agentleFS
sidiangongyuansidiangongyuan/codex-skills-library/skills/app-feature-craft/SKILL.md

app-feature-craft

Skill11 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when implementing or improving a user-facing app workflow. Guides product-grade UX, frontend, backend/API behavior, AI/provider or long-running task states, tests, and end-to-end verification from rough requirements to a shippable feature.

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

18 rules. About 0 are common, 15 are distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈15

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use this skill to turn an app request into a feature users can actually rely on.

    line 9
  2. Distinctive:

    Default to shipping the smallest complete behavior, not a technical stub.

    line 10
  3. Distinctive:

    If visual behavior matters, inspect screenshots or run the app.

    line 18
  4. Distinctive:

    Keep controls near the user's task context.

    line 29
  5. Distinctive:

    Prefer reading-first UI with focused edit affordances for dense knowledge or writing surfaces.

    line 32
  6. Distinctive:

    Follow existing local patterns instead of inventing a new framework.

    line 43
  7. Distinctive:

    Keep user data safe by default.

    line 44
  8. Distinctive:

    Do not expose raw backend/browser errors in public UI.

    line 46
  9. Distinctive:

    Do not report a fake success for external integrations.

    line 47
  10. Very specific:

    Run only the user-selected AI/profile/configuration set.

    line 49
  11. Distinctive:

    Keep separate provider profiles and locally saved keys isolated by owner.

    line 51
  12. Distinctive:

    Verify from the user's seat.

    line 56
  13. Distinctive:

    Run focused unit/API tests for changed behavior.

    line 57
  14. Distinctive:

    Run frontend tests for state, copy, and interactions.

    line 58
  15. Distinctive:

    Use browser or app screenshots for UI/visual changes.

    line 59
  16. Very specific:

    Read references/app-quality-principles.md before implementing complex app features, AI/provider integrations, long-running jobs, first-run …

    line 72
  17. Very specific:

    Read references/living-to-tell-casebook.md when the task resembles one of the captured cases: startup feedback, Not Found cleanup, AI …

    line 76
  18. Distinctive:

    Ask the user only when the decision is product intent and cannot be discovered from the codebase.

    line 84

≈ “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.

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

App Feature Craft

Use this skill to turn an app request into a feature users can actually rely on. Default to shipping the smallest complete behavior, not a technical stub.

Workflow

  1. Ground in the product before designing.
    • Inspect routes, screens, state stores, API clients, backend handlers, data models, tests, packaging scripts, and existing copy.
    • Resolve discoverable facts from the repo before asking the user.
    • If visual behavior matters, inspect screenshots or run the app.
  2. Define the user-facing outcome.
    • State what the user can do after the change.
    • Identify the audience, success criteria, in/out of scope, data safety constraints, and where the behavior must appear.
    • Separate optional convenience from behavior required for a complete feature.
  3. Design the whole path.
    • Cover UI states: empty, loading, success, failure, stale data, first-run, and already-configured.
    • Keep controls near the user's task context. Avoid bolted-on panels, rigid form-heavy surfaces, or result views that disappear behind an ambiguous "back" action.
    • Prefer reading-first UI with focused edit affordances for dense knowledge or writing surfaces.
    • Cover data/API behavior: persistence, validation, compatibility, migration, idempotency, and failure modes.
    • Cover lifecycle behavior for desktop apps: startup, restart, sidecars, installer state, and local paths when relevant.
    • For long-running AI or provider work, design background progress, reopening/recovery, cancellation semantics, and honest stage labels before implementing the request.
  4. Implement narrowly.
    • Follow existing local patterns instead of inventing a new framework.
    • Keep user data safe by default; never delete, overwrite, or migrate destructively unless the user explicitly asked for it.
    • Do not expose raw backend/browser errors in public UI.
    • Do not report a fake success for external integrations. Mocked tests prove code paths, not real provider availability.
    • Run only the user-selected AI/profile/configuration set. Do not silently add a default provider after the user made an explicit choice.
    • Keep separate provider profiles and locally saved keys isolated by owner; never let one profile's credential overwrite another profile's source.
    • Make AI-generated drafts, candidate imports, and writeback actions review-first unless the user explicitly requested automatic mutation.
  5. Verify from the user's seat.
    • Run focused unit/API tests for changed behavior.
    • Run frontend tests for state, copy, and interactions.
    • Use browser or app screenshots for UI/visual changes.
    • For provider, installer, or filesystem features, run at least one real local smoke test when credentials and environment are available.
    • For background jobs, verify close/reopen, status reconnect, cancellation, completion, and failure states without resending the provider request.
  6. Report the result.
    • Summarize user-visible changes, important files, tests run, and any residual risk.
    • Say clearly when a test was mocked, skipped, or only verified locally.

Reference Use

Read references/app-quality-principles.md before implementing complex app features, AI/provider integrations, long-running jobs, first-run experiences, data-path behavior, or desktop lifecycle work.

Read references/living-to-tell-casebook.md when the task resembles one of the captured cases: startup feedback, Not Found cleanup, AI provider transport, data location safety, installation/version mismatch, async selection races, or motif/excerpt deduplication, AI result recovery, profile key isolation, or release asset verification.

Ask Only When Needed

Ask the user only when the decision is product intent and cannot be discovered from the codebase. Prefer one concrete tradeoff question over a broad design question.

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.