reuse-first
Skill2 starsChanged 3 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use when a task may duplicate existing repository code, a standard protocol, platform capability, maintained library, framework feature, or upstream reference implementation.
5 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Leksgg/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Oct 20, 2026
- tentenco/skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 10, 2026
- bhagyamudgal/skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 9, 2026
- AlemTuzlak/skillstheir own version, first seen Aug 3, 2026
- answersamir/codebase-hygienetheir own version, first seen Jul 20, 2026
Other versions5 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 5
- AlemTuzlak/skills★ 45same name
- tentenco/skills★ 5same name
- bhagyamudgal/skills★ 2same name
- answersamir/codebase-hygiene★ 1same name
- Leksgg/claude-skills★ 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.
- adversarial-auditSkill
- architectSkill
- cloud-run-basicsSkill
- debuggingSkill
- design-reviewSkill
- executorSkill
- gap-analysisSkill
- github-workflowSkill
- optimizationSkill
- reliabilitySkill
- researchSkill
- security-reviewSkill
- simplicitySkill
- verificationSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 8
Prefer reuse before invention, but never dependency before thinking.
- Distinctive: line 12
Before designing a new subsystem or utility, inspect:
- Distinctive: line 37
Prefer the smallest adoption surface that solves the problem.
- Distinctive: line 46
BUILD: no acceptable existing option satisfies the constraints.
- Very specific: line 54
Use simplicity to reduce the shape of the chosen solution.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 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
Reuse First
Prefer reuse before invention, but never dependency before thinking.
Search from nearest to farthest
Before designing a new subsystem or utility, inspect:
- the target repository for an existing implementation, abstraction, helper, or pattern;
- the language/runtime standard library and native APIs;
- the framework or platform already in use;
- established protocols, formats, and ecosystem conventions;
- mature maintained libraries;
- upstream reference implementations or small adapters.
A new implementation needs a reason stronger than “we can write it.”
Evaluate reuse, do not worship it
For a candidate dependency or platform feature, check:
- fitness for the actual requirement;
- maintenance activity and ownership;
- security and supply-chain implications;
- license compatibility;
- API stability and migration path;
- lock-in and portability;
- runtime, bundle, storage, and operational cost;
- transitive complexity and configuration burden;
- whether a thin adapter isolates the dependency cleanly.
Prefer the smallest adoption surface that solves the problem. Reuse an existing repository primitive when it is already the project convention. Prefer a standard protocol over a proprietary mechanism when project constraints permit.
Decision outcomes
A good review can conclude:
- REUSE: existing capability already fits;
- WRAP: reuse behind a small project-owned adapter;
- EXTEND: modify an existing project abstraction;
- BUILD: no acceptable existing option satisfies the constraints.
Record why rejected options fail the project’s constraints so a later agent does not repeat the same search. If an existing capability solves 90% of the requirement, compare the cost of a small adapter with the long-term cost of owning the missing 10% yourself.
Failure modes
Do not add a package for a trivial function. Do not create internal infrastructure because a mature platform feature feels “too easy.” Do not copy an upstream implementation and silently inherit its maintenance burden. Do not force a dependency whose abstraction is larger than the problem.
Use simplicity to reduce the shape of the chosen solution. Use research when candidate behavior, maturity, licensing, security, or current support must be verified externally.
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.

