agentleFS
robconeryrobconery/kolea/.claude/skills/github/SKILL.md

github

Skill7 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

GitHub workflow conventions: writing clear conventional commits, opening detailed issues and PRs via the `gh` CLI, and choosing trunk-based vs short-lived branch flow based on the size of the change. Use whenever the user wants to commit, branch, push, open an issue, open a PR, or asks how to structure any of those. Keep it light — direct, detailed messages, no ceremony.

  • Reads credentials
  • Commits and pushes

166 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use taskflow-inbox-triage, BlueBubbles and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • AtomicBot-aiSkill

    taskflow-inbox-triage

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • jiulingyunSkill

    BlueBubbles

    为Clawdbot构建或更新BlueBubbles外部通道插件(扩展包,REST发送/探测,webhook入站)。

    Also in 20 projects that use this

  • hkyutongSkill

    node-connect

    Diagnose OpenClaw node connection and pairing failures for Android, iOS, and macOS companion apps. Use when QR/setup code/manual connect fails, local Wi-Fi works but VPS/tailnet does not, or errors mention pairing required, unauthorized, bootstrap token invalid or expired, gateway.bind, gateway.remote.url, Tailscale, or plugins.entries.device-pair.config.publicUrl.

    Also in 18 projects that use this

  • molt-botSkill

    discord-e2e

    Test Discord with Convex-leased QA bots: check credentials without a Gateway, exercise owned messages, or prove OpenClaw replies, files, threads, reactions, streaming, and typing. Distinguish API and Gateway evidence from manual user interactions.

    Also in 10 projects that use this

  • molt-botSkill

    openclaw-repair-sweep

    Run scoped OpenClaw issue/PR repair campaigns: coordinate workers, prove root causes, and land or close verified work under the requested authority.

    Also in 10 projects that use this

  • clawdbotSkill

    openclaw-performance

    Performance work in OpenClaw: a slow or heavy flow (latency, CPU, memory, SQL, RPC, renders), writing or reviewing a perf PR, or adding a cache. Count the work, delete waste first, cache last.

    Also in 7 projects that use this

  • +2 more from molt-bot

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

12 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 151 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 6

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  • could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
  1. Distinctive:

    Trunk-based (commit straight to main): when:

    line 19
  2. Distinctive:

    Test-only addition that doesn't change behavior.

    line 22
  3. Distinctive:

    Keep branches short-lived.

    line 41
  4. Distinctive:

    Always include one if the change isn't self-evident from the diff.

    line 66
  5. Very specific:

    Add labels if the repo uses them (--label bug, --label good-first-issue).

    line 140
  6. Very specific:

    Add an assignee if known (--assignee @me).

    line 141
  7. Distinctive:

    If the branch isn't pushed, push it first: git push -u origin HEAD.

    line 199
  8. Very specific:

    Don't push to main with --force.

    line 205
  9. Very specific:

    Don't --no-verify to skip hooks unless explicitly asked.

    line 206
  10. Very specific:

    Never commit secrets — re-check the diff for .env, tokens, keys.

    line 207
  11. Very specific:

    Never commit large binaries or node_modules/ — confirm .gitignore covers them.

    line 208
  12. Distinctive:

    If git status shows untracked files you didn't expect, investigate before staging — could be the user's WIP.

    line 210

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 151 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

GitHub workflow

The point: write commits, issues, and PRs that read clearly weeks later. Be direct, be specific, skip the filler.

Branching — when to branch, when not

Trunk-based (commit straight to main) when:

  • Single-file or single-concept fix.
  • Typo, doc tweak, version bump, comment, lint fix.
  • Test-only addition that doesn't change behavior.
  • Anything that takes one commit and reviews itself in 30 seconds.

Short-lived branch when:

  • More than ~2 commits expected.
  • New feature or capability, even a small one.
  • Schema/migration change.
  • Anything that could break main for someone else.
  • A spec / plan task that has its own id (e.g. T052 from docs/PLAN.md).

Branch naming: <type>/<short-slug> — type is one of feat, fix, chore, docs, refactor, test. Examples:

feat/order-fulfillment-tx
fix/signature-verify-header-case
chore/bump-drizzle

Keep branches short-lived. Open the PR early, even as draft.

Commits — Conventional Commits, kept honest

Format:

<type>(<optional scope>): <imperative summary, lower-case, no period>

<body — what changed and why, wrapped at ~72 cols>

<footer — refs, breaking changes>

Types: feat, fix, chore, docs, refactor, test, perf, build, ci, revert.

Summary line rules:

  • 50 chars or fewer when possible, hard cap 72.
  • Imperative mood (add, not added/adds).
  • No trailing period.
  • Scope is optional; use it when there's an obvious area (feat(webhook): …, fix(db): …).

Body rules:

  • Always include one if the change isn't self-evident from the diff.
  • Explain what changed and why — never restate the diff line by line. Mention trade-offs or alternatives rejected if relevant.
  • One blank line between summary and body.
  • Reference issues with Refs #123 or Closes #123.

Footers:

  • Closes #N to auto-close an issue on merge.
  • BREAKING CHANGE: <what breaks, how to migrate> for breakages.
  • Co-Authored-By: lines when pairing.

Example — good:

feat(webhook): ack fast and defer fulfillment via waitUntil

Providers retry on slow acks. Cold-start latency plus downstream
work in-request risks tripping the timeout, so the handler now:

  1. verifies the signature
  2. inserts the pings row
  3. returns 200
  4. runs fulfillment in ctx.waitUntil

The pings insert stays before the outer try/catch so an error path
always has a row to mark.

Refs STORY-003

Example — bad (don't):

  • fix stuff
  • WIP
  • Update webhook.ts (says nothing the diff doesn't)
  • Added some changes and refactored a couple of things (vague + past tense)

Issues — gh issue create

A useful issue answers: what's wrong / what's wanted, what's the context, what does done look like.

Body template:

## Context
<one paragraph: where this came from, why it matters, link to story id
or spec section if relevant>

## What we want
<the concrete change or behavior — bulleted is fine>

## Acceptance criteria
- [ ] <observable outcome 1>
- [ ] <observable outcome 2>

## Notes
<optional — links, screenshots, related PRs, anything that helps the
person picking this up>

Command:

gh issue create \
  --title "feat(webhook): defer fulfillment via waitUntil" \
  --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Context
...
EOF
)"

Add labels if the repo uses them (--label bug, --label good-first-issue). Add an assignee if known (--assignee @me).

Pull requests — gh pr create

A useful PR answers: what changed, why, how to verify, what could go wrong.

Body template:

## Summary
- <bullet 1 — the headline change>
- <bullet 2 — the next>
- <bullet 3 — caveats / non-changes>

## Why
<one paragraph: the motivation. Link the story or issue.>

## How to verify
- [ ] <step 1 — a concrete check, ideally a command>
- [ ] <step 2>
- [ ] <step 3>

## Risk / rollback
<what could go wrong, how to revert. "low risk, revert via git revert"
is fine when true.>

Closes #<issue-number, if any>

Command (always use a HEREDOC for the body — preserves formatting):

gh pr create \
  --title "feat(webhook): defer fulfillment via waitUntil" \
  --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Summary
- Ack-fast handler returns 200 in <200ms
- Fulfillment moved to ctx.waitUntil
- pings row inserted before any try/catch

## Why
Cold-start + downstream calls risked tripping the provider's webhook timeout.

## How to verify
- [ ] `bun test tests/fast-ack-deferred-fulfillment.spec.ts`
- [ ] Replay a sample webhook event against the local handler

## Risk / rollback
Low — revert via `git revert`. No schema change.

Closes #12
EOF
)"

Notes:

  • Title follows Conventional Commits, same as a commit summary.
  • If the branch isn't pushed, push it first: git push -u origin HEAD.
  • For draft PRs: --draft.
  • For PRs targeting a non-default base: --base <branch>.

Sanity rules

  • Don't push to main with --force. Ever.
  • Don't --no-verify to skip hooks unless explicitly asked.
  • Never commit secrets — re-check the diff for .env, tokens, keys.
  • Never commit large binaries or node_modules/ — confirm .gitignore covers them.
  • If git status shows untracked files you didn't expect, investigate before staging — could be the user's WIP.

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.