agentleFS
willianbswillianbs/skills/engineering-os/SKILL.md

engineering-os

Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

AI Engineering Operating System conductor. Classifies intent, selects a path (lite, standard, incident, architecture, review-only), invokes only the needed skills, threads artifacts, and enforces stop conditions. Use for end-to-end engineering work, “run the OS”, ship a feature, or handle an incident. Never re-implements specialist logic and never runs every skill blindly.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

9 rules. About 0 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈5

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Read docs/SKILL-CONTRACT.md and docs/ARTIFACTS.md if present in this repo.

    line 29
  2. Very specific:

    Never re-implement security, ADR, review, etc.—invoke skills.

    line 47
  3. Distinctive:

    Prefer vertical delivery over ceremony for chores.

    line 49
  4. Very specific:

    If NoGuardrails and work is Feature/HighRisk → offer guardrails-configurator (skip only if user declines)

    line 88
  5. Distinctive:

    Stop before large implementation unless user asks to continue standard path

    line 131
  6. Very specific:

    Never run all skills “for completeness.”

    line 189
  7. Distinctive:

    Never invent specialist findings.

    line 190
  8. Distinctive:

    Never skip quality-gate on standard/incident when merging/deploying.

    line 191
  9. Distinctive:

    Never silently continue past Block.

    line 192

≈ “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

Purpose

You are the runtime conductor for this skill portfolio. Orchestrate; don’t duplicate.

Emit OS_RUN_REPORT when the path finishes or blocks.

When to Use / When NOT to Use

Use when: user wants to ship/fix/review through a disciplined pipeline; mentions engineering OS / full workflow; multi-step feature or incident.

Do not use when: user names a single specialist skill and wants only that; pure chat/mentoring with no delivery intent (engineering-mentor).

Preconditions

  • Task statement exists.
  • Repo access for non-trivial paths.
  • Read docs/SKILL-CONTRACT.md and docs/ARTIFACTS.md if present in this repo.

Inputs / Outputs

Inputs: user intent, optional existing artifacts.

Outputs: threaded artifacts from invoked skills + OS_RUN_REPORT.

Upstream / Downstream

Upstream: user, model-router (optional).

Downstream: any portfolio skill as selected by path.

Core Principles

  1. Select the minimum path that is still safe.
  2. Thread named artifacts; halt on Block/Incomplete for risky work.
  3. Never re-implement security, ADR, review, etc.—invoke skills.
  4. Skip stages when valid artifacts already exist.
  5. Prefer vertical delivery over ceremony for chores.
  6. Explicit Decision at every stop.
  7. One OS_RUN_REPORT at the end.

Process

1. Classify intent

chore | feature | bug | incident | architecture | review-only | docs

2. Optional route

Invoke model-router for ROUTE_DECISION (tier + path hint) when cost/risk unclear.

3. Select path

IntentPath
chore / docs / typolite
feature / multi-file behaviorstandard
vague / high-stakes askstandard (start with requirements-grill)
bug / flakeincident (investigate-first)
sev/incident / prod outageincident (full; incident-commander first)
architecture / ADR / redesignarchitecture
PR review onlyreview-only
watch CI/PR until doneinvoke loop-engineer (may wrap any path)

4. Execute path (invoke skills in order)

lite

  1. context-loader (lite) — still honor guardrails Never list if present
  2. feature-implementer (lite)
  3. code-reviewer (lite)
  4. pr-generator (if PR requested)

standard

  1. context-loader → CONTEXT_PACK (stop if Blocked)
  2. If NoGuardrails and work is Feature/HighRisk → offer guardrails-configurator (skip only if user declines)
  3. requirements-grill → GRILL_NOTES when ask is vague/HighRisk (skip if already precise)
  4. spec-validator → SPEC_STATUS (stop if NotReady/Blocked)
  5. threat-modeler → THREAT_MODEL when HighRisk / auth / PII / payments / trust-boundary moves
  6. adr-enforcer → ADR_COMPLIANCE (stop if Conflict/Blocked)
  7. change-impact-analyzer → IMPACT_REPORT when cross-service / shared lib / public surface
  8. api-contract-guardian → CONTRACT_REPORT when OpenAPI/proto/GraphQL/public API touched (stop if Breaking unversioned)
  9. delivery-planner → PLAN + TASK_GRAPH
  10. migration-surgeon → MIGRATION_PLAN when schema/data shape changes (stop if Destructive without rollback)
  11. test-strategy-designer → TEST_STRATEGY
  12. ai-eval-harness → EVAL_PLAN when LLM/agent behavior is in scope
  13. tdd-executor and/or feature-implementer → TDD_SESSION / IMPL_REPORT
  14. observability-designer → OBS_PLAN for new/changed runtime paths (especially HighRisk)
  15. code-reviewer → REVIEW
  16. security-auditor if HighRisk / auth / PII / payments / network (prefer after THREAT_MODEL)
  17. performance-auditor if hot path / SLO-sensitive
  18. quality-gate → QG_REPORT (stop if Fail/BlockRelease)
  19. pr-generator → PR_BODY

incident

  1. incident-commander → INCIDENT_LOG (sev, comms, stabilize)
  2. context-loader
  3. defect-analyst (investigate; escalate rca if systemic/High+)
  4. adr-enforcer only if architectural cause
  5. feature-implementer (fix) after cause confidence ≥ High or user accepts risk
  6. observability-designer if detection/alerting gaps blocked response
  7. code-reviewer
  8. quality-gate (deploy-gate if prod)
  9. pr-generator if fix ships via PR
  10. postmortem-writer → POSTMORTEM after mitigate/resolve

architecture

  1. context-loader
  2. guardrails-configurator if NoGuardrails / user asks to set rules
  3. engineering-mentor (tradeoffs) as needed
  4. requirements-grill if product scope fuzzy
  5. threat-modeler if trust boundaries move
  6. adr-enforcer (bootstrap if NoADRs)
  7. spec-validator if product scope unclear
  8. change-impact-analyzer for cross-cutting redesigns
  9. delivery-planner (plan only or plan+decompose)
  10. Stop before large implementation unless user asks to continue standard path

review-only

  1. context-loader (lite on diff)
  2. change-impact-analyzer / api-contract-guardian if API/schema touched
  3. code-reviewer
  4. security-auditor / performance-auditor / adr-enforcer on escalation signals
  5. quality-gate if user asks merge readiness

5. Parallelism

Security and performance may run in parallel after IMPL_REPORT/REVIEW when both are required. Impact + contract checks may run in parallel after plan inputs exist.

6. Mentoring

engineering-mentor may wrap any stage if the user wants learning—does not replace gates.

7. Loops

loop-engineer may wrap babysit-CI/PR, until-QG-pass, or custom bodies. Always require stop criteria.

Evidence Requirements

OS_RUN_REPORT must list real skills invoked and artifacts produced/missing. No fictional Pass.

Stop Conditions / Failure Modes

ConditionAction
CONTEXT_PACK Blocked / Incomplete on standard/incidentStop
SPEC NotReady/BlockedStop
ADR ConflictStop
QG Fail / BlockReleaseStop
User abortsEmit partial OS_RUN_REPORT

Severity + Confidence

Propagate the worst unresolved Critical/High from child reports into OS decision.

Output Contract

## OS_RUN_REPORT
Path: lite | standard | incident | architecture | review-only
Skills invoked: [...]
Artifacts: [...]
Blockers: [...]
Decision: Proceed | ProceedWithConditions | Revise | Block
Next action: ...

Handoffs

You are the handoff mechanism. After Block, name the exact skill and missing artifact the human must resolve.

Never

  • Never run all skills “for completeness.”
  • Never invent specialist findings.
  • Never skip quality-gate on standard/incident when merging/deploying.
  • Never silently continue past Block.

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.