Create Skill

Create Skill

Build a Claude Code skill that follows harness engineering best practices. The skill must be a map, not a manual — concise entrypoint, structured reference files, hard rules, feedback loops.

Skill types

Every skill is one of three types. Classify FIRST — it determines which rules apply:

| Type | Examples | Key traits | |---|---|---| | workflow | deep-qa, autopilot, team, build | Orchestrates agents, has phases/gates, makes completion claims. Full discipline: counter-tables, termination labels, iron-law gates, pressure-tests. | | reference | jenkins, jira, swagger, dbt-context | Tool guide, API reference, CLI wrapper. Code blocks ARE the value. Needs accuracy verification, not behavioral pressure-testing. | | shim | autopilot-temporal, deep-qa-temporal | Routing wrapper or deprecation redirect. ~15 lines. Exempt from all discipline requirements. |

Execution Model

Contracts scale by skill type:

All types:

• Triggers live in description. Keywords a user would actually type go in the description. "Use when …" phrasing. Never a workflow summary — Claude follows description summaries as shortcuts and skips the skill body.

Workflow skills (full discipline):

• RED-GREEN-REFACTOR is the delivery gate. Pressure scenarios are authored BEFORE the skill. Baseline-without-skill is observed and recorded. Skill is written to address the recorded failures. Loopholes are closed by re-running the same scenarios with the skill loaded. No skill ships without pressure-tests/baseline.md and pressure-tests/with-skill.md on disk.
• Anti-rationalization counter-table is mandatory. Every workflow skill ships with an explicit "Excuse → Reality" table in its SKILL.md or GOLDEN-RULES.md. Rationalizations are captured verbatim from baseline runs.
• Honest termination labels. Any skill that runs a multi-step process must define an exhaustive finite set of terminal labels (e.g. complete | partial | blocked | budget_exhausted | cancelled). Never done / all good / no issues remain.
• Iron-law verification gate language is baked in, not suggested. Any skill that claims completion must require fresh evidence on disk (test output file, lint exit code, judge verdict) before the completion claim. "Tests probably pass" is not a verification.
• Companion file structure for skills over 300 lines. A skill whose total content exceeds 300 lines ships as SKILL.md + FORMAT.md + STATE.md + GOLDEN-RULES.md + INTEGRATION.md (the npow orchestration pattern). Smaller skills may be flatter, but the split is the default once the threshold is crossed.
• No code blocks in SKILL.md. SKILL.md is a map. Code belongs in companion files.

Reference skills (accuracy over discipline):

• Code blocks welcome in SKILL.md. Inline examples are the primary value — they show users/agents how to use the tool.
• Accuracy verification replaces pressure-testing. Run 3-5 commands from the skill and confirm they work. Save results to verification/commands-tested.md. No RED-GREEN-REFACTOR needed.
• Use references/ subdirectory for overflow. Not FORMAT.md/STATE.md — use topic-named files: references/quick-start.md, references/api-reference.md, references/troubleshooting.md.
• Counter-tables, termination labels, and iron-law gates are optional. Reference skills don't orchestrate agents or make completion claims.
• Golden rules still apply — hard constraints like "Always use the auth wrapper, never raw curl" prevent real errors.

Shim skills (minimal):

• Frontmatter + one-paragraph redirect to the canonical skill. No other requirements.

Edit Manifest Protocol (for modifying existing skills)

When editing an existing workflow skill (not creating new), every change must ship with an edit manifest — a falsifiable contract declaring what the edit will fix and what it might break:

1. Before editing, write edit-manifest.md in the skill directory:

``` ## Edit Manifest — {skill name} — {date}

### Change summary What is being changed and why (1-2 sentences).

### Evidence What signals triggered this edit (link to cross-run evidence, defect reports, user feedback, or routing verification failures).

### Predicted fixes

• [task/scenario description]: expected to improve because [reason]

### Predicted regressions

• [task/scenario description]: at risk because [reason]
• "None predicted" is acceptable but must be explicit.

### Verification plan How to confirm fixes materialized and regressions didn't. Must reference concrete eval tasks or pressure-test scenarios. ```

1. After editing, run the verification plan. Write results to edit-manifest.md under a ### Verification results section:

• For each predicted fix: confirmed / not confirmed / inconclusive
• For each predicted regression: not observed / observed / inconclusive
• If any predicted regression observed: revert or document accepted tradeoff

1. Retain manifests. Keep edit-manifest.md files in a manifests/ subdirectory (rename with date: manifests/{date}-{summary}.md). These form the edit history that cross-run evidence aggregation consumes.

This protocol applies to workflow skill edits only. Reference skill edits need only re-run accuracy verification. Shim skill edits are exempt.

Workflow

Step 0: Classify skill type

Determine whether this is a workflow, reference, or shim skill. If shim → write frontmatter + redirect paragraph, done. Otherwise, follow the appropriate track below.

Workflow skill track (Steps 1-10)

1. Understand the domain (batched intake) — elicit what the skill does, when it should trigger, what tools/output it produces. If clarification is needed, present all questions as a single numbered batch in one message — never serially. Do not design until the purpose is clear. See [DESIGN.md](DESIGN.md).

1. Author pressure scenarios FIRST — write 3-5 scenarios a subagent will face without the skill loaded. Include at least one discipline-pressure case (time pressure, sunk cost, authority). Save to pressure-tests/scenarios.md. See [PRESSURE-TESTING.md](PRESSURE-TESTING.md).

1. Run RED baseline — spawn a subagent without the skill and run the scenarios. Record exact rationalizations verbatim to pressure-tests/baseline.md. See [PRESSURE-TESTING.md](PRESSURE-TESTING.md).

1. Design the architecture — decide file structure. Over 300 lines total → split into SKILL.md + FORMAT.md + STATE.md + GOLDEN-RULES.md + INTEGRATION.md. See [DESIGN.md](DESIGN.md) and [FORMAT.md](FORMAT.md).

1. Write the metadata — name and description in YAML frontmatter. Description includes trigger keywords, not workflow summary. See [WRITING.md](WRITING.md).

1. Write SKILL.md — numbered workflow steps (one line each with a pointer), self-review checklist, golden rules, anti-rationalization counter-table, termination labels, iron-law verification gate language. No inline code blocks. See [FORMAT.md](FORMAT.md).

1. Write companion files — FORMAT.md (output templates), STATE.md (run state schema, resume protocol), GOLDEN-RULES.md (rules + counter-table), INTEGRATION.md (composition with deep-qa, deep-design, degraded-mode fallbacks). One file per concern, each under 500 lines. See [FORMAT.md](FORMAT.md).

1. Close loopholes with REFACTOR pass — spawn subagent WITH the skill on the same scenarios. Record verbatim outputs to pressure-tests/with-skill.md. For any new rationalization that slipped past: add a counter-table row, add a red-flag line, add a golden rule. Re-run. Repeat until pressure-tests/with-skill.md shows zero violations. See [PRESSURE-TESTING.md](PRESSURE-TESTING.md).

1. Evaluate — test the skill with positive, implicit, noisy, and negative prompts (separate from pressure tests). Verify progressive disclosure works. See [EVALUATION.md](EVALUATION.md).

1. Deploy with pressure-test hand-off — hand the user the skill + the 3-5 pressure scenarios and the pressure-tests/ log. Direct them to run the scenarios themselves before relying on the skill. See [PRESSURE-TESTING.md](PRESSURE-TESTING.md).

Session extraction track (Steps S1-S5)

Use this track when the current session uncovered a repeatable workflow that should become a reusable skill. Trigger: "turn this into a skill", "extract from session", "skillify this", "save this workflow".

S1. Identify the repeatable task — what did this session accomplish that will recur? Name it.

S2. Extract the skeleton — from conversation context, pull: inputs, ordered steps, success criteria, constraints/pitfalls.

S3. Classify destination — decide where the skill belongs:

• Full skill (~/.claude/skills//SKILL.md) → proceed to workflow or reference track above for the full build.
• Learned skill (lightweight, project-scoped) → continue S4-S5.
• Documentation only → write to appropriate doc file, done.

S4. Draft the learned skill file — must start with YAML frontmatter: ```yaml --- name: description: triggers:

--- ``` Write to one of:

• ~/.claude/skills//SKILL.md (user-level, reusable across projects)
• .claude/skills//SKILL.md (project-level, committed with repo)

S5. Flag open questions — if any branching decisions or fuzzy steps remain, note them explicitly in the skill file rather than leaving them implicit. Terminate with label shipped_lite.

Reference skill track (Steps R1-R6)

R1. Understand the tool — what CLI/API/service does this skill document? What commands, endpoints, or patterns does a user need? See [DESIGN.md](DESIGN.md).

R2. Design the structure — SKILL.md as the primary guide with inline code examples. Use references/ subdirectory for overflow content (quick-start, API reference, troubleshooting, examples). See [FORMAT.md](FORMAT.md).

R3. Write the metadata — name and description in YAML frontmatter. Description includes trigger keywords. See [WRITING.md](WRITING.md).

R4. Write SKILL.md — quick-reference tables, inline code examples, golden rules (hard constraints for the tool), common workflows. Code blocks are welcome. See [FORMAT.md](FORMAT.md).

R5. Write reference files — references/ subdirectory with topic-named files. Each under 500 lines. See [FORMAT.md](FORMAT.md).

R6. Verify accuracy — run 3-5 representative commands from the skill and confirm they work. Save results to verification/commands-tested.md. See [PRESSURE-TESTING.md](PRESSURE-TESTING.md).

Honest termination labels (for this skill's own output)

Every invocation of create-skill terminates with exactly one label in the final report:

| Label | Meaning | |---|---| | shipped | Workflow skill: RED baseline captured, GREEN re-run passes, REFACTOR loopholes closed, pressure scenarios handed to user. Reference skill: accuracy verification passed. | | shipped_degraded | Skill files written, but pressure-test/verification phase was skipped or incomplete. Must be explicitly tagged with reason in the final report. | | shipped_lite | Reference or utility skill under 100 lines. Accuracy verified but exempt from full pressure-testing. | | blocked_needs_input | Domain unclear after Step 0/1; cannot proceed without user clarification. | | cancelled | User interrupted. |

Never label a run done, complete, or all good. Every run produces one of the above labels.

Self-review checklist

Before delivering, verify ALL applicable items:

All skill types:

• [ ] Skill type classified (workflow / reference / shim) at Step 0
• [ ] description is specific, third-person, includes trigger keywords, does NOT summarize workflow
• [ ] Every reference/companion file is linked from SKILL.md with a one-line summary
• [ ] Golden rules are hard and mechanical (never "consider" or "try to")
• [ ] Reference files are one level deep (SKILL.md → file, never file → file → file)
• [ ] Skill works when invoked explicitly (/skill-name) AND when Claude triggers it from a matching request
• [ ] No vague quality language ("clean", "good", "appropriate") — replaced with concrete specs
• [ ] Final report uses one of the five termination labels above

Workflow skills only:

• [ ] SKILL.md is under 100 lines of content (excluding frontmatter) for flat skills, or a lean map for companion-split skills
• [ ] SKILL.md has zero inline code blocks (all code is in companion files)
• [ ] Anti-rationalization counter-table present (min 5 rows for discipline skills, min 3 for one-shots)
• [ ] Honest termination labels defined (finite enum, 3-6 labels)
• [ ] Iron-law verification gate language present (concrete evidence file requirement, not "verify")
• [ ] At least one feedback loop encoded (test → verify → fix → re-test)
• [ ] pressure-tests/scenarios.md, pressure-tests/baseline.md, pressure-tests/with-skill.md all exist on disk
• [ ] pressure-tests/with-skill.md shows zero violations on all scenarios (or degraded tag with reason)
• [ ] Companion split applied if total skill content > 300 lines (SKILL.md + FORMAT.md + STATE.md + GOLDEN-RULES.md + INTEGRATION.md)

Reference skills only:

• [ ] Code examples are inline, copy-paste ready, and tested
• [ ] references/ subdirectory used for overflow (not FORMAT.md/STATE.md pattern)
• [ ] verification/commands-tested.md exists with results from 3-5 representative commands
• [ ] Quick-reference tables present for common operations

Golden rules for skill creation

Hard rules. Never violate these.

1. Classify type first. Every skill is workflow, reference, or shim. Classify at Step 0. The type determines which rules apply. Applying workflow discipline to a reference skill wastes effort; skipping it on a workflow skill invites drift.
2. SKILL.md is a map (workflow) or a guide (reference). Workflow SKILL.md: no code blocks, point to companion files. Reference SKILL.md: code blocks are the value — inline examples, quick-reference tables, CLI patterns.
3. Description is discovery, not summary. Claude picks skills from description alone. If the description summarizes the workflow, Claude follows the description instead of reading the skill body. Describe triggers, not process.
4. RED before GREEN (workflow skills). If there is no pressure-tests/baseline.md recording what a subagent does WITHOUT the skill, the workflow skill is unverified. Delete it. Start over. Reference skills use accuracy verification instead.
5. Golden rules prevent drift. Every skill must encode 3-8 hard mechanical rules specific to its domain. Use imperative voice: "Never", "Always", "Must".
6. Anti-rationalization counter-table is mandatory for workflow skills. Every workflow skill ships with an Excuse → Reality table capturing the exact verbatim excuses observed in RED baseline.
7. Termination labels are a finite enum (workflow skills). Workflow skills define 3-6 exhaustive labels. Never "done" / "no issues" / "all good" as a label. Reference skills don't need them.
8. Iron-law gates beat gentle reminders (workflow skills). A rule that says "verify tests pass" is weaker than a gate that refuses to claim completion unless test-output.txt exists on disk and matches a pattern.
9. Feedback loops are the product. A skill without a concrete verification cycle (do → check → diagnose → fix → re-check) is a suggestion, not a skill.
10. Diagnose, don't retry. When the agent gets stuck, the skill must tell it how to figure out WHY, not just "try again." Include a symptom → cause → fix table.
11. Concrete beats abstract. "Use a clean design" produces slop. "Define CSS variables on :root, use system-ui, add hover states" produces consistency. Replace every adjective with a specification.
12. Progressive disclosure saves context. Only SKILL.md loads on trigger. Companion files load when Claude reads them. Put expensive content

…

Source & license

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

• Author: npow
• Source: npow/claude-skills
• License: Apache-2.0

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