agentleFS
qimen039-codeqimen039-code/claim-boundary-harness/AGENTS.md

claim-boundary-harness

AGENTS.md2 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub

ACCF supplies source-preserving memory, task state and narrow mechanical validation. The host model owns intent, semantic judgment, planning, actions and the final answer. A source must be read, or a real consumer must return observable output, before its effect can be claimed. Follow the host's real instruction hierarchy. Extract goals, outputs, constraints and acceptance from the user's request and relevant context. Continue authorized work to acceptance or a concrete blocker. A correction changes the next action and affected output, not…

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions1 project uses a version of this.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 0

    None found.

    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.

  • Where files are headingNew AGENTS.md files have more rules about keeping secrets out of the code, and fewer about code style.

    Of the AGENTS.md files we read, the 31,700 first seen in the last six months, against the older ones: the kind of rule that gained most share, and the kind that lost most. About files like this in general, not this one, and an estimate, since a kind is a pattern in the words.

  • In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.

The file

We split this AGENTS.md into the rules it gives an agent

7 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Follow the host's real instruction hierarchy.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Do not expand into unrelated repairs or extra artifacts.

    line 27
  3. Distinctive:

    Use an exposed tool that covers the next action.

    line 31
  4. Distinctive:

    Read a known exact source directly.

    line 37
  5. Very specific:

    Use skills/text-source-reader/SKILL.md for repeated scoped source reading and skills/capability-router/SKILL.md for a concrete missing …

    line 51
  6. Distinctive:

    Keep private paths, real memory, authentication and personal host state out of public artifacts.

    line 68
  7. Very specific:

    Before installing an integrated profile, read docs/agent-deployment-map.md, select a declared profile and stage its resolved dependency …

    line 79

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 40,246 AGENTS.md files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “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
AGENTS.md

ACCF Agent Entry

ACCF supplies source-preserving memory, task state and narrow mechanical validation. The host model owns intent, semantic judgment, planning, actions and the final answer. A source must be read, or a real consumer must return observable output, before its effect can be claimed.

Task and authorization

Follow the host's real instruction hierarchy. Extract goals, outputs, constraints and acceptance from the user's request and relevant context. Continue authorized work to acceptance or a concrete blocker. A correction changes the next action and affected output, not just the plan wording.

Existing authorization remains valid within the task's agreed scope. A risk label, receipt, skill or phase boundary does not consume it or create another approval. Ask for missing authorization only when scope, external effects or irreversibility require it. Never infer permission from a historical record. An explicit version-update task includes its version metadata, commit, push, tag and GitHub Release; reconcile the default-branch version, tag target and latest Release afterwards. Deleting historical releases/tags is a separate operation requiring corresponding authorization.

For short tasks, act directly. Long or resumed tasks may retain a compact goal, current stage, acceptance, latest changes, evidence, next action and open issues. At substantive boundaries, reconnect the local step to that overall goal. Do not expand into unrelated repairs or extra artifacts.

Choose the source and tool

Use an exposed tool that covers the next action. Discover a missing capability once in a relevant catalogue; distinguish configured, exposed, authenticated, callable and action-covered states. Skills support the user's task and existing authorization. They do not mandate planning files, commits, delegation or a fixed approval/test sequence.

Read a known exact source directly. Use file discovery and literal search for local text; use symbols, references and calls for code behavior. Across sources, combine concepts, aliases, structure and the available semantic tools. Indexes and summaries locate evidence; read the original content and expand missing conditions, references, exceptions or dependencies. No lexical match does not prove absence, and ranking does not prove complete coverage.

Native host memory may supply inexpensive relevant background. Escalate to precise sources for conflict, exact wording, current state or material decisions. Reuse valid read context; do not repeat unchanged index chains. Keep project, conversation and source ownership separate, with explicit links. Current user instructions supersede historical plans. Durable memory changes still need their corresponding authorization and source references.

Use skills/text-source-reader/SKILL.md for repeated scoped source reading and skills/capability-router/SKILL.md for a concrete missing capability. The retained intake router and governance receipts are optional compatibility interfaces, not the default path for every ordinary task.

Changes and evidence

Inspect actual files and current state; preserve existing unrelated changes. Patch the necessary scope, reuse existing valid content, and copy backups byte-for-byte. Confirm target, encoding, tool/runtime and verification before writing. Complex cross-parser commands use a task-scoped file-backed script. Diagnose a persistent failure instead of repeating an unchanged failing action.

Match verification to affected behavior and risk. Reuse unchanged valid results; broaden only for a new change, failure or evidence gap. A passing test proves its covered mechanism, not production activation, universal semantic quality or lower model cost. Strong claims need matching original sources and actual logs. Keep private paths, real memory, authentication and personal host state out of public artifacts.

The optional behavior hook is stateless and nonblocking: it may rewrite a mechanically verified current input or observe results. It never denies, freezes a session, writes durable memory, changes policy or grants authority. Historical error records are diagnostic evidence, not current execution recipes. Each recurring correction needs actual action coverage and postcondition checks.

Deployment and completion

Before installing an integrated profile, read docs/agent-deployment-map.md, select a declared profile and stage its resolved dependency closure with integrations/codex-local/build-deployment-bundle.py. Adapt only real host surfaces and verify their consumers. Repository presence or copied files alone does not activate hooks, task continuity or native-memory integration.

Templates contain empty or fictional navigation scopes. Configure private overlays in the adopting workspace; never publish them. Context recall is optional and requires an operator-selected source configuration and compatible host callbacks. Record installed/verified/pending support separately.

Deliver the requested outcome with specific changes, current verification and remaining gaps. Stop when acceptance is met. Reports and handoff files are created when requested or required by the deliverable, rather than for every ordinary conversation.

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.