search
Skill6 starsChanged 14 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Find relevant items under uncertainty across repositories, databases, web sources, or any searchable corpus. Use when exploring unknown territory, finding related information, or discovering relevant resources.
- Reads credentials
54 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- beCyborg/jadlis-searchtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- hydra-db/hydradb-claude-codetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Mahashwetha/Job-search-email-system-claudetheir own version, first seen Nov 5, 2026
- denolfe/dotfilestheir own version, first seen Nov 2, 2026
- Arcadia-1/virtuoso-bridge-litetheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- jav-ed/skill_Managtheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use fetch, export and 9 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.
jtfasulo7Skillfetch
Use this skill when the user wants to retrieve a URL without a full browser session: fetch HTML or JSON from static pages, inspect status codes or headers, follow redirects, or get page source for simple scraping. Prefer it over a browser when JavaScript rendering and page interaction are not needed. Supports proxies and redirect control.
Also in 3 projects that use this
soilmassSkillexport
Animation export configurations including format selection, resolution, framerate, quality, and optimization settings. Use when rendering animations for web, mobile, video, or social media. Provides tokens for all export parameters across Lottie, GIF, video, and sprite sheet formats.
Also in 4 projects that use this
rogue-dev-studioSkillmonitoring
Claude monitoring and usage tracking tools (UV, claude-monitor, claude-usage-cli). Use when the project needs this capability or the user / team manifest asks for it. Use for specialized `monitoring` work when listed in TEAM.yaml or explicitly requested.
Also in 3 projects that use this
DockerSkillwrite
Write or edit reader-facing technical prose for immediate comprehension. Use for documentation, PR titles and descriptions, release notes, design documents, user-facing explanations, and substantive comments. Also use when asked to make writing clearer, more natural, less AI-generated, or easier to read. For documentation fixes, handles edits, formatting, self-review, and commits after research identifies what to change. Do not use for code-only tasks with no prose deliverable.
Also in 3 projects that use this
JaimeGBASkillingest
Digest an external source (article, paper, transcript, URL, book chapter) and integrate its content into the knowledge base
Also in 4 projects that use this
wrsmith108Skilldocker
Container-based development for isolated, reproducible environments. Use when running npm commands, installing packages, executing code, or managing project dependencies. Trigger phrases include "npm install", "run the build", "start the server", "install package", or any code execution request.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions54 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 54
- anthropics/knowledge-work-plugins★ 35ksame name
- exa-labs/exa-mcp-server★ 5.2ksame name
- browserbase/agent-browse★ 3.7ksame name
- spotify/portal-ai-plugins★ 2.8ksame name
- Muuuun/luxas★ 1.2ksame name
- Arcadia-1/virtuoso-bridge-lite★ 1ksame name
- ZimoLiao/scholaraio★ 585same name
- BlockRunAI/blockrun-mcp★ 389same name
- project-numina/numina-lean-agent★ 279same name
- brightdata/skills★ 270same name
44 more not listed
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 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
- discover-capabilitiesSkill
- discoverSkill
- executeSkill
- explainSkill
- generateSkill
- groundSkill
- inquireSkill
- integrateSkill
- invokeSkill
- measureSkill
- mutateSkill
- observeSkill
- persistSkill
- perspective-validationSkill
- planSkill
- predictSkill
- recallSkill
- receiveSkill
- retrieveSkill
- rollbackSkill
- sendSkill
- simulateSkill
- stateSkill
- synchronizeSkill
- transformSkill
- transitionSkill
- verifySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
11 rules. 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 47 edited versions we read keep these.
9
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
- Distinctive: line 28
Search strategy is appropriate for the domain
- Very specific: line 34
Search feeds into the State Layer by discovering entities and observations to include in world-state.
- Distinctive: line 58
Code/repo search: Use Grep patterns, file globs
- Distinctive: line 59
Web search: Use web search tools with keywords
- Distinctive: line 60
Documentation: Search docs directories, README files
- Distinctive: line 68
Execute searches: Run queries across sources
- Distinctive: line 69
Use multiple query variations if first returns poor results
- Distinctive: line 75
Remove duplicates (same content, different paths)
- Distinctive: line 322
Do not search paths marked as sensitive
- Very specific: line 340
Avoid searching when exact path is known (use retrieve)
- Distinctive: line 341
Never search without considering coverage limitations
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 47 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.
Files
Live Context
Available search context:
- Current directory: !
pwd - File types available: !
find . -type f -not -path './.git/*' 2>/dev/null | sed 's/.*\.//' | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -10 - Total searchable files: !
find . -type f -not -path './.git/*' 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' ' - Common directories: !
find . -type d -maxdepth 2 -not -path './.git/*' 2>/dev/null | head -10 - README files: !
find . -name 'README*' -not -path './.git/*' 2>/dev/null | head -5
Intent
Execute search to find relevant information when you don't know exactly where to look. Unlike retrieve (which fetches known items), search explores under uncertainty and ranks results by relevance.
Success criteria:
- Relevant results are found and ranked
- Search strategy is appropriate for the domain
- Coverage is sufficient for the use case
- Results include relevance scores and evidence
- False positives are minimized
World Modeling Context:
Search feeds into the State Layer by discovering entities and observations to include in world-state. It supports the Identity & Continuity Layer by finding candidate matches for identity-resolution.
Compatible schemas:
schemas/output_schema.yaml
Inputs
| Parameter | Required | Type | Description |
query | Yes | string|object | What to search for (natural language or structured) |
scope | No | string | Search scope/domain |
limit | No | integer | Maximum results |
Inputs not listed here are outside the capability's contract: a workflow step that binds them gets W604 (STANDARD v1.1 §5.5).
Procedure
- Parse query: Understand what the user is looking for
- Extract key terms and concepts
- Identify entity types being sought
- Determine search intent (existence, discovery, comparison)
- Expand with synonyms or related terms if appropriate
- Select search strategy: Based on scope and query type
- Code/repo search: Use Grep patterns, file globs
- Web search: Use web search tools with keywords
- Documentation: Search docs directories, README files
- Semantic: Expand query with related concepts
- Construct search queries: Formulate effective queries
- For Grep: Build regex patterns that balance precision/recall
- For web: Use keywords, exclude noise terms
- Apply filters (file type, date range, domain)
- Execute searches: Run queries across sources
- Use multiple query variations if first returns poor results
- Apply pagination for comprehensive coverage
- Track which queries were tried
- Collect and deduplicate results: Aggregate findings
- Merge results from multiple sources
- Remove duplicates (same content, different paths)
- Note source and search method for each result
- Rank results: Score by relevance and other criteria
- Term match: How well result matches query
- Authority: Source credibility, recency
- Context: Relevance to broader task
- Uniqueness: Information not found elsewhere
- Extract key information: For top results
- Relevant snippets that match query
- Metadata (file, date, author)
- Context around the match
- Assess coverage: Evaluate search completeness
- What portion of relevant sources were searched?
- Any known blind spots?
- Suggest additional searches if coverage is poor
Output Contract
Return a structured object:
results:
- id: string # Result identifier
type: file | web | doc | record
source: string # Where found
path: string | null # File path or URL
title: string | null
snippet: string # Relevant excerpt
relevance_score: number # 0.0-1.0
metadata:
date: string | null
author: string | null
size: number | null
evidence_anchor: string # Reference for grounding
total_count: integer # Total matches before filtering
query_details:
query: string # Original query
query_expansions: array[string] # Variations tried
sources_searched: array[string] # Where we looked
returned: integer # Results in this response
coverage:
sources_available: array[string]
sources_searched: array[string]
coverage_ratio: number # 0.0-1.0
blind_spots: array[string] # Known gaps
search_strategy:
method: string # How search was conducted
queries_executed: array[string] # Actual queries run
filters_applied: object
confidence: number # 0.0-1.0
evidence_anchors: array[string]
assumptions: array[string]
next_searches: array[string] # Suggested follow-up searchesField Definitions
| Field | Type | Description |
results | array | Ranked search results (empty when nothing matched) |
results[].relevance_score | number | How well result matches query |
total_count | integer | Total matches before filtering (results may hold fewer) |
query_details | object | Query, expansions tried, sources searched, and number returned |
coverage | object | Assessment of search completeness |
blind_spots | array | Known areas not searched |
next_searches | array | Suggested follow-up queries |
confidence | number | 0.0-1.0 confidence the results answer the query |
evidence_anchors | array | References to where each result was found |
assumptions | array | Explicit assumptions |
Examples
Example 1: Code Search for Authentication Logic
Input:
query: "JWT token validation"
scope: "repo: *.ts and *.js files, excluding node_modules/ and test/"Output:
results:
- id: "r1"
type: file
source: "repo"
path: "src/middleware/auth.ts"
title: null
snippet: |
export function validateToken(token: string): JWTPayload {
return jwt.verify(token, process.env.JWT_SECRET) as JWTPayload;
}
relevance_score: 0.95
metadata:
date: "2025-01-20"
author: null
size: 2450
evidence_anchor: "src/middleware/auth.ts:45-48"
- id: "r2"
type: file
source: "repo"
path: "src/services/user-service.ts"
title: null
snippet: |
const decoded = validateToken(authHeader.split(' ')[1]);
relevance_score: 0.75
metadata:
date: "2025-01-15"
size: 5200
evidence_anchor: "src/services/user-service.ts:23"
- id: "r3"
type: file
source: "repo"
path: "src/utils/jwt-helpers.ts"
title: null
snippet: |
export const JWT_ALGORITHM = 'HS256';
export const TOKEN_EXPIRY = '24h';
relevance_score: 0.60
metadata:
date: "2024-12-01"
size: 800
evidence_anchor: "src/utils/jwt-helpers.ts:1-5"
total_count: 8
query_details:
query: "JWT token validation"
query_expansions:
- "jwt.*valid"
- "token.*verify"
- "jsonwebtoken"
sources_searched: ["repo:src/"]
returned: 3
coverage:
sources_available: ["repo", "docs"]
sources_searched: ["repo:src/"]
coverage_ratio: 0.85
blind_spots:
- "Config files not searched"
- "Documentation not searched"
search_strategy:
method: "grep_pattern_search"
queries_executed:
- "grep -r 'jwt.*valid' --include='*.ts' src/"
- "grep -r 'token.*verify' --include='*.ts' src/"
filters_applied:
file_types: [".ts", ".js"]
excluded: ["node_modules", "test"]
confidence: 0.9
evidence_anchors:
- "src/middleware/auth.ts:45-48"
- "src/services/user-service.ts:23"
- "src/utils/jwt-helpers.ts:1-5"
assumptions:
- "All JWT logic is in TypeScript files"
- "No JWT validation in excluded test files matters"
next_searches:
- "Search config/ for JWT_SECRET references"
- "Search docs/ for authentication documentation"Evidence pattern: Used Grep with multiple patterns to find JWT-related code, ranked by directness of validation logic.
Example 2: Web Search for API Documentation
Input:
query: "OpenAI API rate limits 2025"
scope: webOutput:
results:
- id: "w1"
type: web
source: "web"
path: "https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/rate-limits"
title: "Rate limits - OpenAI API"
snippet: "Rate limits are measured in tokens per minute (TPM) and requests per minute (RPM). Tier 1 users: 500 RPM, 100,000 TPM..."
relevance_score: 0.95
metadata:
date: "2025-01-15"
author: "OpenAI"
evidence_anchor: "url:https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/rate-limits"
- id: "w2"
type: web
source: "web"
path: "https://community.openai.com/t/rate-limit-changes-2025"
title: "Rate Limit Changes in 2025"
snippet: "As of January 2025, we've updated rate limit tiers..."
relevance_score: 0.85
metadata:
date: "2025-01-10"
evidence_anchor: "url:https://community.openai.com/t/rate-limit-changes-2025"
total_count: 15
query_details:
query: "OpenAI API rate limits 2025"
query_expansions:
- "OpenAI rate limit tiers"
- "GPT-4 API quota"
sources_searched: ["web"]
returned: 2
coverage:
sources_available: ["web", "docs"]
sources_searched: ["web"]
coverage_ratio: 0.7
blind_spots:
- "Internal documentation not accessible"
search_strategy:
method: "web_search"
queries_executed:
- "OpenAI API rate limits 2025"
- "OpenAI rate limit tiers"
filters_applied:
recency: "2025"
confidence: 0.85
evidence_anchors:
- "url:https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/rate-limits"
assumptions:
- "Official documentation is current"
next_searches:
- "Search OpenAI changelog for rate limit updates"Verification
- All returned results have valid evidence anchors
- Relevance scores are between 0.0 and 1.0
- Coverage assessment identifies blind spots
- Search strategy is documented
- Suggested next searches address coverage gaps
Verification tools: Link validators, file existence checks
Safety Constraints
mutation: falserequires_checkpoint: falserequires_approval: falserisk: low
Capability-specific rules:
- Do not search paths marked as sensitive
- Rate-limit web searches appropriately
- Flag when search coverage is < 50%
- Distinguish authoritative from user-generated sources
Composition Patterns
Commonly follows:
- None typically - search is often a starting point
- May follow
inspectwhen inspection reveals knowledge gaps
Commonly precedes:
retrieve- After finding, retrieve full contentworld-state- Search results inform state constructionidentity-resolution- Find candidate entities to resolvegrounding- Search for evidence to ground claims
Anti-patterns:
- Avoid searching when exact path is known (use
retrieve) - Never search without considering coverage limitations
Workflow references:
- See
reference/composition_patterns.md#world-model-buildfor search in model construction - See
reference/composition_patterns.md#debug-code-changefor search during debugging
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.

