본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

agent-doc-discipline

Write or revise instructions, specifications, tickets, and skill files so an agent can act without prior chat history. Make rules checkable, explain their reasons, define completion criteria, and keep authoritative information in one place.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

원문원문 설명 보기

Writing-time discipline for documents agents consume (the five surfaces, specs, tickets, .omc/skills/) — every rule checkable and carrying a why, steps before reference, one meaning in one home, no restating what the environment already says. Mandatory at drydock seed generation and the launch C5 sediment pass; opt-in for any other agent-facing doc edit. The companion of minimal-code-discipline: that one disciplines code, this one disciplines papers.

설치 방법 보기

이럴 때 유용합니다

  • Clarifying instructions in CLAUDE.md
  • Making specifications and tickets actionable
  • Adding completion criteria to skill procedures
  • Removing duplicate and outdated document rules

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md6.0 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Agent Doc Discipline

Use this skill to apply a writing-time discipline while creating or editing any document an agent consumes to act: the five surfaces (CLAUDE.md, GLOSSARY.md, docs/standards/, design-system/, .omc/skills/), specs, tickets, and skill files. The test a document must pass: a fresh agent session can act on it by reading alone.

Mandatory when: drydock generates surface seeds, the launch C5 sediment pass writes a lesson into a slot. Opt-in for every other edit — but any edit to an agent-facing document should survive these rules.

When Not to Use

Documents written for humans only: docs/business/ narrative, ADR decision stories, READMEs for human onboarding. They may still follow the rules where it costs nothing, but they are not held to this discipline.

The Discipline

Write for a reader with no chat history. The document is self-describing: nothing leans on "as discussed", a prior session, or knowledge that lives in someone's head. Test: a brand-new agent session can act on the document by reading alone.

Every rule checkable and carrying a why. No "keep it clean" — write the observable condition and the reason. Test: an agent can decide pass/fail from the text alone, and the why is stated next to the rule.

One meaning, one home. Each rule or definition has a single authoritative place; duplication is drift waiting to happen. Test: changing a behavior is a one-place edit.

Never restate what the environment confesses. Package scripts, directory layouts, --help output are lookups, not documents — a copied lookup goes stale. Document only what cannot be found by looking: the unwritten convention, the reason behind a choice, the gotcha. Test: every line survives "can this be looked up elsewhere?".

Steps first, reference behind, rare material behind a pointer. What to do, in order, at the top; consult-on-demand rules below; low-frequency material pushed behind a pointer whose wording names the branches that should trigger reaching it. Test: the next action is findable within the first screen.

Every step ends on a completion criterion. Done must be tellable from not-done — a vague bound invites premature completion. Test: for each step, "how do I know this is finished?" has an answer in the text.

A procedure longer than two steps is numbered. The numbers are stable references: a reader can name step 3, follow the order, and jump without re-reading. An unnumbered procedure of many steps makes the reader hold the order in their head. Test: every procedure of three or more steps carries its numbers.

A list is capped at what a reader holds in one glance. A list that outgrows the reader's grasp loses its point — nothing in it is findable. A longer enumeration becomes structure (a table, subsections) or splits. This governs the writing of documents; it never touches the machinery of a gate or a batched decision, which lives in the methodology, not the prose. Test: every list in the document fits in one glance, and any longer enumeration has become structure.

Deferred and scheduled work states when. A document that defers work to a later step, session, or release states that timing next to the work it defers — "when" is a fact the reader needs to act, and an unstated deferral reads as an unstarted one. The timing is stated in the prose only; it never rebinds a checkpoint the methodology pushes right deliberately. Test: every deferral in the document carries its when.

Close on a next action a reader can start now. A report, ticket, or session-close pointer ends not with a summary but with the one next step a reader can begin in under two minutes — the destination, the pointer, or the command. A close that only summarizes makes the reader re-derive what to do first. Test: the last line answers "what do I do next?" without scrolling up.

Re-state the position each time the reader rejoins. A document a returning reader touches mid-flight (a long spec, a run report, a map Notes section) opens the new material with where things stand — step, phase, or decision count — before adding anything new. Test: a reader arriving cold can locate the current state in the first two lines of the newest section.

Prompt the positive. State the target behavior; a prohibition is reserved for hard guardrails and is always paired with the positive target. Test: every prohibition in the document names the thing to do instead.

Scrape barnacles on write. When the document contains stale or redundant material, remove it in the same edit; when it does not, add only the required material and do not invent deletions. A sentence the model already obeys by default pays load for nothing — delete the whole sentence. Test: every line re-read earns its place against "does this change behavior versus the default?", and any stale or redundant material found during the edit is gone.

Verification

Before reporting a document change done, confirm:

  • a fresh session could act on it without asking a human anything
  • every rule is checkable and states its why; no rule restates a lookup
  • meanings live in one place; pointers name their trigger branches
  • stale or redundant material found during the edit was removed, while valid unrelated content was preserved
  • closes end on a next action the reader can start now; rejoining readers find the current state stated before new material
  • procedures of three or more steps are numbered; lists fit in one glance; every deferral states its when

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Simplify bloated AI-generated code by removing dead code, duplicated logic, and unnecessary layers while checking that existing behavior stays intact. Use a limited cleanup scope, verify changes with relevant checks, or request a review without edits.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Removing duplicate logic and unused code
  • Simplifying unnecessary wrappers without changing behavior
  • Cleaning up only a specified set of changed files
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4만2026년 10월 22일 업데이트

Review module relationships and change history to identify structural improvements in a codebase. Receive ranked candidates with file references, suggested changes, and risks, plus a recommendation for where to start, without modifying code.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Reviewing architecture after a batch of changes
  • Investigating changes that touch too many files
  • Prioritizing structural improvements
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4만2026년 10월 22일 업데이트

ask

무료

Send questions, review requests, or implementation tasks to a supported local AI command-line tool through one shared command. The wrapper handles provider-specific options and saves the result as a Markdown file for later reference.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Requesting a security review of a patch
  • Seeking UX suggestions for a user flow
  • Drafting an implementation plan for an issue
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4만2026년 10월 22일 업데이트

Turn an unclear idea into linked decision tickets on a repository’s issue tracker. Work through one decision per session, record outcomes and dependencies, and prepare a brief defining the objective, scope, and exclusions for delivery.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Clarifying the destination of an early idea
  • Mapping decisions and their dependencies
  • Resuming unresolved decisions across sessions
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4만2026년 10월 22일 업데이트

autopilot

무료

Turn a short product idea into working code through requirements analysis, technical planning, implementation, testing, and review. It coordinates agents across these stages, fixes detected problems, and reports assumptions that still need a human decision.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Building a product from a short idea
  • Creating a bookstore inventory API
  • Developing a habit-tracking command-line tool
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4만2026년 10월 22일 업데이트

Run repeated change-and-evaluation cycles for one predefined improvement mission within an explicit runtime limit. Save each evaluation as JSON and each decision in readable Markdown logs, with support for periodic reruns through Claude Code native cron.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 영어 요약을 표시하고 있습니다.

  • Repeating improvements under a fixed evaluation method
  • Keeping evaluation results and decision logs
  • Running experiments within a time limit
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode4만2026년 10월 22일 업데이트

Yeachan-Heo의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고