fable-validate-fableplan
Skill50 starsChanged 5 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when the user asks to validate a GitHub issue with Fable 5.1 and always plan it with Fable 5.1, stopping once the plan is posted — "fable-validate-fableplan", "fable validate and fable plan #N", "validate and plan #N with fable, don't build it". Runs fable-validate, auto-applies its update-issue edits when the verdict calls for it, then has fableplan produce and post a Fable 5.1 implementation plan for EVERY issue (no score gate), and stops at the posted plan — no worktree, no build, no PR, no review loop. Stops earlier 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. The no-implementation counterpart to fable-validate-fableplan-loop.
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-fableplan-loopSkill
- 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 4 with the changes below, then run this skill's step 5 in place of fable-validate-loop's steps 5 …
≈ “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
Chain fable-validate → (conditional) update issue → fableplan into one autonomous run, and stop there. The vetted plan is posted to the issue as a comment. Nothing is built.
This is fable-validate-fableplan-loop with the handoff to work-on-issue-loop dropped. When the plan should be built and driven through review in the same run, use fable-validate-fableplan-loop.
Do not skip or reorder the chain. Validation gates planning. There is 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 4 with the changes below, then run this skill's step 5 in place of fable-validate-loop's steps 5 and 6:
Step 1 (fable-validate): also keep the verdict block and the validation report in the scratchpad; step 4 passes them to the planner.
Step 2 (scope gate): fable-validate-loop step 2's STOP table applies unchanged. An incomplete validation is never approval to plan.
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.
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 scope gate, whatever the validated score. Hand the planner the verdict block and validation report from step 1; the plan must respect what validation established (verified/refuted claims, the Optimal-direction note when architecture was Underspecified, 5c concerns). Instruct fableplan to use the harness suffix fable-validate-fableplan in the posted comment's attribution footer. fableplan stops at the posted plan, and so does this skill.
5. Report
Report, in order: scope gate passed, issue updated or not, plan posted (comment URL), and one line on what the plan proposes. Then name the follow-on options in one line — work-on-issue to build the plan and stop at the PR, work-on-issue-loop to build it and drive review to convergence, or fable-validate-fableplan-loop for the same chain end-to-end next time. Do not start any of them.
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, written for a reader with no context on this codebase.
Red Flags — STOP
fable-validate-loop's Red Flags rows for the scope gate, the step 2 human-decision rows (a) to (c), waiting on prompts, the bare issue number, the update-before-plan order, and a structurally wrong plan apply, with one substitution: in the structurally-wrong-plan row, read "post a broken plan" for "hand a broken plan to work-on-issue-loop". In addition:
| Situation | Action |
| Tempted to implement the plan, open a worktree, or open a PR | Stop at the posted plan; name work-on-issue / work-on-issue-loop / fable-validate-fableplan-loop as the follow-on instead of starting one |
| Tempted to skip validation and go straight to planning | Never reorder; there is no sanctioned skip |
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.

