follow-up
Skill2 starsChanged 28 days agoMITView on GitHub
Finish what earlier releases left open: go through every release whose status is `open`, check its watches (verifications that wait for something real to happen — the first real payment, the next nightly run), run any verification that has become possible, and close each release once nothing is left. Reach for this between work sessions, when `/debrief` or `/release` reports open items, or when asked whether last week's change has proven itself. Never ships anything.
23 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Jakeschincariol/whale-skilltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Jakeschincariol/closer-skilltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Celorus/celorus-plugintheir own version, first seen Nov 6, 2026
- digitalgym/aipathway-standardstheir own version, first seen Nov 4, 2026
- burnoutscript/sales-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- aya-taleb/biz-boost-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use call-prep, mock-interview and 1 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.
AnthropicSkillcall-prep
Prepare for a customer or prospect call using Common Room signals. Triggers on 'prep me for my call with [company]', 'prepare for a meeting with [company]', 'what should I know before talking to [company]', or any call preparation request.
Also in 3 projects that use this
aslavchevSkillmock-interview
Simulate a real job interview for any role. Use when user says "mock interview", "interview me", "interview prep", "practice interview", or wants to rehearse for a specific company or position. Adapts rounds and questions to the role — technical, managerial, creative, or any other.
Also in 3 projects that use this
jwilgerSkillpipeline
Autonomous build-phase orchestrator with 8-stage per-slice pipeline (decompose, slice readiness review, implement via TDD pairs, three-stage code review, address feedback, mutation testing, push/CI, merge/flag). Manages slice queue (walking skeleton first, dependency ordering), dispatches TDD pairs with capability detection, enforces 5 binary quality gates with 3-cycle rework budgets and human escalation, maintains audit trail, and respects strict controller boundaries (never writes code, delegates all creative work). Supports three autonomy levels (conservative/standard/full). Use when running factory mode, orchestrating build phases, managing slice queues, or coordinating TDD pairs with review gates. Triggers on: "run the pipeline", "factory mode", "build phase", "slice queue", "quality gates", "autonomous build". NOT for: individual TDD (use tdd), standalone code reviews (use code-review), CI-only workflows (use ci-integration).
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions23 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 23
- n24q02m/better-email-mcp★ 37same name
- n24q02m/email★ 37same name
- Jakeschincariol/closer-skill★ 33same name
- etrebels/claude-code-growth-os★ 21same name
- alejopijuan/Claude-Code-Agency-Co-Founder★ 19same name
- Jakeschincariol/whale-skill★ 15same name
- zime-skills/global★ 8same name
- zime-skills/zime-skills★ 8same name
- noticedso/skills★ 2same name
- palashjain95/jobhunter★ 2same name
13 more not listed
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.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
3 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 19 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 21
Stop only at items that need the user, and collect them for the end.
- Very specific: line 56
Not yet → leave it open; add Checked <date>: not yet — <what you saw>.
- Very specific: line 79
Commit the files you changed (docs(release): follow up <names>), with an explicit pathspec, pushed only if RELEASING.md says bookkeeping …
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 19 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.
Files
<Args>$ARGUMENTS</Args>
<Args> may name one release (3.6.0, 2026-10-05-3f9a1c2) to limit the run to it.
Follow up on open releases
A release stays open while any of its boxes are unticked — mostly watches, sometimes a
verification that needed a moment the release could not wait for. This skill is the only place
they get worked, so the debrief stays on the hot path and the release can end.
It runs on its own: within the autonomy rules of RELEASING.md, check and tick without asking.
Stop only at items that need the user, and collect them for the end.
1. Read the ground
cat RELEASING.mdFrom it: the releases directory, the autonomy rules, the test surfaces, and whether bookkeeping
commits are pushed. git pull first where bookkeeping is pushed — others release and follow up
too. Then list the release directories whose RELEASE.md says status: open (and in-flight ones
only to skip them — a running release belongs to its release session). A release's open boxes are
in the files of its directory — the theme files, and RELEASE.md itself for releases from before
there were theme files.
Nothing open → say so in one line and stop.
2. Secure access before working
The user starts a follow-up and moves on, so every login has to be in place before the first item.
List the surfaces the open items will need — the production app in the browser (as which account),
Slack or Discord channels, test servers, cluster contexts, tokens; RELEASING.md's test surfaces
say how each is reached — and probe each once, read-only (logged in as the expected account, with the rights the check needs? channel
readable? get works?), using the probe RELEASING.md names where it names one. Collect every gap
into one message with exactly what the user has to do, wait, re-probe, repeat until all is
green. A surface the user waives leaves the items that need it for them. Then say in one line that
access is set and the rest runs without them.
3. Work each open item
Per release, oldest first, per debrief file, per unticked box:
- A watch (
[watch]): run its read-only check.- The event happened → check what the watch actually verifies (the booking has the new field, the job ran with the new behaviour), tick it with a one-line note of what you saw and when.
- Not yet → leave it open; add
Checked <date>: not yet — <what you saw>. If it has been open long enough that the event should have happened by now (the first payment after a change usually comes within a day or two), say so: a watch that never fires may mean the change broke the path that would trigger it. - Never cause the event yourself to make it fire — no test payment into a real ledger, no synthetic action against real users. A watch exists precisely because that would be wrong.
- A verification left open: run it now, within the autonomy rules, on the test surfaces
RELEASING.mdlists. Tick what passes, note what fails. - A box that needs the user (a click, a decision, something the autonomy rules forbid): leave it, collect it for the report.
- A Fixed entry in
Users noticewhose verification is now ticked: reply to the reporter as thereleaseskill describes (thread reply, checkmark reaction, tick,Replied:) — the reply was waiting for exactly this.
4. Close what is done
A release whose every box in every file is now ticked (or [~] carried by the user's decision) gets
status: closed and closed: <date> in its RELEASE.md. announced: does not hold a release open — announcing is
/announce's business, not a box. Never carry an item into next/ on your own —
if an item looks like it will never be satisfiable as written, propose carrying or dropping it and
let the user decide. Carrying follows step 13 of the release skill; a dropped item becomes
- [~] with → dropped: <reason>.
Commit the files you changed (docs(release): follow up <names>), with an explicit
pathspec, pushed only if RELEASING.md says bookkeeping commits are pushed.
5. Report
Per release: what you ticked and what you saw, what is still open and why (not yet happened / needs you / failed), which releases you closed. End with the items that need the user — each with what exactly they would do.
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.

