Imported from iplaylf2/coding-profile (profile/agent/skills/skill-design/SKILL.md). Install upstream with npx skills add iplaylf2/coding-profile --skill skill-design. Copyright stays with the author.

Skill Design

The requested new or existing skill target is an input supplied by the user or an already-established task decision. This skill designs, creates, reviews, or changes that target; it does not decide whether creation is warranted.

Use questions that can change the current design decision or review conclusion. Answer them first from the request, target artifacts, surrounding conventions, and available evidence. Ask the user only when an unresolved answer would materially change the requested result.

Positioning Questions

Read every existing target skill completely. Inspect affected resources and the local schemas, templates, validators, and repository conventions that govern the artifact.

Use the current request for desired behavior, runtime and schema requirements for validity, and current repository conventions for integration. When current evidence leaves a material design question unresolved, use relevant history to inform that decision within current requirements.

When related task guidance can clarify the target's contribution, compare the inputs each requires, the judgments it guides, and the results it produces. Keep the finished skill independently usable after activation: express boundaries as domain inputs, outputs, and out-of-scope decisions without naming, invoking, or requiring another skill or shared context.

• In concrete situations, what is the user trying to accomplish and what would a successful result look like?
• Which representative situations actually expose a design choice, and which would merely expand a checklist?
• What stable semantic task family appears across the relevant situations?
• What context is already available at activation, and what judgments, workflow, or result must the target skill contribute?
• What relevant behavior is already supplied by baseline agent behavior or project guidance, and what does the target add or refine for its domain?

Front Matter Questions

Front matter routes before the body is loaded. Follow the repository's metadata schema and keep execution guidance in the body.

• What minimum semantic context is needed to decide whether to load the target skill?
• Which user intents benefit from the target's contribution, and which fall outside its declared domain?
• Would paraphrase, translation, or implication preserve the same activation decision?
• Is the description expressing a task family and user intent rather than an internal step or artifact inventory, and did any execution detail enter without helping activation?

Skill Body Questions

The body guides work after activation. Fixed invariants and fragile or ordered procedures may be stated directly; contextual judgments should remain questions or decision prompts.

• Once the target skill is active, which task-specific judgments, workflows, result paths, validation, and result delivery must it guide?
• What information sources can change those decisions, what can the agent infer from them, and which unresolved answer would justify a focused follow-up?
• What concrete decision does each question expose or instruction settle, and would answering the question differently or removing the content materially affect future behavior?
• Is each question located with the responsibility it shapes and worded to keep the judgment open rather than smuggle in a preferred answer?
• Which content should remain an open question, and which is an explicit constraint, runtime contract, fixed sequence, or validation fact that should be stated directly?
• Does execution require reusable material that the body cannot carry effectively, and what stable purpose and source of truth would that resource have?
• Does a literal keyword or list change routing or execution, and is the list a closed set, a fixed sequence, or an open set better expressed as a category?
• Is the body proportional to its distinct decisions, or did incremental edits leave repetition, conflicting rules, patch traces, or disproportionate emphasis that call for a rewrite?

Target Artifact Questions

• For a new target, what name, location, smallest complete front matter, body, and resource set follow from its positioning and repository contract?
• For an existing target, in which situations is the current design effective, and where does its routing or execution diverge?
• Compared with leaving the target unchanged, what would a proposed change improve, and would that gain justify its context, coupling, and maintenance costs?
• When refactoring without preserving the current section or patch shape, what coherent structure would retain valid external behavior and current contracts?
• When optimizing for a supplied goal, which elements affect that goal and which unrelated effective behavior should remain intact?

Validation Questions

Use existing validation facilities. Report exact checks and distinguish static reasoning from runtime evaluation.

• What behavior or contract changed, and which existing check or affected task boundary can reveal conflicting guidance, missing coverage, unnecessary repeated work, duplicated sources of truth, or a broken use path?
• Are the target's declared inputs sufficient to produce its complete result in representative activation and execution situations?
• What was actually checked, what remains a static inference, and what has not been evaluated at runtime?

Result Questions

Lead with the requested design, completed artifact or change, or review conclusion.

• What intended usage, positioning, activation boundary, or execution responsibility was established or changed?
• Which material design choice, rewrite, or removal should the user understand?
• What validation evidence can be reported truthfully, and what uncertainty still affects future behavior?