agentleFS
siemendevsiemendev/release-process/skills/follow-up/SKILL.md

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

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.
  • AnthropicSkill

    call-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

  • aslavchevSkill

    mock-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

  • jwilgerSkill

    pipeline

    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

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
  1. Distinctive:

    Stop only at items that need the user, and collect them for the end.

    line 21
  2. Very specific:

    Not yet → leave it open; add Checked <date>: not yet — <what you saw>.

    line 56
  3. Very specific:

    Commit the files you changed (docs(release): follow up <names>), with an explicit pathspec, pushed only if RELEASING.md says bookkeeping …

    line 79

“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.

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

<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.md

From 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.md lists. 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 notice whose verification is now ticked: reply to the reporter as the release skill 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.

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.