fable-validate-fableplan-loop
Skill50 starsChanged 4 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the user asks to validate a GitHub issue with Fable 5.1, always plan it with Fable 5.1, and autonomously drive it to a reviewed PR in one shot — "fable-validate-fableplan-loop", "fable validate, fable plan, and work on #N", "fully automate #N with fable validation and an unconditional fable plan". Runs fable-validate, auto-applies its update-issue edits when the verdict calls for it, has fableplan produce and post a Fable 5.1 implementation plan for EVERY issue (no score gate — unlike fable-validate-loop, which skips planning when the score is below 75), then hands off to work-on-issue-loop — stopping instead when validation flags the issue as too large, architecturally infeasible, or already addressed by an existing PR, or recommended for closure as completed or invalid.
In this repository39 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- app-prdSkill
- cli-dispatchSkill
- codex-validate-plan-work-on-issueSkill
- create-releaseSkill
- execution-plan-reviewSkill
- expo-app-initializeSkill
- fable-advisorSkill
- fable-dispatchSkill
- fable-new-issue-loopSkill
- fable-new-issueSkill
- fable-orchestrateSkill
- fableplan-loopSkill
- fableplanSkill
- fableplan-work-on-issueSkill
- fable-validate-fableplanSkill
- fable-validate-loopSkill
- fable-validateSkill
- fix-pr-review-loopSkill
- fix-pr-reviewSkill
- github-issue-formatSkill
- issueplanSkill
- milestoneplanSkill
- milestone-workflowSkill
- new-app-pipelineSkill
- new-issue-loopSkill
- new-issueSkill
- prd-questionsSkill
- prd-to-issuesSkill
- pr-reviewSkill
- sync-docs-releaseSkill
- sync-docsSkill
- tldrSkill
- validate-fableplan-loopSkill
- validate-issue-loopSkill
- validate-issueSkill
- wansSkill
- work-on-issue-loopSkill
- work-on-issueSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 21
Follow fable-validate-loop steps 1 through 6 with these changes:
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill 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.
Files
fable-validate-fableplan-loop
Chain fable-validate → (conditional) update issue → fableplan → work-on-issue-loop into one autonomous run.
This is fable-validate-loop with the score gate removed: fableplan always runs, whatever the validated complexity score, and there is no "skip when the score is below 75" rule. When skipping the plan for lower-band issues is fine, use fable-validate-loop.
Do not skip or reorder the chain. Validation gates planning, and the plan gates implementation. This variant has no sanctioned skip: every step runs, and only the "wait for the user's reply" moments are replaced by the decision rules in the cited steps.
Input
Same as fable-validate-loop, including the optional targetBranch.
Steps
Follow fable-validate-loop steps 1 through 6 with these changes:
Step 1 (fable-validate) applies unchanged.
Step 2 (scope gate) applies unchanged, with fable-validate-loop step 2's STOP table.
Step 3 (update-issue edits): apply them per fable-validate step 5 / validate-issue step 11; the stacked Validated with LLM: … attribution line uses the harness suffix fable-validate-fableplan-loop.
Step 4 (fableplan): there is no score gate — fable-validate-loop's score gate, safety carve-out, and top-band note do not apply; fableplan runs for every issue that passed the step-2 scope gate, whatever the validated score. Instruct fableplan to use the harness suffix fable-validate-fableplan-loop in the posted comment's attribution footer. The rest of the step applies unchanged: fableplan's planning-phase-only invocation, and the validation verdict handed to the planner (verified/refuted claims, the Optimal-direction note when architecture was Underspecified, 5c concerns), with the scratchpad kept for step 5.
Step 5 (handoff) applies unchanged — including that deviations follow work-on-issue step 2's plan-deviation policy and must each be named in the PR body.
Step 6 (report) applies unchanged. Cap the whole report at 55 words and 5 sentences, plain simple English in ASD-STE100 — apply the Response Style rules in CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md.
Red Flags — STOP
fable-validate-loop's Red Flags table applies. Read its "only sanctioned skip is the step-4 score gate" wording as "no sanctioned skip at all": a score below 75 never skips fableplan here.
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.