agentleFS
Sign inStart free
thiennc-tesoglobalthiennc-tesoglobal/flutter-skills/skills/flutter-package-development/SKILL.md

flutter-package-development

Skill16 starsChanged 2 months agoBSD-3-ClauseView on GitHub

Create, evolve, test, or prepare reusable Dart packages and Flutter plugins for distribution. Use when the package itself, its public API, platform support, federation, example app, compatibility, or publication readiness is the deliverable; route app-owned native bridges to flutter-platform-integration.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

9 rules. About 0 are common, 8 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈8

    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
  1. Distinctive:

    Treat reusable packages as versioned contracts consumed by independent projects.

    line 8
  2. Distinctive:

    Do not convert app-owned bridges into packages merely because code reuse is possible.

    line 19
  3. Distinctive:

    Read public API and package quality for exports, deprecations, semver, and consumer compatibility.

    line 23
  4. Distinctive:

    Read plugins and federation for platform interfaces, registration, FFI, and federated architecture.

    line 24
  5. Distinctive:

    Read publication readiness for dry-run inspection, pub.dev checklist, and release verification.

    line 25
  6. Distinctive:

    When publication readiness is in scope:

    line 36
  7. Very specific:

    Run dart pub publish --dry-run and inspect all output, warnings, and included files.

    line 37
  8. Distinctive:

    Never publish, tag, or create releases without explicit user authorization.

    line 38
  9. Distinctive:

    When tool or repository access is missing, provide an executable review plan with clear pass/fail criteria covering metadata, license, …

    line 39

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Flutter Package Development

Treat reusable packages as versioned contracts consumed by independent projects. Preserve SDK bounds, package architecture, supported platforms, and release conventions unless migration is requested.

Preflight

Inspect pubspec.yaml, public exports, examples, tests, platform folders, CI, changelogs, and consumers. Choose the smallest viable shape:

  • Dart package for reusable Dart-only logic.
  • Flutter package for reusable widgets without native code.
  • Plugin or FFI package when native platform implementations are required.
  • Federated plugin only when independent platform ownership or release cadence justifies multiple packages.

Do not convert app-owned bridges into packages merely because code reuse is possible.

Load references conditionally

  • Read public API and package quality for exports, deprecations, semver, and consumer compatibility.
  • Read plugins and federation for platform interfaces, registration, FFI, and federated architecture.
  • Read publication readiness for dry-run inspection, pub.dev checklist, and release verification.

Boundaries

  • flutter-platform-integration owns app-side native code and low-level channel/FFI mechanics.
  • flutter-dependency-upgrades owns consumer-side package upgrades in an application.
  • flutter-build-release owns application stores and binary builds, not pub package publication.

Verification

Format, analyze, run tests, and exercise the example fixture across all claimed platforms. When publication readiness is in scope:

  • Run dart pub publish --dry-run and inspect all output, warnings, and included files. A passing dry run proves neither compatibility nor authorization.
  • Never publish, tag, or create releases without explicit user authorization. A conditional go-ahead ("publish if the dry run passes") does not cover changes you made after it: show the final diff and dry-run result, then ask before publishing.
  • When tool or repository access is missing, provide an executable review plan with clear pass/fail criteria covering metadata, license, changelog, and dry-run output rather than fabricating results.

Sources

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.

Check your setup, free