicitly. Emit the completion summary with changes, checks, commit or skipped status, branch, flags, and log location. Continue any already-authorized delivery steps.

Examples

Base mode: /quick add --verbose flag to the CLI -- Generate ID 260322-001, plan 3 edits (flag definition, handler, help text), create branch quick/260322-001-add-verbose-flag, execute, commit, log.

With research: /quick --research fix the timeout bug in auth middleware -- Read auth middleware first, trace call path, then plan and execute.

Escalated from trivial: --trivial hit 3-edit limit across 5 files. Quick picks up with context, plans remaining edits, commits all changes, logs as tier trivial->quick.

Full rigor: /quick --full update payment amount rounding logic -- Plan edit, execute, run tests + lint + diff review, commit.

Error Handling

ErrorCauseFix
Task ID collisionTwo tasks with same sequenceIncrement sequence. If STATE.md corrupted, scan git log for Quick task YYMMDD- to find next ID.
Scope exceeds quick tierTask grows beyond contained workSuggest /do for multi-component or architectural changes. >15 edits is advisory.
Test failure in --full modeQuality gate found issuesFix failing tests. If fix needs significant work, note in STATE.md and suggest follow-up /quick.
Branch conflictBranch quick/<id>-... existsIncrement task ID sequence and retry.

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.