agentleFS
sonichisonichi/sutando/skills/observe/SKILL.md

observe

Skill396 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

/observe — natural-language entry to the Policy Interaction Layer: compile an NL request into a structured observation/subscription policy, confirm via effect-card (or standing approval), then subscribe on the events plane.

10 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use design and ship.

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.
  • Microsoft AzureSkill

    design

    Design rules and conventions for the API Center Portal. Use when editing detail pages, card components, badges, layout, navigation, sidebars, or headers. Covers badge styling, metadata placement, page navigation patterns, and layout alignment.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AWSSkill

    ship

    Finalize dev work on an issue branch — update docs, push, and open a PR.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 9 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    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
  1. Very specific:

    Test: python3 tests/observe-policy.test.py (99% module coverage).

    line 61

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 9 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

/observe — NL → observation policy (MVP step 1)

The owner (or a scoped user) says what they want watched, in natural language:

/observe watch doc changes in this room and ping me daily

The core agent COMPILES that into a structured draft; everything deterministic around the compilation lives in observe_policy.py. Design + resolved decisions: workspace notes/observe-mvp-slice-design.md.

Processing convention (core agent, on an /observe <text> owner task)

  1. Compile (LLM-side — you): produce a draft dict: {room_id, event_types[], mode, cost_cap?, created_by, source_text}
    • room_id: the task's channel_id unless the text names another room.
    • event_types: map the intent to plane types (message.created, reaction.added, artifact.updated, member.joined, …). Unknown intent → ask, don't guess.
    • mode: observe (context only) | record (journal) | notify (ping the owner) | taskify (promote batches to ambient tasks — never standing-approved).
  2. Validate: observe_policy.validate_draft(draft) — errors go back to the user verbatim; do not "fix" a draft silently.
  3. Standing approval: evaluate_standing_approval(rec, owner_mxid=…, owner_rooms=…). owner_rooms = rooms the owner OWNS — created by the owner or where the owner holds PL≥50 (checked via the room state the core already has; when ownership is unknown, the room is NOT in scope). Familiarity — "the owner sent a task from here" — is NOT ownership: a shared room must never enter standing-approval scope (001 review; the server's four-way authz still gates the subscribe, but the standing-approval semantic is stricter by design). True → save + transition(id, "active") + subscribe + post the AUTO-ACTIVATED card (visibility is mandatory — never activate silently). False → save draft + post the CONFIRM card and wait for the decision.
  4. Decision grammar (same infrastructure as human-action cards): policy <id> activate | edit <new text> | cancel — typed reply, reaction on the card, or (when custom-event fan-out lands) an A2UI button. edit recompiles with the new text into the SAME policy id.
  5. Subscribe on activate: events client subscribe(room_id, event_types) — the events plane's four-way authz is the permission evaluator; a subscribe rejection (e.g. PL too low) goes back to the user as the card's failure line, not swallowed.
  6. Enforcement: active notify/record/taskify policies are consumed by the sparrow drain handlers (taskify today; notify/record handlers are the next slice). cost_cap shows the CAP on cards; metering is a later slice.

Files

  • observe_policy.py — validation, standing-approval evaluator, SubscriptionStore (<workspace>/state/observe/), effect-card renderer (plain text always; A2UI choice-group in the real renderer contract behind include_a2ui).
  • Store records: obs_*.json, states draft → active → cancelled/expired, terminal states immutable, every transition audited.

Test: python3 tests/observe-policy.test.py (99% module coverage).

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.