Protocol Implementer Review

What this skill is for

Use this skill when an external adopter, SDK user, or second surface needs protocol-oriented review.

Constitutional purpose

Keep interoperability honest by separating protocol compatibility from local convenience names, README optimism, or adapter-specific drift.

Failure modes targeted

• Protocol drift
• Compatibility overclaiming
• Competing naming layers
• Missing conformance or discovery evidence

When to use it

• Reviewing an adapter or starter kit.
• Checking external implementation claims.
• Preparing adopter feedback.

When not to use it

• Do not use it to redesign ACP.
• Do not use it for Relay-only UI QA.
• Do not accept skill prose as protocol truth.

Inputs expected

• Implementation or adapter path
• Protocol bundle/discovery references
• Conformance output when available
• Claimed supported surfaces

Required evidence for valid use

• Discovery or schema references sufficient to compare semantics
• Claimed support boundary for the adopter or adapter
• Conformance evidence when compatibility is claimed rather than merely explored

Preflight / prerequisites

1. Load protocol/discovery.json.
2. Load canonical schema and implementer guide.
3. Identify the adopter's claimed support level.

Workflow

1. Check discovery and schema references.
2. Review lifecycle and condition vocabulary.
3. Confirm conformance or fixture compatibility.
4. Identify gaps without expanding ACP semantics.

Decision rules / judgment criteria

• External support must be stated precisely.
• Canonical fields beat local convenience names.
• Compatibility proof requires artifacts, not only README claims.

Escalation rules

Escalate when the implementation changes lifecycle meanings, omits conformance evidence, or introduces a competing naming layer.

Available scripts

• scripts/smoke.mjs: emits the protocol review checklist.

Produced artifacts

• Implementer review notes
• Compatibility gaps
• Conformance recommendation

Allowed claims

• That compatibility appears supported, unsupported, or unverified under the provided evidence
• That a local field or lifecycle name drifts from ACP semantics
• That more evidence is required before public compatibility claims are made

Forbidden claims

• That an adopter is ACP-compatible based only on README language
• That local convenience names automatically become protocol truth
• That skill prose can redefine schema semantics

Human override points

• Spec-level compatibility approval
• Maintainer review of disputed lifecycle or field meanings
• Manual decision on whether a public compatibility note is acceptable

Outputs

• Implementer review notes
• Compatibility gaps
• Conformance recommendation

Failure handling

If conformance cannot run, record the blocker and avoid compatibility claims.

Trust / safety notes

This skill protects ACP as an open protocol. It should make adopter gaps clear without overstating maturity.

Composition notes

Use after SDK/adopter starter runs and before public compatibility claims.

Examples to inspect next

Read examples/casebook.md for adopter review cases.

Evaluation hooks

Run scripts/smoke.mjs, npm run conformance:check, and npm run skills:audit.

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

• Author: jasontang-ai
• Source: jasontang-ai/acp
• License: Apache-2.0

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.