discover-capabilities
Skill6 starsChanged 14 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Analyze a task description to detect required capabilities from the ontology, identify gaps, and synthesize a valid workflow automatically. Trigger: "discover capabilities", "what capabilities do I need", "analyze task", "synthesize workflow"
In this repository42 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- attributeSkill
- auditSkill
- gap-analysis-workflowSkill
- checkpointSkill
- classifySkill
- compareSkill
- constrainSkill
- critiqueSkill
- debug-workflowSkill
- decomposeSkill
- delegateSkill
- detectSkill
- digital-twin-bootstrapSkill
- digital-twin-sync-workflowSkill
- discoverSkill
- executeSkill
- explainSkill
- generateSkill
- groundSkill
- inquireSkill
- integrateSkill
- invokeSkill
- measureSkill
- mutateSkill
- observeSkill
- persistSkill
- perspective-validationSkill
- planSkill
- predictSkill
- recallSkill
- receiveSkill
- retrieveSkill
- rollbackSkill
- searchSkill
- sendSkill
- simulateSkill
- stateSkill
- synchronizeSkill
- transformSkill
- transitionSkill
- verifySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈7
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 28
All atomic actions in the task are identified
- Distinctive: line 47
Load ontology context: Read the capability ontology to understand available capabilities
- Distinctive: line 65
If available, generate proposed new capabilities with:
- Very specific: line 74
Check for conflicts_with violations
- Distinctive: line 214
Verification tools: Read, Grep, Bash
- Distinctive: line 240
Do not execute synthesized workflows without human review
- Distinctive: line 241
Do not add proposed capabilities to the ontology without governance
- Distinctive: line 242
Do not bypass gap detection by forcing low-confidence matches
≈ “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
Intent
Execute discover-capabilities to analyze a natural language task description and automatically:
- Detect which ontology capabilities are needed
- Identify gaps where the ontology lacks coverage
- Synthesize a valid workflow DAG from matched capabilities
This skill bridges the gap between "I want to do X" and "here are the specific capabilities and workflow steps needed to do X safely."
Success criteria:
- All atomic actions in the task are identified
- Each action maps to an ontology capability with confidence score
- Missing capabilities are flagged with proposed extensions
- A valid workflow is synthesized with proper safety steps
- Evidence anchors trace the discovery reasoning
Compatible schemas:
schemas/capability_ontology.yamlschemas/workflow_catalog.yaml
Inputs
| Parameter | Required | Type | Description |
task_description | Yes | string | Natural language description of the task to analyze |
domain | No | string | Domain context for specialization (e.g., "security", "data-pipeline") |
Procedure
- Load ontology context: Read the capability ontology to understand available capabilities
- Load
schemas/capability_ontology.yamlvia CapabilityRegistry - Load
schemas/workflow_catalog.yamlvia WorkflowEngine - Note: 36 atomic capabilities across 9 cognitive layers
- Load
- Analyze task: Decompose the task into atomic capability requirements
- Parse the task description for action verbs and targets
- Map each action to the closest ontology capability
- Assign confidence scores based on semantic match quality
- Identify domain parameters where applicable
- Classify matches: Validate and filter capability matches
- Accept matches with confidence >= 0.6
- Route low-confidence matches to gap detection
- Identify unmatched requirements
- Detect gaps: For unmatched requirements
- Find nearest existing capabilities by semantic similarity
- If available, generate proposed new capabilities with:
- Suggested layer, risk level, and schemas
- Edges to related existing capabilities
- Rationale for the proposal
- Synthesize workflow: Build a valid workflow from matched capabilities
- Resolve transitive dependency chains (
requiresedges) - Insert safety steps (
checkpointbefore mutations,auditat end) - Topological sort respecting
precedesedge ordering - Check for
conflicts_withviolations - Generate data flow bindings between steps
- Resolve transitive dependency chains (
- Present results: Format and display the discovery output
- List detected capabilities with confidence and reasoning
- Show any gaps with proposals
- Display synthesized workflow steps
- Offer to validate workflow against ontology
- Offer to scaffold gap capabilities if needed
Output Contract
Return a structured object:
capabilities:
- id: string # ontology capability ID
confidence: number # 0.0-1.0
reasoning: string # why this capability was matched
domain: string # domain parameter if applicable
gaps:
- description: string
proposed_capability:
id: string
layer: string
risk: string
workflow:
name: string
steps: array # ordered workflow steps
confidence: number # overall workflow confidence
confidence: number # overall discovery confidence 0.0-1.0
evidence_anchors: array # provenance trailField Definitions
| Field | Type | Description |
capabilities | array | Matched ontology capabilities with scores |
gaps | array | Unmatched requirements with proposals |
workflow | object | Synthesized or matched existing workflow |
confidence | number | Overall confidence (0.0-1.0) |
evidence_anchors | array | Discovery provenance trail |
Examples
Example 1: Simple Analysis Task
Input:
task_description: "Find all Python files with TODO comments"Output:
capabilities:
- id: search
confidence: 0.95
reasoning: "'Find' maps to search capability for discovering items under uncertainty"
- id: detect
confidence: 0.85
reasoning: "'TODO comments' requires pattern detection within found files"
domain: pattern
gaps: []
workflow:
name: find_python_files_with_todo
steps:
- capability: search
purpose: Find Python files in the codebase
store_as: search_out
- capability: detect
purpose: Detect TODO patterns in found files
domain: pattern
store_as: detect_out
input_bindings:
data: ${search_out}
pattern: TODO
confidence: 0.9
confidence: 0.9Example 2: Mutation Task with Safety
Input:
task_description: "Delete old log files older than 30 days"Output:
capabilities:
- id: search
confidence: 0.9
reasoning: "'log files' requires searching for matching files"
- id: detect
confidence: 0.8
reasoning: "'older than 30 days' requires date-based detection"
domain: time
- id: checkpoint
confidence: 1.0
reasoning: "Auto-added: mutation requires checkpoint for safety"
- id: mutate
confidence: 0.95
reasoning: "'Delete' is a persistent state mutation"
- id: audit
confidence: 1.0
reasoning: "Auto-added: mutation operations require audit trail"
gaps: []
workflow:
name: delete_old_log_files
steps:
- capability: search
purpose: Find log files in the system
store_as: search_out
- capability: detect
purpose: Filter files older than 30 days
domain: time
store_as: detect_out
- capability: checkpoint
purpose: Create safety checkpoint before deletion
store_as: checkpoint_out
- capability: mutate
purpose: Delete the identified old log files
store_as: mutate_out
requires_checkpoint: true
- capability: audit
purpose: Record deletion actions for audit trail
store_as: audit_out
confidence: 0.93
confidence: 0.93Verification
- All action verbs in the task description are identified
- Each capability match has confidence score and reasoning
- Safety steps (checkpoint, audit) are automatically added for mutations
- Workflow respects ontology edge constraints (requires, precedes, conflicts_with)
- Binding references between steps are valid (no undefined variables)
Verification tools: Read, Grep, Bash
Safety Constraints
mutation: falserequires_checkpoint: falserequires_approval: falserisk: low
Capability-specific rules:
- Discovery is read-only: it analyzes and proposes but never modifies the ontology
- Gap proposals are suggestions only; they require governance review before adoption
- Workflow synthesis validates against ontology constraints but does not execute
Composition Patterns
Commonly follows:
inquire- User provides task description via promptretrieve- Load ontology and workflow catalog
Commonly precedes:
plan- Use discovered capabilities to plan implementationinvoke- Execute the synthesized workflowgenerate- Scaffold new capability files for gap proposals
Anti-patterns:
- Do not execute synthesized workflows without human review
- Do not add proposed capabilities to the ontology without governance
- Do not bypass gap detection by forcing low-confidence matches
Workflow references:
- See
schemas/workflow_catalog.yamlfor existing workflow patterns - See
schemas/capability_ontology.yamlfor the full ontology
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.

