sdd-report
Skill0 starsChanged 37 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when drafting a task issue, Git commit message, pull request description, or evidence-backed task, milestone, phase or final implementation report, or review/revision campaign plan or report for an SDD project. Adapt the summary to feature, bug, code health, performance, security, testing, documentation, integration, or compatibility work without inventing results.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- duviolin/sdd-kittheir own version, first seen Sep 19, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- duviolin/sdd-kit★ 0same name
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 repository14 other files it gives its agents.
- sdd-conventionsSkill
- sdd-designSkill
- sdd-docsSkill
- sdd-forgeSkill
- sdd-implementSkill
- sdd-integrate-featureSkill
- sdd-manageSkill
- sdd-orientSkill
- sdd-planSkill
- sdd-specifySkill
- sdd-steerSkill
- sdd-tasksSkill
- sdd-tddSkill
- sdd-verifySkill
The file
Files
Report SDD work
Choose the requested output and load only its reference:
| Output | Load |
| First SDD commit disclosure/usage evidence (drafting only) | sdd-manage: skills/sdd-manage/references/repository-bootstrap.md (bundled dependency) |
| Planned task issue title and body, task/amendment or merge commit message, or pull request draft | drafts for hosted and Git objects |
| Task, milestone, phase, final implementation, branch boundary, or interrupted-work status report | completion reports |
| Adjacent SPEC/PLAN/TASKS preparation QC reports and appended correction/recheck sections | document QC reports |
| Review plan/report or revision plan/report, including focused prompt-driven review | campaign artifacts |
| Kind-specific emphasis and reusable What, Why, Verification, Result patterns | change kinds |
Use the owning TASKS or active FEATURE-TASKS entry, applicable design, SPEC, PLAN, and layout, actual changes, verification output, and Git evidence appropriate to the requested output. Obtain hosted issue references from sdd-forge when available; a guessed issue number is never acceptable. Separate planned, performed, verified, and blocked statements. State missing or limited evidence plainly; do not turn an example, unchecked task, or intended benchmark into a completed result. Follow project-specific title and reporting conventions where they exist.
Compose only the requested text or structured draft. Keep a concise shared core of What, Why, Verification, and Result, varying the labels and optional sections to suit the actual change. For a planned issue, Verification is an acceptance or check plan and Result is an intended outcome, not a completed claim. Emoji labels are optional presentation, not required metadata. For Markdown output, separate each heading from adjacent content with blank lines; a heading at the start needs no preceding blank line.
This skill drafts reports and messages. The active implementation or steering workflow owns its work commits and task status; sdd-manage coordinates other persistence and explicit boundary merges, sdd-forge owns hosted issue/milestone mutations, and any future PR workflow owns PR creation or merge. A draft does not grant authorization for those actions or establish task completion. Return the draft, source task IDs and issue references actually resolved, evidence used, and any facts still needed before publication.
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.

