cyw
Skill12 starsChanged 44 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Multi-pass review of recent work to catch errors, gaps, and improvements. Use when the user invokes /cyw, or asks to 'check your work', 'review what you just did', 'is this correct/complete?', 'what's missing?', 'what needs fixing?'. Runs a structured 3-phase loop: critical review, fix, verify. Repeats up to 3 times, stopping early when no issues remain. Supports an embedded single-pass mode (argument: single-pass) for use inside phase gates.
In this repository19 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- clarifySkill
- commitSkill
- demo-videoSkill
- diff-reviewSkill
- extract-hooksSkill
- handoffSkill
- plan-duelSkill
- plan-initSkill
- plan-init-v1Skill
- plan-phaseSkill
- plan-phase-v1Skill
- plan-runSkill
- plan-run-v1Skill
- review-panelSkill
- security-review-codebaseSkill
- tddSkill
- web-verifySkill
- xcSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 8
Run a structured review loop on the work just completed in this conversation.
- Very specific: line 10
Embedded single-pass mode: when invoked from a phase gate (e.g.
- Distinctive: line 26
Check each change against:
- Distinctive: line 39
If zero issues and this is pass 2 or later: print "No issues found — work is complete." and stop the loop.
- Distinctive: line 40
If zero issues on pass 1: still continue to pass 2 (a second clean review is required to confirm).
- Distinctive: line 49
If the work involved code changes, run the relevant test command to confirm nothing is broken.
- Distinctive: line 52
Write a brief summary: issues found this pass, issues fixed, any remaining concerns.
≈ “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
Check Your Work
Run a structured review loop on the work just completed in this conversation.
Embedded single-pass mode: when invoked from a phase gate (e.g. plan-run's Gate
transition) or with the argument single-pass, run exactly one pass — Phase 1 → 2 → 3,
then stop. In this mode the loop-control rules do not apply: ignore only the zero-issue
stop/continue rules inside Phase 1 step 4 (still produce the numbered issue list) and
the "always continue" rule (Phase 3 step 6), and skip Phase 3's full test run (step 2) —
the calling gate owns the suite. But if this pass's Fix changes production code, re-run
the scoped test(s) for it before returning, since the gate's test pass ran before
your Fix. Everything else below applies unchanged. Standalone invocations use the full
loop.
Loop control: Repeat Phases 1–3 up to 3 passes. At the start of each pass, print the header ### Pass N of 3. Stop early (before Phase 2/3) when Phase 1 finds zero issues on pass 2 or later — a clean pass 1 still requires a confirming second review. After pass 3, stop regardless of remaining issues.
Phase 1: Critical Review
- Restate the original task in one sentence to anchor the review scope.
- Re-read all files that were created or modified.
- Check each change against:
- Correctness — Does the logic do what was intended? Any bugs, wrong conditions, incorrect API usage?
- Completeness — All requirements addressed? Files missed? Edge cases skipped?
- Consistency — Matches existing naming conventions, patterns, and architecture?
- Code quality — Clean, well-structured, maintainable? Any code smells or anti-patterns?
- Integration — Correct imports? Are callers/consumers updated?
- Tests — Existing tests still pass? New tests needed?
- Produce a numbered list of issues found. Each issue must name the concrete harm it
causes, and the form that takes depends on what was reviewed. For code: the input or
condition that produces the wrong result. For prose, skills or docs: the reader who is
misled and the wrong thing they do next. An observation you cannot put in either form
is recorded as an observation and not fixed in Phase 2 — a review that changes
things it cannot show are wrong is how a clean pass makes work worse.
- If zero issues and this is pass 2 or later: print "No issues found — work is complete." and stop the loop.
- If zero issues on pass 1: still continue to pass 2 (a second clean review is required to confirm).
Phase 2: Fix
Address every issue from Phase 1, stating which issue each fix resolves.
Phase 3: Verify
- Re-read each modified file.
- If the work involved code changes, run the relevant test command to confirm nothing is broken.
- Confirm every Phase 1 issue is resolved.
- Confirm the original task is fully met.
- Write a brief summary: issues found this pass, issues fixed, any remaining concerns.
- Always continue to the next pass unless this was pass 3. Do NOT stop here even if all issues are resolved — "all issues fixed" is not the same as "Phase 1 found zero issues". The only early-stop is after Phase 1 of pass 2 or later, when zero issues are found. If this was pass 3 and issues remain, note them as unresolved concerns and stop.
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.

