agentleFS
rolandtolnayrolandtolnay/llm-toolkit/skills/plain/SKILL.md

plain

Skill1 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Rephrase an explanation in plain language without losing substance. Use when a synthesis is too dense to act on — legal, tax, accounting, product research, or technical — and the reader needs to understand it well enough to decide.

7 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use debug.

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.
  • AnthropicSkill

    debug

    Structured debugging session — reproduce, isolate, diagnose, and fix. Trigger with an error message or stack trace, "this works in staging but not prod", "something broke after the deploy", or when behavior diverges from expected and the cause isn't obvious.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

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

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Keep a term of art when the reader will encounter it again — on forms, in laws, in contracts, in vendor docs, in error messages — and …

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    every obligation, requirement, or action item, and who it falls on

    line 23
  3. Distinctive:

    every number: deadlines, amounts, thresholds, prices, limits

    line 24
  4. Distinctive:

    every condition that changes the outcome ("this applies only if…")

    line 25
  5. Distinctive:

    every material risk, penalty, or trade-off

    line 26
  6. Distinctive:

    If simplifying would collapse a distinction that changes the decision, keep the distinction and explain it plainly instead.

    line 29

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 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

Rephrase the target explanation for an intelligent reader with no background in this domain. They are not reading out of curiosity: they need to understand the material well enough to make a decision and act on it themselves, so the rewrite succeeds only if it is both understandable and complete enough to act on.

Target: $ARGUMENTS — if empty, rephrase your most recent substantive explanation in this conversation, or the material the user just referenced.

Style

Write in the style of the SEC Plain English Handbook, at roughly an 8th-grade reading level: short sentences, one idea per sentence, active voice with a named actor ("you must file X by Y", not "a filing obligation arises"), everyday words over terms of art, concrete examples over abstractions.

Lead with the answer — what this means for the reader and what they should do. Explanation and evidence come after. Default to plain paragraphs; use lists or tables only when the content is a genuine comparison or enumeration.

Keep a term of art when the reader will encounter it again — on forms, in laws, in contracts, in vendor docs, in error messages — and define it in plain words the first time, in the same sentence. Otherwise replace it.

Substance

Plain language must not cost substance. Preserve every fact that changes what the reader would decide or do:

  • every obligation, requirement, or action item, and who it falls on
  • every number: deadlines, amounts, thresholds, prices, limits
  • every condition that changes the outcome ("this applies only if…")
  • every material risk, penalty, or trade-off
  • the citations and sources behind factual claims

If simplifying would collapse a distinction that changes the decision, keep the distinction and explain it plainly instead.

If sources disagree, or the answer depends on a fact about the reader's situation you don't have, say so plainly and name the fact that decides it. Do not average disagreement into a vague middle ground, and do not let missing evidence silently become a "no".

Before answering

Compare the rewrite against the original. If a decision-relevant fact from the list above was dropped, put it back. A rewrite that survives this check is done — do not pad it back toward the original's length or density.

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.