agentleFS
syangasyanga/astack/skills/show-me-your-work/SKILL.md

show-me-your-work

Skill0 starsChanged 55 days agoMITView on GitHub

Keep and audit an evidence-backed decision trail for long-running work and later review.

67 other projects use a version of this, 58 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use ketchup-video, principle-explain-the-number and 10 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.
  • tristanphvnSkill

    ketchup-video

    Catch the user up like /keel:ketchup, with a short silent video of slides for what happened and the waiting calls as text under it. Use for /keel:ketchup-video.

    Also in 14 projects that use this

  • ianclearySkill

    principle-explain-the-number

    Apply before you trust, report, or act on a number you measured: a speedup, a regression, a throughput, a latency, or an eval result. Find what limits it, and rule out that it measured something other than the work you think.

    Also in 29 projects that use this

  • eryzerzSkill

    make-bot-ui

    Use when building a custom UI (page, dashboard, buttons) that should wake a Grok Bot over a webhook, when the user must provide a webhook sender key, or when exposing that UI on Tailscale.

    Also in 20 projects that use this

  • bnemaSkill

    setup-pstack

    Configure which Pi models pstack uses per role. Detects available provider/model specs and writes pstack's user configuration. Use for /setup-pstack, "configure pstack models", or changing pstack model choices.

    Also in 25 projects that use this

  • ianclearySkill

    poteto-help

    Guides users through pstack setup, /poteto-mode, and picking the skill, playbook, or principle for a task. Type /poteto-help with a question.

    Also in 14 projects that use this

  • instructureSkill

    ketchup

    Rebuild context after /clear by analyzing uncommitted changes across Canvas LMS and all plugin repositories

    Also in 25 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

11 rules. 1 is common, 8 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 1

    Common

    Most of the 64 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 8

    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. Common:

    Keep one canonical log.

    line 9
  2. Distinctive:

    Write each entry the way you'd tell a teammate what you did.

    line 36
  3. Distinctive:

    Commit it when a reviewer needs the trail and sharing its contents is authorized.

    line 49
  4. Very specific:

    If an existing log has a different header, preserve it under an unused decisions.legacy-<date-time>.tsv name before creating the current …

    line 51
  5. Distinctive:

    Prefer evidence produced by committed scripts over hand-made one-offs per Encode Lessons in Structure.

    line 60
  6. Distinctive:

    Every row maps to a real action.

    line 66
  7. Distinctive:

    Keep new entries specific.

    line 69
  8. Distinctive:

    If the work diverged from what a row claims, append the corrected result with evidence.

    line 71
  9. Distinctive:

    Before handing back, spawn an independent reviewer.

    line 75
  10. Distinctive:

    Every handoff or final reply for a run that produced a trail ends with an "Attention" section.

    line 90
  11. Very specific:

    Read top to bottom, follow the evidence pointers, spot-check.

    line 98

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 64 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

Show me your work

Keep one canonical log.

The format

A single TSV file, one row per decision. Cells stay single-line. Evidence is a pointer, not prose.

Copy the header template to start a clean log. Columns:

  • ts. ISO8601 timestamp.
  • phase. The phase or workstream.
  • decision. What was chosen or done, one line.
  • why. The reason in plain words. If a principle drove it, say it plainly, not as a jargon tag.
  • evidence. A commit SHA, a PR number, a CI run URL, or the path to a saved file or directory that proves the row, optionally with :line to point inside a file. Harness task IDs, agent IDs, and output that exists only in the session do not count.
  • result. The outcome or predicate state: tests green, reverted, pixel-diff 0, INCONCLUSIVE, open.

An example, plain-spoken so a reviewer reads it at a glance. This is illustration only. Don't copy these rows into a real log.

ts	phase	decision	why	evidence	result
2026-05-24T09:02:00Z	frame	counted the work first, about 100 components and roughly 75 hours	wanted to know the size before starting a long run	commit 3a9f1c2	found 5 things to sort out before starting
2026-05-24T09:40:00Z	harness	took screenshots of the old version before changing anything	so we can compare old against new and catch any visual change	scripts/snapshot.sh, baseline/	saved 120 reference screenshots
2026-05-24T11:15:00Z	widget	moved the widget styles over without changing how it looks	keep the change small and the result identical	commit 7c21e0a, logs/widget-pixel-diff.log, logs/widget-tests.log	looks identical, tests pass
2026-05-24T12:30:00Z	widget	threw out a helper's work because its screenshots were blank	checked the real files instead of trusting its summary	reports/widget-helper-review.md	reverted, tightened the instructions for next time

Logging a row

Write each entry the way you'd tell a teammate what you did. Name concrete actions and apply unslop.

Use bash "<this skill's directory>/scripts/log.sh" "<logfile>" "<phase>" "<decision>" "<why>" "<evidence>" "<result>". The helper writes a timestamp and creates the header on first use. It replaces tabs and line breaks with spaces, and prefixes cells starting with =, +, -, or @ with a single quote. The execution owner serializes writes to this log. Workers return proposed entries to that owner. The helper does not lock the log.

Log decision points and checkpoints, not every action: a fork chosen, a unit completed with its verification result, a pivot or revert with its trigger, a blocker surfaced, a gate fixed. For loop runs, one row per iteration. Skip the trivial and self-evident.

Where it lives

By default the log is a working artifact, not committed. Keep it at decisions.tsv in the work dir, or .audit/<task-slug>.tsv when several efforts run at once, and leave it out of git.

For a multi-phase plan, use decisions.tsv in the shared execution store from orchestrate/STATE.md. Keep the path in the plan and handoffs.

Commit it when a reviewer needs the trail and sharing its contents is authorized.

If an existing log has a different header, preserve it under an unused decisions.legacy-<date-time>.tsv name before creating the current format. Log the transition with a link to that file. Keep earlier facts there rather than inventing missing timestamps, reasons, or outcomes. The helper rejects an incompatible header.

Rules

  • One row is one decision or checkpoint.
  • Append-only. A wrong call gets a new row that supersedes it. Never edit or delete history.
  • Prefer evidence produced by committed scripts over hand-made one-offs per Encode Lessons in Structure.

Audit the log against the transcript

At the end of the run, before handing back, check the log told the truth. Read this run's transcript through the active environment's session tools or its documented transcript path. Restrict reads to this task's sessions. If transcripts are unavailable, audit the available command records and artifacts, and report that coverage limit. Walk the log against what actually happened:

  • Every row maps to a real action. Append a correction for an invented or aspirational entry, identifying the original row.
  • Each row's evidence resolves and shows what the row claims.
  • A fork, pivot, or abandoned approach that shaped the work but isn't logged is a gap. Add it.
  • Keep new entries specific. Identify earlier padding in the audit findings.

If the work diverged from what a row claims, append the corrected result with evidence. Preserve the original row so the correction remains reviewable.

Independent review of the trail

Before handing back, spawn an independent reviewer. Run Codex when hosted in Claude and Claude when hosted in Codex, following provider execution. If the outside provider is unavailable, not permitted, or fails, use a fresh native agent on the session's model. The reviewer reads the audit trail and the run's transcript, or the available records, and flags what the user should inspect. It reviews decisions and evidence without redoing the work. If delegation is unavailable, perform the audit yourself and report that independent review was unavailable. Self-review does not count as independent review.

  • Decisions logged with weak or absent evidence.
  • Verification steps skipped or claimed without proof in the transcript.
  • Choices that look risky in hindsight (premature, scope-creeping, papering over a symptom).
  • Gaps the user would otherwise miss on a casual skim.

Every handoff or final reply for a run that produced a trail ends with an "Attention" section. Name the reviewer and model when known, or state that only self-review was available. List flags with links to specific rows or events, and disclose unavailable transcript or outside-provider coverage. "No flags" is a valid finding, but it does not replace the review attribution.

Reviewing the trail

Read top to bottom, follow the evidence pointers, spot-check. GitHub renders a committed TSV as a table. column -s$'\t' -t decisions.tsv renders it in a terminal.

Composing this skill

Other skills route their audit trail here instead of inventing one. Reference it by name and let it own the format. Don't restate the columns.

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.