accelerate
Skill8 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub
Accelerate issue implementation through autonomous or semi-autonomous agent work. Covers classification, prompt generation, @Codex dispatch, and progress tracking. Examples: - /accelerate 287 — single issue - /accelerate 191 197 127 — batch For each issue, validate before doing any work: Wait for user approval before executing. Ensure these labels exist (create if missing): For issues routed locally: When asked for status:
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- Alexander-Tyagunov/magiciantheir own version, first seen Sep 28, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- Alexander-Tyagunov/magician★ 14same name
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.
In this repository31 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- implement-issueSkill
- pipeline-engSkill
- pipeline-orchestrateSkill
- pipeline-peSkill
- pipeline-scorerSkill
- qa-acceleratedSkill
- qa-prSkill
- qa-webSkill
- releaseSkill
- review-feedbackSkill
- roadmap-prioritizationSkill
- roadmap-refinementSkill
- security-auditSkill
- accelerateSkill
- implement-issueSkill
- pipeline-engSkill
- pipeline-orchestrateSkill
- pipeline-peSkill
- pipeline-scorerSkill
- qa-acceleratedSkill
- qa-hitlSkill
- qa-prSkill
- qa-webSkill
- releaseSkill
- review-feedbackSkill
- roadmap-prioritizationSkill
- roadmap-refinementSkill
- screenshotsSkill
- security-auditSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈5
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 23
Report blockers: before proceeding
- Distinctive: line 52
Wait for user approval before executing.
- Distinctive: line 56
Ensure these labels exist (create if missing):
- Distinctive: line 95
Follow standard AGENTS.md workflow (branch, commit, PR)
- Distinctive: line 99
When asked for status:
≈ “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
Accelerate GitHub Issues
Accelerate issue implementation through autonomous or semi-autonomous agent work. Covers classification, prompt generation, @Codex dispatch, and progress tracking.
Usage
/accelerate <issue-numbers>Examples:
/accelerate 287— single issue/accelerate 191 197 127— batch
Phase 0: Pre-Flight
For each issue, validate before doing any work:
- Fetch issue details via
gh issue view - State check: Skip if closed
- Duplicate check: Any open PRs already referencing this issue? (
gh pr list --search "#{number}") - Label check: Already has
acceleratedlabel? May be in-progress - Report blockers before proceeding
Phase 1: Classification
Route Decision
| Signal | Route | Rationale |
| Labels include "spike" or "investigation" | Local (Codex) | Requires exploration |
| Title starts with "SPIKE:", "RFC:", "Research:" | Local | Explicit exploration |
| Files mentioned > 5, or touches core abstractions | Local | Complex scope |
| Mentions "debug", "trace", "investigate" | Local | Needs interactivity |
| Clear acceptance criteria + bounded scope | Cloud (@Codex) | Automatable |
| Bug with repro steps | Cloud (@Codex) | Clear fix path |
| UI enhancement with clear scope | Cloud (@Codex) | Bounded feature |
Present Classification
## Acceleration Plan
| Issue | Title | Route | Rationale |
|-------|-------|-------|-----------|
| #287 | Move files | Cloud | UI feature, bounded scope |
| #191 | Auto-update | Local | Complex, touches build pipeline |
Confirm to proceed, or specify overrides.Wait for user approval before executing.
Phase 2: Label Management
Ensure these labels exist (create if missing):
| Label | Color | Description |
accelerated | #7057ff | Issue queued for agent acceleration |
Label Lifecycle
| Event | Label Action | Execution Step |
| On acceleration start | Add accelerated | Phase 3 Cloud step 1 / Local step 1 |
| On @Codex comment posted | (label already applied) | Phase 3 Cloud step 2 |
| On PR created | Update to accelerated:pr-open | Phase 3 Cloud step 4 |
| On PR merged | Remove all accelerated* labels | — |
Phase 3: Execution
Cloud Route (@Codex on GitHub)
- Add
acceleratedlabel to the issue - Post a
@Codexcomment on the issue to trigger theCodex.ymlworkflow:
@Codex Implement this issue.
Read AGENTS.md for project conventions (commit format, branch naming, PR format).
Create a feature branch, implement the changes, and open a PR.- The
Codex.ymlworkflow handles the rest — it picks up@Codexmentions, creates a branch, implements, and opens a PR. - On PR created: update label to
accelerated:pr-open(if label exists)
Local Route (Codex)
For issues routed locally:
- Add
acceleratedlabel to the issue - Present the issue details and suggest an implementation approach
- Work through it interactively with the user
- Follow standard AGENTS.md workflow (branch, commit, PR)
Phase 4: Progress Tracking
When asked for status:
gh issue list -R solo-ist/prose --label "accelerated" --json number,title,state,labels
gh pr list -R solo-ist/prose --search "accelerated" --json number,title,stateDecision Framework
Proceed via Cloud When:
- Acceptance criteria are explicit and testable
- Changes are additive (low regression risk)
- Scope is ≤5 files
- Issue type is Feature or Bug with clear repro
Route Locally When:
- Multiple valid architectural approaches exist
- Changes affect core abstractions or shared utilities
- Acceptance criteria are ambiguous
- Would require changes to >10 files
- Requires Circuit Electron QA testing
- Spike or exploration issue
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.