split agent-docs skills
This commit is contained in:
14
skills/agent-docs/references/audit-checklist.md
Normal file
14
skills/agent-docs/references/audit-checklist.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
|
||||
# Audit Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Use this checklist for read-only audits of `AGENTS.md` and `agent-docs/`.
|
||||
|
||||
- Is the root `AGENTS.md` still the clear entrypoint?
|
||||
- Can a maintainer tell which document to read first for each common task?
|
||||
- Does any document act like a secondary router without enough reason?
|
||||
- Does each rule appear to have one authoritative home?
|
||||
- Does any inventory document contain policy language that should live in a rule doc?
|
||||
- Does any general-purpose agent-doc mix in project-specific business rules, product instructions, or end-user documentation?
|
||||
- Do key workflow docs state their edge cases and failure modes clearly enough that an agent would not have to infer them?
|
||||
- Are there residual cycles or cross-links that materially increase adherence cost?
|
||||
- Which findings are observed facts, and which are inferences about adherence risk?
|
||||
- If there are no concrete findings, what residual risks remain?
|
||||
19
skills/agent-docs/references/child-doc-template.md
Normal file
19
skills/agent-docs/references/child-doc-template.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
|
||||
# Child `agent-docs/` Template Chooser
|
||||
|
||||
Use this reference when you know you are editing a Markdown file inside `agent-docs/`, but still need to decide which child template fits.
|
||||
|
||||
## Choose The Smallest Matching Template
|
||||
|
||||
- Use `rule-doc-template.md` for instructions, constraints, policy, decision criteria, or workflow guidance.
|
||||
- Use `inventory-doc-template.md` for maintained lists, registries, migration queues, or cleanup backlogs.
|
||||
- Split the document if one file tries to serve both purposes and the split would reduce ambiguity.
|
||||
|
||||
## Quick Tests
|
||||
|
||||
- If the document mainly tells maintainers what to do and what to avoid, use the rule template.
|
||||
- If the document mainly tracks entries that need to be updated over time, use the inventory template.
|
||||
- If the document has a long list of repeated entries under one governing policy, keep the policy brief and let the inventory structure carry the list.
|
||||
|
||||
## Compatibility Note
|
||||
|
||||
Older repositories may still refer to `references/child-doc-template.md` as the default child template. Keep this file as the entrypoint, but point new work to the specific template that matches the document's job.
|
||||
12
skills/agent-docs/references/consistency-checklist.md
Normal file
12
skills/agent-docs/references/consistency-checklist.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
|
||||
# Consistency Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Use this checklist for structural inspection of the AGENTS and `agent-docs` graph.
|
||||
|
||||
- Is every active child document directly or indirectly reachable from the root?
|
||||
- What is the shortest routing depth for each child doc?
|
||||
- Are there direct cycles? If so, which ones are harmless and which ones are noisy?
|
||||
- Does any document have unusually high out-degree and behave like a secondary index?
|
||||
- Does any intermediate document only restate links without adding scope or decision logic?
|
||||
- Is any rule likely owned by more than one active document?
|
||||
- Does each document's actual shape still match its declared job: root, rule doc, or inventory?
|
||||
- Are there stale references to deleted or renamed docs?
|
||||
63
skills/agent-docs/references/inventory-doc-template.md
Normal file
63
skills/agent-docs/references/inventory-doc-template.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
|
||||
# Inventory `agent-docs/` Template
|
||||
|
||||
Use this structure for Markdown files inside `agent-docs/` when the document's main job is to track a maintained set of entries: media plans, registries, migration queues, or cleanup lists.
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended Shape
|
||||
|
||||
```md
|
||||
# <Document Title>
|
||||
|
||||
<Opening statement: what this inventory tracks, when it should be used or updated, and that it must be followed in scope.>
|
||||
|
||||
## Applies To
|
||||
|
||||
- <tasks that require reading or updating this inventory>
|
||||
|
||||
## Does Not Apply To
|
||||
|
||||
- <tasks that belong in a rule doc, public docs, or another inventory>
|
||||
|
||||
## Maintenance Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- <how to add, update, remove, or rewrite entries>
|
||||
|
||||
## Reclassification Rules
|
||||
|
||||
- <when an entry changes status or grouping>
|
||||
- <when repeated notes should become policy in a rule doc>
|
||||
- <when this inventory should split or link to a narrower rule doc>
|
||||
|
||||
## Entries
|
||||
|
||||
### <Grouping Heading>
|
||||
|
||||
#### <Entry Title>
|
||||
|
||||
<Recommended fields; keep only the ones that materially help maintainers.>
|
||||
|
||||
Source:
|
||||
- <path or owning document>
|
||||
|
||||
Status:
|
||||
- <planned / in progress / complete / remove / optional>
|
||||
|
||||
Notes:
|
||||
- <what to capture, why it matters, or what to clean up>
|
||||
|
||||
## Maintenance Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
- <questions for keeping the inventory current and unambiguous>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- Prefer an inventory template when the document is mostly a maintained list rather than a rules essay.
|
||||
- Start with a small field set. `Source`, `Status`, and `Notes` are common defaults, not mandatory fields.
|
||||
- Add, rename, or remove entry fields to match the repository's actual maintenance needs.
|
||||
- Keep entry fields stable enough within one document that maintainers can scan and update them consistently.
|
||||
- Use grouping headings only when they materially improve navigation.
|
||||
- Separate durable maintenance rules from the entries themselves.
|
||||
- If the governing policy becomes large, move it to a rule doc and link to it from the inventory.
|
||||
- Add `Reclassification Rules` when entry state changes or repeated review decisions would otherwise stay implicit.
|
||||
- Write for maintainers and make update decisions explicit.
|
||||
- If the document references repository files, write repository-relative paths in backticks, not Markdown links or machine-local absolute filesystem paths.
|
||||
62
skills/agent-docs/references/linking-patterns.md
Normal file
62
skills/agent-docs/references/linking-patterns.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,62 @@
|
||||
# Linking Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
## Preferred Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
### Root -> Topic Docs
|
||||
|
||||
Use when the repository has a small set of clearly separate instruction topics.
|
||||
|
||||
```md
|
||||
# Required `agent-docs` Before Editing
|
||||
|
||||
- Read and follow `agent-docs/topic-a.md` when ...
|
||||
- Read and follow `agent-docs/topic-b.md` when ...
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Root -> Project Doc -> Leaf Docs
|
||||
|
||||
Use only when the intermediate layer reduces ambiguity or repeated cross-reference text.
|
||||
|
||||
```md
|
||||
AGENTS.md
|
||||
-> agent-docs/project-guidelines.md
|
||||
-> agent-docs/topic-a.md
|
||||
-> agent-docs/topic-b.md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Root -> Subproject `agent-docs/`
|
||||
|
||||
Use in monorepos when a subproject has its own scoped instruction set.
|
||||
|
||||
```md
|
||||
AGENTS.md
|
||||
-> apps/docs/agent-docs/project-guidelines.md
|
||||
-> services/api/agent-docs/backend-guidelines.md
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Common rules stay in the root `AGENTS.md`. Subproject-specific rules stay near the subproject they govern.
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-Patterns
|
||||
|
||||
- Root file linking to every leaf doc in a large tree without grouping
|
||||
- Child docs that are never reachable from the root
|
||||
- Topic-specific rules stored in the root file without a reference reason
|
||||
- Extra index files that only restate links without adding scope or decision logic
|
||||
- Moving rules out of the root file without leaving an explicit reference to the new child file
|
||||
- Keeping monorepo-wide and subproject-specific constraints mixed together in the same root section when they can be separated cleanly
|
||||
|
||||
## Explicit Reference Rule
|
||||
|
||||
Parent documents should point to the child documents that refine them.
|
||||
|
||||
If a child document exists and is active, there must be an explicit reference path from the root `AGENTS.md` to that document.
|
||||
|
||||
The root `AGENTS.md` should list only the next `agent-docs` documents that are actually needed. Do not add unnecessary next-step links just for completeness.
|
||||
|
||||
## Conflict Resolution Rule
|
||||
|
||||
- More specific scope beats broader scope.
|
||||
- A child doc with explicit task scope beats a generic note in the root file.
|
||||
- A rule doc's behavior rule beats an inventory entry's shorthand wording.
|
||||
- If two active docs both read like authoritative owners for the same rule, do not improvise a priority. Treat it as duplicate authority and refactor the tree.
|
||||
- If two sibling docs are equally specific and both explicitly apply, do not break the tie by tone or wording. Report the ambiguity and refactor the tree.
|
||||
27
skills/agent-docs/references/refactor-checklist.md
Normal file
27
skills/agent-docs/references/refactor-checklist.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
|
||||
# Refactor Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Use this checklist after changing the root `AGENTS.md` or any file in `agent-docs/`.
|
||||
|
||||
- Does each covered document own one clear topic?
|
||||
- Does each filename clearly express the document's purpose?
|
||||
- Does each opening explain purpose, trigger, and that the document must be followed in scope?
|
||||
- Is the root `AGENTS.md` still the starting point for required `agent-docs`?
|
||||
- Does every active `agent-docs/` file have an explicit path from the root?
|
||||
- Does each child doc use the right shape for its job: rule doc versus inventory doc?
|
||||
- Did you remove stale references, filenames, and replaced paths?
|
||||
- Did you delete or update any `agent-docs` file that is no longer referenced from the root `AGENTS.md`?
|
||||
- Did you avoid duplicating the same rule across multiple active docs?
|
||||
- Did you avoid mixing long entry inventories into rule docs when a separate inventory would be clearer?
|
||||
- Did you avoid adding an intermediate router or index doc that only repeats links?
|
||||
- If you split a doc, did the split reduce ambiguity, repetition, or maintenance cost?
|
||||
- If a document grew broader, did you check whether it now owns more than one real decision surface and should be split?
|
||||
- If a workflow is fragile or easy to misapply, did you add explicit edge cases or failure modes instead of hiding them in prose?
|
||||
- Is the default path basis still the root of the current Git working tree unless explicitly overridden?
|
||||
- Are repository-wide constraints still in the root file?
|
||||
- Are topic-specific constraints still in child docs?
|
||||
- Are project-specific rules still kept in project-specific documents rather than the general rules layer?
|
||||
- Did you avoid mixing general agent-doc governance with project-specific business rules or end-user documentation?
|
||||
- Do repository file references still use plain repository-relative paths in backticks rather than Markdown links or machine-local absolute paths?
|
||||
- Did you keep reference depth minimal?
|
||||
- Does the root still act like a route map instead of a topic dump?
|
||||
- If the repository has a validation command, did you run it?
|
||||
12
skills/agent-docs/references/repo-alignment-checklist.md
Normal file
12
skills/agent-docs/references/repo-alignment-checklist.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
|
||||
# Repo Alignment Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Use this checklist when comparing AGENTS or `agent-docs` against repository facts.
|
||||
|
||||
- Which exact doc claims depend on repository reality?
|
||||
- Which repository files or commands provide the authoritative fact for each claim?
|
||||
- Do the rule docs expose enough authority or source-of-truth anchors that a maintainer can verify the claim without guessing?
|
||||
- Do scripts, ports, paths, or package names still match the docs?
|
||||
- Do the documented verification commands still match actual script behavior?
|
||||
- Do layering, contract-boundary, or runtime-topology claims still match code structure?
|
||||
- Which mismatches are must-fix drift versus wording cleanup?
|
||||
- Are the conclusions grounded in current files and command output rather than memory?
|
||||
38
skills/agent-docs/references/root-agents-template.md
Normal file
38
skills/agent-docs/references/root-agents-template.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,38 @@
|
||||
# Root `AGENTS.md` Template
|
||||
|
||||
Use this structure for the `AGENTS.md` at the root of the current Git working tree.
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended Shape
|
||||
|
||||
```md
|
||||
# Root AGENTS.md
|
||||
|
||||
- State that this file is the starting point for the repository's required `agent-docs`.
|
||||
- Define the default path basis.
|
||||
|
||||
# Common Constraints
|
||||
|
||||
- Keep repository-wide rules here.
|
||||
- Do not repeat topic-specific rules that belong in child docs.
|
||||
|
||||
# Required `agent-docs` Before Editing
|
||||
|
||||
- List the required `agent-docs` explicitly.
|
||||
- Use explicit "Read and follow ..." wording.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- Keep this file short.
|
||||
- Treat this file as an instruction document, not a passive index.
|
||||
- Reference child docs only when they are actually needed.
|
||||
- Write for maintainers and keep decisions explicit.
|
||||
- When referring to child docs, write repository-relative paths in backticks such as `agent-docs/example.md`, not Markdown links or machine-local absolute filesystem paths.
|
||||
- Do not turn the root file into a dump of all topic-specific rules.
|
||||
- If the root starts collecting multiple topic-specific rule blocks, split them into child docs and keep only the routing decision here.
|
||||
|
||||
## Complexity Budget
|
||||
|
||||
- Keep the root focused on three jobs only: entrypoint, repository-wide constraints, and next-step routing.
|
||||
- If a root section starts carrying topic-specific decision logic, move that logic to a child doc and leave only the routing cue behind.
|
||||
- Treat multiple topic-specific rule blocks in the root as a refactor trigger, not as a sign to keep extending the root file.
|
||||
51
skills/agent-docs/references/rule-doc-template.md
Normal file
51
skills/agent-docs/references/rule-doc-template.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
|
||||
# Rule `agent-docs/` Template
|
||||
|
||||
Use this structure for Markdown files inside `agent-docs/` when the document's main job is to govern behavior: rules, policy, constraints, decision criteria, or workflow guidance.
|
||||
|
||||
## Recommended Shape
|
||||
|
||||
```md
|
||||
# <Document Title>
|
||||
|
||||
<Opening statement: what this doc governs, when it applies, and that it must be followed in scope.>
|
||||
|
||||
## Applies To
|
||||
|
||||
- <specific task or document types>
|
||||
|
||||
## Does Not Apply To
|
||||
|
||||
- <out-of-scope task or document types>
|
||||
|
||||
## Authority
|
||||
|
||||
- <source of truth: owning doc, repository path, command, or code area>
|
||||
|
||||
## <Rule Section>
|
||||
|
||||
- <instructions>
|
||||
|
||||
## Edge Cases
|
||||
|
||||
- <exceptions, ambiguous cases, or branch conditions>
|
||||
|
||||
## Failure Modes
|
||||
|
||||
- <what usually goes wrong and how to recover>
|
||||
|
||||
## Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
- <validation questions>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Notes
|
||||
|
||||
- Make the scope explicit.
|
||||
- Keep the document responsible for one topic.
|
||||
- Use semantic filenames and headings.
|
||||
- Write for maintainers. State actions, constraints, and decision criteria directly.
|
||||
- If the document references repository files, write repository-relative paths in backticks, not Markdown links or machine-local absolute filesystem paths.
|
||||
- State the user or maintainer decision directly: what to do, what to avoid, and how to choose.
|
||||
- Add `Authority` when the rule depends on a repository fact, owning document, or other source of truth that later reviews must verify.
|
||||
- Add `Edge Cases` and `Failure Modes` when the workflow is easy to misapply or the scope boundary is easy to misunderstand.
|
||||
- Prefer linking to inventories, examples, or narrower child docs instead of embedding long registries inline.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
|
||||
# Skill Maintenance Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Use this checklist when editing the `agent-docs` skill suite itself: any `SKILL.md`, `agents/openai.yaml`, or shared file under `references/`.
|
||||
|
||||
- Does each `agents/openai.yaml` still match the skill title, scope, and trigger language in the corresponding `SKILL.md`?
|
||||
- Is every file in `references/` directly referenced from the router skill or the specialized skill that requires it?
|
||||
- Are there stale filenames, old skill names, or outdated terms left behind after renames or splits?
|
||||
- Does one concept still use one term across `SKILL.md`, `agents/openai.yaml`, and `references/`?
|
||||
- If a shared checklist or template changed, do the affected skills still point to the right file and workflow step?
|
||||
12
skills/agent-docs/references/verification-checklist.md
Normal file
12
skills/agent-docs/references/verification-checklist.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
|
||||
# Verification Checklist
|
||||
|
||||
Use this checklist after changing `AGENTS.md` or `agent-docs/`.
|
||||
|
||||
- Did you run the strongest repository validation that actually applies?
|
||||
- For docs-only work with no stronger validator, did you at least run `git diff --check`?
|
||||
- If routing changed, did you re-check root reachability?
|
||||
- If cross-links changed, did you re-check for stale references or direct cycles where relevant?
|
||||
- If root routing, child references, conflict rules, or required follow-up workflow changed, did you test 1 to 3 representative prompts?
|
||||
- Did those representative prompts confirm that the agent read the root entrypoint first, chose the intended specialized workflow, ran required follow-up checks, and surfaced ambiguity instead of guessing?
|
||||
- Does the completion claim match the commands actually run?
|
||||
- If part of the change was not verified, is that limitation stated explicitly?
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user