Install
$ agentstack add skill-int2t05-engineering-skills-oss-polish ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Open Source Project Polish
One-pass workflow to turn a bare repo into a professional, discoverable open source project. Four phases: README → topics/About → commit-history narrative → trending-repo positioning.
When to use
- Preparing a project for public release or first launch
- Repo has working code but a bare README, missing topics, or no About description
- Want a commit-history narrative (
REPOSITORY_SUMMARY.md+THE_STORY_OF_THIS_REPO.md) - Researching trending repos in a domain for positioning benchmarking
- Triggers on "polish my repo", "beautify open source project", "开源项目美化", "优化项目展示"
Not for: open source business model or commercialization strategy (use oss-strategy), or general project documentation (use documentation-audit).
Steps
Step 1: Analyze project
- Read entry files (
package.json,go.mod,Cargo.toml,requirements.txt,mkdocs.yml). - Scan source dirs for architecture and key features; note tech stack, target users, unique value.
- Check existing
README.mdand repo metadata. - If
README.mdexists, ask: update in place or back up toREADME-backup.mdfirst?
Result: a one-paragraph summary of what the project does, who it's for, and what's special.
Step 2: Generate README
Produce a professional README.md with sections in this order:
- Title (H1) — repository name.
- Badges — shields.io format. Order: build status → tech stack → hosting → license.
Pick templates from references/badges.md. Limit 5–10 for readability. Do NOT add a self-link "GitHub repo" badge — readers are already on GitHub.
- Live site link — if deployed (GitHub Pages, Netlify, Vercel).
- Overview — 1–3 paragraphs answering what / who / why / unique. Hook a visitor in `; emit a
| Metric | Count | table (markdown files, words, chapters, glossary…). For code-focused repos, skip this step — github_fetcher.py covers repo metrics instead.
- Getting Started — prerequisites, clone, install, build/serve, deploy.
- Repository Structure — concise ASCII tree (10–20 lines), representative not exhaustive.
- Reporting Issues — link to GitHub Issues + bug-report template.
- License — match
LICENSEfile /mkdocs.ymlcopyright; default CC BY 4.0 for
educational content (CC BY-SA if share-alike is desired); reserve NC (NonCommercial) only for projects that explicitly restrict commercial use, MIT or Apache-2.0 for code.
- Acknowledgements — key dependencies only.
- Contact — maintainer info.
- Optional — Contributing, Citation (BibTeX), Changelog.
Formatting: ATX headers, blank line before lists, code fences with a language tag, lines env var to list repos by stars; inspect each repo's topics` field.
- Identify 8–15 highly relevant topics; rank by discoverability × relevance × search volume.
- Select the final list (max 20 — GitHub limit).
- Write the About description (GitHub allows ≤350 chars): one compelling sentence
covering what + who + why.
Present the final list + rationale to the user before applying. Apply via GitHub API (PUT /repos/:owner/:repo/topics) and repo settings (description).
Step 4: Commit-history narrative story
Generate two files in the repo root using git data as evidence — write the files directly, do NOT paste markdown to chat.
REPOSITORY_SUMMARY.md— overview, architecture, key components, technologies, data
flow, team/ownership.
THE_STORY_OF_THIS_REPO.md— chronicles (year in numbers), cast of characters
(contributors + specialties), seasonal patterns, great themes (feat/fix/refactor), plot twists/turning points, current chapter.
Git commands to run systematically (POSIX forms for Git Bash):
git rev-list --all --count— total commitsgit shortlog -sn --since="1 year ago" | head -20— top contributorsgit log --since="1 year ago" --format="%ai" | cut -c1-7 | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -12— monthly activitygit log --since="1 year ago" --oneline --grep="feat\|fix\|update\|add\|remove" | head -50— change themesgit log --since="1 year ago" --name-only --oneline— hotspot filesgit log --since="1 year ago" --merges --oneline | head -20— collaboration patterns
Be specific: actual file names, commit messages, contributor names. Evidence-based — explain why patterns exist (holidays, releases, incidents).
Step 5: Trending-repo positioning
- Run
python references/scripts/github_fetcher.pywithTOPIC=to fetch top
repos by stars.
- Run
python references/scripts/readme_fetcher.py(or the batch helper) to pull competitor
README summaries.
- Benchmark: how does this project compare on stars, README quality, topic coverage, positioning?
- Produce: a 5–10 word tagline, recommended launch channels (HN / Reddit / Dev.to /
DevHunt by domain), and a short positioning paragraph noting differentiators.
GH_TOKEN env var is optional but recommended (5000 req/hr authenticated vs 60 unauthenticated).
Step 6: Consolidated report
Output a single report:
# [Project Name] Open Source Polish
## Analysis Summary — what / stack / audience
## README — full content or diff
## Topics & About — About (≤350 chars), topics list, rationale
## Narrative — links to the two generated .md files
## Positioning — tagline, launch plan, differentiators
## Next Steps — apply checklist (README, topics, About, LICENSE)
After user approval, apply changes via your available GitHub tooling — the gh CLI or GitHub MCP (create_or_update_file for README/LICENSE; GitHub API PUT /repos/:owner/:repo/topics for topics; repo settings for the About description).
Output: README.md (polished) + REPOSITORY_SUMMARY.md + THE_STORY_OF_THIS_REPO.md (commit-history narrative), plus topics/About applied via GitHub API.
Verify
- [ ] README conforms to best practices — run
python references/scripts/validate-readme.py README.md; score ≥75/100 and no missing required sections (overview, getting started, license, contact).
- [ ] Topics set on the repo (1–20 topics, all relevant to the project's domain).
- [ ] About description set (≤350 chars, covers what + who + why).
- [ ] Both narrative files (
REPOSITORY_SUMMARY.md,THE_STORY_OF_THIS_REPO.md) exist in repo
root with complete content (not chat output).
- [ ] Badge URLs resolve; no self-link GitHub-repo badge; all README links work.
- [ ] Positioning report includes tagline, launch channels, and ≥1 differentiator vs trending repos.
References
- [${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}/references/engineering-principles.md](${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}/references/engineering-principles.md) — discipline every skill shares.
- [references/badges.md](references/badges.md) — shields.io templates by category (languages, hosting, license, status, custom).
- [references/scripts/](references/scripts/) —
collect-site-metrics.py(README metrics),validate-readme.py(README linter, scores 0–100),github_fetcher.py+readme_fetcher.py+config.py(trending-repo research via GitHub API).
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: int2t05
- Source: int2t05/engineering-skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.