goal-creator
Skill7 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when creating /goal directives, reusable testable outcome-oriented success standards for agentic workflows. Use whenever the user asks to create a goal, write a /goal directive, define what good looks like, set success criteria for an agent, define a reusable instruction, create a quality standard, write acceptance criteria for an agent workflow, or specify done conditions.
4 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- YogirajA/Claude-Skillstheir own version, first seen Sep 17, 2026
- yinsang0910-star/goal-creatortheir own version, first seen Aug 4, 2026
- zebbern/skillsword for word, first seen Jun 28, 2026
- mysticaltech/goal-creator-skilltheir own version, first seen Jun 5, 2026
Other versions4 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- zebbern/skills★ 29100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 3
- mysticaltech/goal-creator-skill★ 3same name
- yinsang0910-star/goal-creator★ 1same name
- YogirajA/Claude-Skills★ 1same name
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 repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- claude-code-projectSkill
- python-anti-patternsSkill
- python-background-jobsSkill
- python-design-patternsSkill
- python-error-handlingSkill
- python-mcp-server-generatorSkill
- python-performance-optimizationSkill
- pocmap-agentSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
7 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
6
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 17
Create reusable, testable, outcome-oriented success standards that guide agents across repeated runs.
- Very specific: line 53
Rule of thumb: Use a /goal when you need a reusable success standard.
- Very specific: line 126
Read references/patterns.md for full details with examples.
- Very specific: line 132
BDD-Style Verification: - Use Given/When/Then for complex multi-step goals
- Very specific: line 136
Read references/patterns.md for the full catalog with before/after corrections.
- Distinctive: line 149
Read the appropriate file when targeting a specific workflow type:
- Very specific: line 160
Before delivering any /goal directive, confirm ALL of the following.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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
/goal Creator
Create reusable, testable, outcome-oriented success standards that guide agents
across repeated runs. A /goal is not a one-off prompt - it is a durable
operating instruction that defines what good execution looks like.
Core Workflow
Creating a /goal follows these steps:
- Define the outcome - what does success look like in observable terms?
- Select category - which workflow stage is this for? (see categories below)
- Apply a template - fill in the master template or select an alternate
- Add constraints - what must NOT happen? what boundaries apply?
- Define verification - how will an independent checker confirm success?
- Run quality audit - apply the pre-flight checklist before delivering
What a /goal Is
A /goal directive is a declarative, outcome-oriented specification of what
success looks like - independent of execution path. It is:
- Enduring - reusable across multiple sessions, not one-off
- Evaluable - an independent checker can verify achievement
- Decomposable - can be broken into sub-goals with dependencies
- Role-anchored - tied to a specific agent responsibility
What a /goal Is Not
| Format | What It Specifies | /goal Difference |
| One-off prompt | A single task invocation | Durable standard, not transient |
| System instruction | How the agent should behave (identity, tone) | What the agent must achieve (outcome) |
| Checklist | Steps to execute | Success conditions to meet |
| Acceptance criteria | Verifiable conditions for one feature | Reusable standard for a class of work |
| User story | User need from product perspective | Agent responsibility from execution perspective |
| SOP | Procedural "how to" instructions | Outcome specification - "what done means" |
Rule of thumb: Use a /goal when you need a reusable success standard. Use
other formats for one-time tasks, identity definition, procedure lists, or
feature-level verification.
Master Template
Fill every /goal using this template. All fields marked * are required.
## /goal: [Short Name]
**Category**: [EXPLORE / DEFINE / PLAN / BUILD / VERIFY / DEPLOY / MONITOR / REFLECT]
**Scope**: [One-line: what this goal covers and excludes]
### Objective*
[Single declarative sentence: what success looks like in observable terms]
### Success Criteria* (verify ALL before returning)
- [Criterion 1: measurable, pass/fail verifiable condition]
- [Criterion 2: measurable, pass/fail verifiable condition]
- [Criterion 3: measurable, pass/fail verifiable condition]
### Constraints* (hard boundaries)
- MUST NOT: [forbidden action or output characteristic]
- MUST: [required characteristic every output must have]
- LIMIT: [quantified bound - time, length, count, etc.]
### Output Specification*
[Exact expected output: format, structure, required sections, naming conventions]
### Verification Method*
[How an independent checker confirms success without re-doing the work]
### Failure Modes to Prevent
- [Specific failure mode 1]: [prevention strategy]
- [Specific failure mode 2]: [prevention strategy]
### Context (optional)
[Domain assumptions, prerequisite state, related goals]
### Examples (optional)
**Good output example:** [brief illustration]
**Bad output example:** [brief illustration with why it fails]Required Fields Reference
| Field | Purpose | Quality Bar |
| Objective | North star for the agent | Observable state, not process description |
| Success Criteria | Done checklist | Each criterion is pass/fail verifiable |
| Constraints | Guardrails | Quantified where possible, MUST NOT/MUST/LIMIT format |
| Output Specification | Delivery contract | Format + structure + required elements |
| Verification Method | Independent confirmation | Method an external checker can execute |
Category Quick Reference
Each workflow stage has a different goal category. Read the appropriate reference file for detailed templates, examples, and stage-specific guidance.
| Category | Verb Family | Read This | Use When |
| EXPLORE | explore, investigate, research | references/categories.md | Gathering information, learning, discovering |
| DEFINE | define, scope, frame | references/categories.md | Setting boundaries, specifying requirements |
| PLAN | plan, design, architect | references/categories.md | Creating blueprints, selecting approaches |
| BUILD | implement, build, create | references/categories.md | Producing artifacts, writing code/content |
| VERIFY | verify, validate, test | references/categories.md | Checking correctness, quality assurance |
| DEPLOY | deploy, launch, release | references/categories.md | Shipping to production |
| MONITOR | monitor, maintain, improve | references/categories.md | Ongoing operations, optimization |
| REFLECT | reflect, evaluate, learn | references/categories.md | Post-hoc analysis, knowledge capture |
Gold Patterns (High-Impact)
Read references/patterns.md for full details with examples. The top 5:
- End-State-First - Define "done" in verifiable terms before describing process
- Structured Output Contract - Specify exact output format as an interface contract
- Constraint-First Safety - Define what NOT to do before what to do
- Second-Agent Test - A different agent can verify success from the output alone
- BDD-Style Verification - Use Given/When/Then for complex multi-step goals
Anti-Patterns (Avoid These)
Read references/patterns.md for the full catalog with before/after corrections.
| Anti-Pattern | Symptom | Fix |
| Vague Aspiration | "Create something good" | Add measurable criteria |
| Over-Specification | Prescribes every micro-step | Separate goal (outcome) from procedure (how) |
| Under-Specification | Missing output format | Add output contract section |
| Conflicting Signals | Multiple incompatible priorities | Explicit priority order |
| No Termination | Agent does not know when to stop | Add explicit stop conditions |
| Sycophancy Trap | Vague praise-seeking language | Replace with objective criteria |
Workflow-Specific Guidance
Read the appropriate file when targeting a specific workflow type:
| Workflow Type | Read This File |
| Website building (frontend, UI/UX) | references/workflow-guides.md |
| Software build/CI-CD | references/workflow-guides.md |
| Research and analysis | references/workflow-guides.md |
| Product development | references/workflow-guides.md |
Pre-Flight Quality Checklist
Before delivering any /goal directive, confirm ALL of the following.
Any item marked [VETO] failing blocks delivery regardless of other quality.
A. Clarity
- Objective states an observable outcome, not a process
- Success criteria use pass/fail language (no "should" or "try to")
- Output format is specified with required sections/fields
- Constraints use MUST NOT / MUST / LIMIT format
B. Verifiability
- Second-agent test: a different agent could verify success from output alone
- Each success criterion is independently checkable
- Verification method does not require re-doing the work
C. Safety [VETO items - any failure blocks delivery]
- At least one MUST NOT constraint prevents harmful output
- No instruction conflicts with safety or compliance requirements
- Goal explicitly forbids fabricating data, sources, or credentials
- Stop conditions prevent infinite loops or runaway execution
D. Completeness
- Category is assigned (EXPLORE/DEFINE/PLAN/BUILD/VERIFY/DEPLOY/MONITOR/REFLECT)
- Scope boundaries are explicit (what is included AND excluded)
- At least 2 specific failure modes are listed with prevention strategies
- Examples are provided for non-trivial goals
E. Reusability
- Goal is parameterized (uses placeholders for context-specific values)
- No hardcoded dates, names, or one-time references
- Goal can guide multiple runs without modification
F. Actionability
- Agent receiving this goal knows exactly what to produce
- Agent receiving this goal knows when to stop
- Agent receiving this goal knows what to avoid
Minimum passing score: 10/12 items from sections A, B, D, E, F + ALL section C
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.

