skillify
- Repo stars 238
- Author updated Live
- Author repo dotfiles
- Domain
- Other
- Compatible agents
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- Trust score
- 88 / 100 · community maintained
- Author / version / license
- @fredrikaverpil · no license declared
- Token usage
- Lean
- Setup complexity
- Guided setup
- External API key
- Not required
- Operating systems
- Unspecified (assume cross-platform)
- Runtime requirements
- No special requirements
- Permissions
-
- Read-only
- Write / modify
- Shell exec
- Network behavior
- Local-only
- Install commands
- 26 variants
Profile is derived at build time from SKILL.md and install vectors. Subject to drift from author intent.
Heads up: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: skillify
description: You are capturing this session's repeatable process as a reusable skill. You have the full conve…
category: other
runtime: no special runtime
---
# skillify output preview
## PART A: Task fit
- Use case: You are capturing this session's repeatable process as a reusable skill. You have the full conversation history available to you. Analyze it directly to understand what process was performed, what tools were used, and how the user runs entirely locally. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, Cline and 23 more..
- Inputs: target material, constraints, expected output, and acceptance criteria.
- Evidence boundary: follow “Your Session Context / Your Task / Step 1: Analyze the Session” and do not present inference as author intent.
## PART B: Execution result
- **01** The card summarizes the use case; runtime output centers on “You are capturing this session's repeatable process as a reusable skill. You have the full conversation history available to you. Analyze it directly to understand what process was performed, what tools were used, and how the user runs entirely locally. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, Cline and 23 more.”.
- **02** When the source has headings, the agent prioritizes “Your Session Context / Your Task / Step 1: Analyze the Session” so the result follows the author’s structure.
- **03** Typical output includes task judgment, concrete steps, required commands or file edits, validation, and follow-up options.
- **04** Risk context follows the fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, run shell commands; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
## Running Rules
- read files, write/modify files, run shell commands; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding scope.
- Return the result, validation criteria, and next iteration options. The source does not require a stable slash command. After installation, invoke the skill by name and describe the task.
Name target files or source material, expected output, forbidden changes, and whether network or shell access is allowed. Permission fingerprint: read files, write/modify files, run shell commands.
Start with a small task and check whether the result follows “Your Session Context / Your Task / Step 1: Analyze the Session”. Inspect diffs, logs, previews, or tests before expanding scope.
Confirm the final output includes a concrete result, evidence, and next action. If it stays generic, tighten inputs, boundaries, and acceptance criteria.
---
name: skillify
description: You are capturing this session's repeatable process as a reusable skill. You have the full conve…
category: other
source: fredrikaverpil/dotfiles
---
# skillify
## When to use
- You are capturing this session's repeatable process as a reusable skill. You have the full conversation history availa…
- Use it when the task has clear inputs, repeatable steps, and validation criteria.
## What to provide
- Target material, scope, expected result, and forbidden changes.
- Whether network, commands, file writes, or external services are allowed.
## Execution rules
- Organize steps around “Your Session Context / Your Task / Step 1: Analyze the Session” and keep inference separate from source facts.
- read files, write/modify files, run shell commands; mostly runs locally; usually needs no extra API key.
- Validate with a small sample before expanding the task.
## Output requirements
- Return the deliverable, key evidence, validation method, and next action.
- Mark missing information as unknown; do not invent commands, platforms, or dependencies. The author source anchors workflow facts; repository files anchor sources and commands; Fluxly only adds fit, limitations, and quality judgment.
skill "skillify" {
input -> user goal + target files + boundaries + acceptance criteria
context -> Your Session Context / Your Task / Step 1: Analyze the Session
rules -> SKILL.md triggers / order / output contract
runtime -> no special runtime | read files, write/modify files, run shell commands | mostly runs locally
guardrails -> usually needs no extra API key + small-sample validation + diff/log review
output -> copyable result + checklist + next iteration
} Skillify
You are capturing this session's repeatable process as a reusable skill.
Your Session Context
You have the full conversation history available to you. Analyze it directly to understand what process was performed, what tools were used, and how the user steered you.
If a description was provided: The user described this process as: "$description"
Your Task
Step 1: Analyze the Session
Before asking any questions, analyze the conversation history to identify:
- What repeatable process was performed
- What the inputs/parameters were
- The distinct steps (in order)
- The success artifacts/criteria (e.g. not just "writing code," but "an open PR with CI fully passing") for each step
- Where the user corrected or steered you
- What tools and permissions were needed
- What agents were used
- What the goals and success artifacts were
Step 2: Interview the User
You will use AskUserQuestion to understand what the user wants to automate. Important notes:
- Use AskUserQuestion for ALL questions! Never ask questions via plain text.
- For each round, iterate as much as needed until the user is happy.
- The user always has a freeform "Other" option to type edits or feedback -- do NOT add your own "Needs tweaking" or "I'll provide edits" option. Just offer the substantive choices.
Round 1: High level confirmation
- Suggest a name and description for the skill based on your analysis. Ask the user to confirm or rename.
- Suggest high-level goal(s) and specific success criteria for the skill.
Round 2: More details
- Present the high-level steps you identified as a numbered list. Tell the user you will dig into the detail in the next round.
- If you think the skill will require arguments, suggest arguments based on what you observed. Make sure you understand what someone would need to provide.
- If it's not clear, ask if this skill should run inline (in the current conversation) or forked (as a sub-agent with its own context). Forked is better for self-contained tasks that don't need mid-process user input; inline is better when the user wants to steer mid-process.
- Ask where the skill should be saved. Suggest a default based on context
(repo-specific workflows -> repo, cross-repo personal workflows -> user).
Options:
- This repo (
.claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md) -- for workflows specific to this project - Personal (
~/.claude/skills/<name>/SKILL.md) -- follows you across all repos
- This repo (
Round 3: Breaking down each step For each major step, if it's not glaringly obvious, ask:
- What does this step produce that later steps need? (data, artifacts, IDs)
- What proves that this step succeeded, and that we can move on?
- Should the user be asked to confirm before proceeding? (especially for irreversible actions like merging, sending messages, or destructive operations)
- Are any steps independent and could run in parallel? (e.g., posting to Slack and monitoring CI at the same time)
- How should the skill be executed? (e.g. always use a Task agent to conduct code review, or invoke an agent team for a set of concurrent steps)
- What are the hard constraints or hard preferences? Things that must or must not happen?
You may do multiple rounds of AskUserQuestion here, one round per step, especially if there are more than 3 steps or many clarification questions. Iterate as much as needed.
IMPORTANT: Pay special attention to places where the user corrected you during the session, to help inform your design.
Round 4: Final questions
- Confirm when this skill should be invoked, and suggest/confirm trigger phrases too. (e.g. For a cherrypick workflow you could say: Use when the user wants to cherry-pick a PR to a release branch. Examples: 'cherry-pick to release', 'CP this PR', 'hotfix.')
- You can also ask for any other gotchas or things to watch out for, if it's still unclear.
Stop interviewing once you have enough information. IMPORTANT: Don't over-ask for simple processes!
Step 3: Write the SKILL.md
Create the skill directory and file at the location the user chose in Round 2.
Use this format:
---
name: { { skill-name } }
description: { { one-line description } }
allowed-tools: { { list of tool permission patterns observed during session } }
when_to_use:
{
{
detailed description of when Claude should automatically invoke this skill,
including trigger phrases and example user messages,
},
}
argument-hint: "{{hint showing argument placeholders}}"
arguments: { { list of argument names } }
context: { { inline or fork -- omit for inline } }
---
# {{Skill Title}}
Description of skill
## Inputs
- `$arg_name`: Description of this input
## Goal
Clearly stated goal for this workflow. Best if you have clearly defined
artifacts or criteria for completion.
## Steps
### 1. Step Name
What to do in this step. Be specific and actionable. Include commands when
appropriate.
**Success criteria**: ALWAYS include this! This shows that the step is done and
we can move on. Can be a list.
IMPORTANT: see the next section below for the per-step annotations you can
optionally include for each step.
...
Per-step annotations:
- Success criteria is REQUIRED on every step. This helps the model understand what the user expects from their workflow, and when it should have the confidence to move on.
- Execution:
Direct(default),Task agent(straightforward subagents),Teammate(agent with true parallelism and inter-agent communication), or[human](user does it). Only needs specifying if not Direct. - Artifacts: Data this step produces that later steps need (e.g., PR number, commit SHA). Only include if later steps depend on it.
- Human checkpoint: When to pause and ask the user before proceeding. Include for irreversible actions (merging, sending messages), error judgment (merge conflicts), or output review.
- Rules: Hard rules for the workflow. User corrections during the reference session can be especially useful here.
Step structure tips:
- Steps that can run concurrently use sub-numbers: 3a, 3b
- Steps requiring the user to act get
[human]in the title - Keep simple skills simple -- a 2-step skill doesn't need annotations on every step
Frontmatter rules:
allowed-tools: Minimum permissions needed (use patterns likeBash(gh:*)notBash)context: Only setcontext: forkfor self-contained skills that don't need mid-process user input.when_to_useis CRITICAL -- tells the model when to auto-invoke. Start with "Use when..." and include trigger phrases. Example: "Use when the user wants to cherry-pick a PR to a release branch. Examples: 'cherry-pick to release', 'CP this PR', 'hotfix'."argumentsandargument-hint: Only include if the skill takes parameters. Use$namein the body for substitution.
Step 4: Confirm and Save
Review the skill against the
official documentation. Use the
skill-creator skill to evaluate it.
Before writing the file, output the complete SKILL.md content as a yaml code block in your response so the user can review it with proper syntax highlighting. Then ask for confirmation using AskUserQuestion with a simple question like "Does this SKILL.md look good to save?" -- do NOT use the body field, keep the question concise.
After writing, tell the user:
- Where the skill was saved
- How to invoke it:
/{{skill-name}} [arguments] - That they can edit the SKILL.md directly to refine it
Decide Fit First
Design Intent
How To Use It
Boundaries And Review