agentleFS
vzhukovsvzhukovs/podman-desktop-kit/skills/preflight/SKILL.md

preflight

Skill0 starsChanged 11 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Run the deterministic gates and report pass or fail.

47 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use adr, ship and 8 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.
  • asterkinSkill

    adr

    Create Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) following project standards. Guides template usage, process, and best practices for documenting architecturally significant decisions.

    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 5 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    report

    Turn an exploration (threads, findings, charts) into a single Markdown report — note, blog post, executive summary, KPI dashboard, slide brief, or multi-section analytical report, with embedded charts.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • AnthropicSkill

    status

    Case status summary by audience — client-facing (plain language), internal (for the professor), or court-ready (formal caption format per local rules). Same facts, different framing and depth. Use when a student needs to update the client, brief the professor, or prepare a court status report.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • GitHubSkill

    refactor

    Surgical code refactoring to improve maintainability without changing behavior. Covers extracting functions, renaming variables, breaking down god functions, improving type safety, eliminating code smells, and applying design patterns. Less drastic than repo-rebuilder; use for gradual improvements.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    caveman

    Ultra-compressed response style that reduces output token count while preserving technical accuracy, with intensity levels and auto-clarity safety rules

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +2 more from microsoft

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 42 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    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. Very specific:

    A skip is not a pass: Read the reason. steps-to-check skipping because no body exists yet means that check has not run at all, and the …

    line 34
  2. Very specific:

    Every run is written to preflight.json under the issue — green or red, both passes — and pdkit state <n> --to preflight-green reads it …

    line 51

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 42 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

Runs pdkit preflight and presents the report. The checks decide; this skill reports and, where a failure is unambiguous, offers to fix it.

Steps

  1. pdkit preflight <issue> — the full set. It runs the repository's real test, lint and typecheck scripts, so it takes minutes on podman-desktop.
  2. Once a PR body exists: pdkit preflight <issue> --body-only --body <file>, or --body-from-pr <k> when the pull request is already open and its body on GitHub is the one to judge. Eight checks read the body, and re-running the whole suite to re-read a paragraph is minutes of nothing.
  3. Present the report as it came. Show the remedy line for every failure — it is where the check says what to do.

Discipline

Do not interpret a failure into a pass. Not "this looks like a flake", not "this is pre-existing", not "unrelated to our change". If it is any of those, that is a finding to report, not a reason to move on.

Do not re-run a check until it happens to succeed. A check that passes on the third run is a flake, and a flake found here is worth more than a green report — it is the one thing you can still cheaply investigate.

A skip is not a pass. Read the reason. steps-to-check skipping because no body exists yet means that check has not run at all, and the second pass is what makes it real.

working-tree red stops everything. While the tree is dirty the file checks read the commit and the command checks read the disk, so nothing else in the report means what it says.

What you may fix without asking

Lint failures that lint:fix resolves, and a missing SPDX header — the check prints the exact block. Re-run afterwards.

Everything else goes back to the user with the output attached.

The run is kept, and it is what the next state is made of

Every run is written to preflight.json under the issue — green or red, both passes — and pdkit state <n> --to preflight-green reads it rather than taking your word. It asks three things: the checks ran on this commit, none that blocks is failing, and the four that read the pull request body have seen one.

So the two passes are not ceremony. The first, without a body, leaves those four having judged nothing; --body-only --body <file> is what completes them. Until it does, the transition refuses and the gate cannot open.

Next

/pd:pr <issue> [slice] — green preflight is what the push gate is issued from, and nothing else is.

In a new session. What this run proved is in preflight.json, which is what pdkit state --to preflight-green reads; the test and lint output that scrolled past here is not, and does not need to be. Kept in context, it is re-read on every turn of /pd:pr — including step 6, where a person reads the push command. pdkit next <issue> prints the line.

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.