agentleFS
rizukirrrizukirr/vibekit/skills/exec/SKILL.md

exec

Skill20 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when a plan is approved and implementation has not started: dispatches one fresh subagent per task, runs each task's verify clause, and routes failures back instead of repairing them. One task, one commit.

4 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

  • Other versions4 projects use a version of this.

    Word for word · 0

    None found.

    Edited · 0

    None found.

    Wrote their own version · 4

    1. cloudflare/computer★ 9.9ksame name
    2. nauvalazhar/skills★ 4same name
    3. sequant-io/sequant★ 1same name
    4. vzhukovs/podman-desktop-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 repository16 other files it gives its agents.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

8 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 7

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Do NOT implement any task in this session.

    line 14
  2. Distinctive:

    Before dispatching anything, refuse unless all of these hold:

    line 20
  3. Distinctive:

    Never dispatch two implementers at once.

    line 73
  4. Distinctive:

    Never fix a finding yourself.

    line 74
  5. Distinctive:

    Never re-dispatch an unchanged brief after a halt.

    line 75
  6. Distinctive:

    Never batch commits across tasks.

    line 76
  7. Distinctive:

    Every dispatch names its model explicitly.

    line 80
  8. Very specific:

    When every task is complete, the plan file is fully ticked and the branch holds one or more commits per task.

    line 91

“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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

exec

Execute an approved plan, one task per fresh subagent. No task is written here and nothing is repaired here.

HARD-GATE

Do NOT implement any task in this session. Every task goes to a fresh subagent.

The reason is not tidiness. A session that wrote the plan reads past its own contradictions. A fresh context reads the plan literally and stops. Every plan defect found in this project was found by a dispatched implementer or a reviewer, never by the author.

Whole-plan gate

Before dispatching anything, refuse unless all of these hold:

  • The plan file exists, is committed, and the user approved it.
  • The spec it names carries status: approved.
  • The working tree is clean.
  • The run is on a dedicated branch or worktree, never the base branch.
  • Every task header carries a → verify: clause.

A plan missing even one clause is rejected whole, naming the task. Do not dispatch the tasks that do have clauses and deal with the rest later. The alternative is discovering task six is unverifiable after paying for five dispatches.

exec does not create the workspace. If there is no dedicated branch, stop and say so.

The task loop

For each task in order:

1. Record BASE. git rev-parse HEAD, before dispatch. Every later check measures against it. Never HEAD~1: a task making three commits would have two escape the scope check silently.

2. Write the brief to a file. Extract this task's section from the plan verbatim, heading, files, every step, the clause, into a scratch file, and add one line to it: invoke lazy before writing any code. Pass the path. Never paste the task into the prompt, and never hand over the whole plan. Everything pasted into a dispatch stays in your context for the rest of the session and is re-read on every later turn.

The line goes in the brief, not beside it. The brief is what the implementer treats as its requirements. Anything else is framing it may reasonably ignore.

3. Dispatch one fresh subagent. Its prompt carries: one line on where the task sits, the brief path introduced as its requirements to use verbatim, repo state it cannot infer, interfaces earlier tasks produced that its brief cannot know, and the return contract below. Restrict its tools to what the task needs, plus whatever loads a skill. The brief tells it to invoke lazy, and an instruction it has no means to obey is worse than no instruction. A constraint the runtime enforces cannot be talked past. A constraint in prose can.

A dispatched agent inherits none of this session's modifiers. It starts unaware of them. What you know about how much to build reaches the implementer only if the brief says so, and naming the skill beats restating it: the ladder has one home.

4. Run the clause. Execute the task's → verify: command yourself. Its exit status decides. This is the gate. There is no reviewer.

5. Check scope. git diff --name-only BASE..HEAD must be a subset of the task's files. Every changed line traces to the task that authorised it.

Then tick the task's checkboxes and commit that plan update on its own, so the plan always states what actually happened.

Return contract

Three statuses. Branch on the first field.

  • done: commits made as sha: subject, the command run and its exit status, and a concerns string, empty if none. Concerns are recorded, not acted on.
  • blocked: cannot be completed as written. What was tried and why it stopped. Not a retry request.
  • needs-input: a genuine ambiguity in the plan. The blocking step quoted verbatim, what was attempted from the brief alone, and two or more options. Roll back to BASE before returning, so a halt never leaves partial work.

Repair nothing

On anything that is not done, halt and route. Never fix it here.

  • needs-input: surface the question verbatim, wait. On an answer, the plan is amended by plan, in its own commit, then the task is dispatched fresh. Never patch the plan inline mid-loop: the plan and the work drift apart, and the drift is only found later, by a reviewer.
  • blocked: surface, stop the run.
  • Clause fails: halt. The task's own criterion said no. A failed clause is a failure with no diagnosis, which is what debug is for.
  • Scope violation: halt, name the offending paths.

A halt leaves the branch as it was at the last completed task.

Never

  • Never dispatch two implementers at once. They conflict.
  • Never fix a finding yourself. Your context is for coordination, and a fix you make skips the gate.
  • Never re-dispatch an unchanged brief after a halt. If it stopped, something has to change first.
  • Never batch commits across tasks.

Name the model

Every dispatch names its model explicitly. An omitted model inherits this session's, which is usually the most expensive one available, on tasks that rarely need it.

Choose by task shape, not by importance:

  • Cheap tier: the brief carries the full code and the steps are mechanical.
  • Standard tier: the steps require judgement the brief cannot spell out.

Naming it is the point. A dispatch with no model is a cost decision made by accident.

Handoff

When every task is complete, the plan file is fully ticked and the branch holds one or more commits per task. The next skill is verify. Say plainly what ran and what remains unproven.

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.