agent-skills
Health Warn
- License — License: MIT
- Description — Repository has a description
- Active repo — Last push 0 days ago
- Low visibility — Only 5 GitHub stars
Code Pass
- Code scan — Scanned 8 files during light audit, no dangerous patterns found
Permissions Pass
- Permissions — No dangerous permissions requested
No AI report is available for this listing yet.
Research-grounded, harness-agnostic skills for AI coding agents
agent-skills
Rigorous engineering process for AI coding agents, packaged as portable
Agent Skills: implement a spec end to end to a
verified PR, review code with independent judgment — your own branch, or
anyone's PR — work through review feedback like a professional author, and
keep documentation (agent-facing and human-facing) converged with the code
it describes.
- Harness-agnostic — standard
SKILL.mddirectories. Claude Code, Codex,
Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot, and a growing list of clients load them
natively; anywhere else (Windsurf, Goose, a human with a terminal), a
one-line pointer to the skill file works. - Codebase-agnostic — no assumptions about your repo, language, or
toolchain. Build/test/lint commands are discovered from the repo or passed
as inputs, never hardcoded. - Research-grounded — durable ledgers, fresh-context review,
evidence-first reporting: the design decisions trace to the
agent-engineering literature
(rationale).
The flagship: implement-spec
Most agents can write plausible code from a spec. What they don't do reliably
is everything around that — hold the plan across a long horizon, test what
they wrote, catch where the implementation quietly diverges from the spec,
and prove the result rather than assert it. implement-spec packages that
discipline: hand it an agent-ready spec, and it runs the lifecycle
autonomously, surfacing only at the end.
spec ─▶ branch ─▶ plan + test matrix ─▶ implement (tests alongside)
─▶ two-pass self-review ─▶ gap analysis vs the spec ─▶ close gaps
─▶ live verification ─▶ PR + acceptance-criteria evidence report
- Evidence over claims — "done" means every acceptance criterion in the
final report maps to a verifiable artifact (a test, a command's output, a
live check) — not that the model says so. - Survives long horizons — a durable run ledger on disk makes the run
resumable across crashes and context compaction. - Proportional rigor — every heavyweight phase (ledger, self-review, gap
analysis, tests, live verification) is individually opt-out, so a one-line
fix doesn't pay a ten-phase tax.
The full design rationale, with the literature behind each phase, is in
skills/implement-spec/README.md.
The skills around it
Seven more skills stand alongside it — two scale it across sessions, the rest
review, answer, and document:
| Skill | Purpose |
|---|---|
decompose-spec |
Split one large spec into the fewest self-contained tickets that each fit a single fresh context, and seed a durable build ledger — the planning half of a multi-session build |
orchestrate-build |
Drive that ledger to completion: run each ticket through implement-spec in a fresh context, report progress, pause for intervention, finish with a whole-build capstone — the execution half |
self-review |
Two-pass review of your own branch, pre-PR: mechanical verification, then independence-preserving design critique |
review-pr |
Review someone else's PR: CI/verification grounding, focused design + security passes, calibrated severities, high-precision inline comments |
address-pr-comments |
Work through review feedback on your PR: triage every thread, fix or push back with evidence, reply with commit links |
agent-docs |
Bootstrap or refresh the AGENTS.md hierarchy — the agent-facing knowledge layer |
refresh-repo-docs |
Audit and sync human-facing docs (README, docs/, examples) against the code |
The multi-session build
When a spec is too large for one focused run, decompose-spec andorchestrate-build turn it into a resumable chain of PRs — implement-spec
is still the per-ticket worker, run once per ticket in a fresh context:
decompose-specis the planner, and the
quality ceiling of the whole build: it partitions the spec to a precise
objective — the fewest tickets such that each fits one fresh context with
rigor headroom and no cut severs a shared implicit decision — then reviews
its own split in a fresh context and seeds the build ledger. The two bounds
(context rot above, fragmented decisions below) trace to the
rationale.orchestrate-buildis the driver. Its
key move: sequencing is deterministic code — a portable loop
(drive-build.shthat
discoversclaude -p/goose run/codex exec/gemini -p) that holds
no state and dispatches each ticket to a fresh context — so nothing
accumulates context across the build and there is no long-lived agent
context to rot.
State lives in the ledger; the human pauses and intervenes at ticket
boundaries by editing it. Degrades to a subagent-per-ticket or a manual
fresh-session floor where a harness offers less; the
rationale covers why it stays
harness-agnostic.
The review suite
Three seats at the same table, sharing one epistemology — every flag must
be demonstrable, and precision beats recall (false positives are how
reviewers lose the room):
self-reviewis the author pre-PR: Pass 1
runs auto-discovered build/test/lint (viaverify.sh, which infers the
toolchain when the repo doesn't declare one) plus binary
checklists; Pass 2 is design
critique under independence rules — fresh context where the harness
supports subagents, evidence-from-disk discipline where it doesn't. Alsoimplement-spec's review phase.review-pris the reviewer's seat: grounded
in CI and (optionally) local verification, then separate focused passes
for correctness, design, security, and scope; findings gated by
demonstrability → confidence → novelty → materiality, labeledblocking/important/nit/question, capped to prevent alert fatigue,
posted with suggestion blocks. It informs — approval stays human.address-pr-commentsis the author
answering: every unresolved thread gets a fix, a commit link, a reasoned
push-back, an answer, or a scoped follow-up — never silence, never
sycophancy, never a mid-review force-push.
The docs pair
Same convergence philosophy, two corpora with different consumers and
quality bars — each with a deterministic, CI-gateable drift detector in
front of the LLM work:
agent-docsowns the agent-facing knowledge
layer (AGENTS.md hierarchy) the other skills run on. Two modes —bootstrap(reconnaissance → gotcha mining → generation) andrefresh
(drift triage → surgical fixes) — auto-selected by a
detector that
classifies broken references as went stale vs authoring error using
git history. Owns the shared
Doc Authoring Guidelines.refresh-repo-docsowns what humans
read: README,docs/, CHANGELOG, guides, examples. Its
detector
flags broken references and docs older than the code they cite; the audit
is scoped by evidence (flagged docs, not "read the whole repo"), findings
are classed stale/cruft/gap/mode-drift with Diátaxis as the per-doc
quality lens, and no claim is written unverified.
Install
As a Claude Code plugin:
/plugin marketplace add SteveVitali/agent-skills
/plugin install agent-skills@agent-skills
Or by symlink, for any client that discovers skills on disk
(~/.claude/skills/, a project's .agents/skills/, etc.):
git clone https://github.com/SteveVitali/agent-skills.git ~/agent-skills
ln -s ~/agent-skills/skills/* ~/.claude/skills/
Clients without native skill support (e.g. Windsurf): a one-line
workflow or rule pointing at the skill file is enough — "Read and follow<path>/skills/implement-spec/SKILL.md".
Each skill declares its inputs in SKILL.md frontmatter; state them in
natural language ("implement docs/spec.md, skip the ledger, base off main").
System requirements: git, bash 3.2+, and standard Unix tools; the PR
skills (review-pr, address-pr-comments) additionally need an
authenticated GitHub CLI (gh).
Repo layout
.claude-plugin/ # plugin + marketplace manifests (Claude Code)
skills/<skill-name>/
├── SKILL.md # entry point (Agent Skills format: frontmatter + steps)
├── README.md # design rationale (where it exists)
├── modes/ # mode-specific step files, loaded on demand (where applicable)
├── scripts/ # supporting shell helpers (bash 3.2+ compatible)
└── checklists/ # supporting checklists / shared reference docs (where applicable)
One predictable entry filename means an agent (or tool) pointed at skills/
knows where every skill starts; everything else in a skill directory is
progressive-disclosure material referenced from its SKILL.md.
Design principles
- Durable state over context — anything that must survive compaction or a
crash goes to disk (run ledgers, snapshots, reports), never only in context. - External verification over self-assessment — compilers, tests, and live
systems are the arbiters; an agent's claim of "done" without evidence is
treated as not done. - Judgment independence — review happens in a fresh context where
possible, and always argues from what is on disk rather than memory of
writing it. - Deterministic before LLM — cheap, exit-code-gated scripts handle
everything mechanical (drift detection, toolchain checks) so model judgment
is spent only where judgment is required. - Progressive disclosure — hub files stay small; mode files, guidelines,
and checklists load only when needed. - Proportional rigor — every heavyweight phase is opt-out, so a one-line
fix doesn't pay a ten-phase tax.
Authoring a new skill
- Create
skills/<name>/SKILL.mdwith frontmatter:name,description
(what it does and when to use it), andinputs(each withname,required,description). Keep the body harness-neutral — no
tool-specific directives in skill files. - Write instructions that are concrete enough to verify ("run X, expect
exit 0"), and calibrated to a frontier model: specify what and why,
not keystroke-level how. - If the skill nears the spec's ~500-line ceiling for
SKILL.mdor has
distinct modes, split into a hub +modes/files (seeagent-docs). - Shell helpers go in
scripts/: bash 3.2-compatible, self-contained,
read-only by default — anything mutating must say so in its header, and
known limitations belong in the header too. - No assumptions about repo, language, or toolchain anywhere: discover from
the repo or take it as an input.
Related
- Agent Skills — the open format
these skills conform to. - anthropics/skills — Anthropic's
reference collection; mostly capability skills (documents, design,
testing tools). - obra/superpowers — a full
interactive development methodology (brainstorm → plan → subagent-driven
TDD). Kindred spirit, different center of gravity: superpowers optimizes
the human-in-the-loop workflow; agent-skills optimizes the autonomous run
and its evidence trail. - claude-hibernate —
hibernate running Claude Code sessions across reboots. Began in this repo;
Claude Code-specific by nature, so it lives on its own.
License
Reviews (0)
Sign in to leave a review.
Leave a reviewNo results found