agent-spec

Featured

Specify an autonomous or tool-using AI agent before building it. Use when asked to design an AI agent, define an agent's tools and guardrails, scope what an agent is allowed to do, or write an agent spec/PRD. Produces an agent spec — goal & scope, tools with permissions, the control loop, guardrails & approval gates, memory, escalation/handoff, evaluation, and failure handling.

AI & Automation 1,356 stars 240 forks Updated yesterday MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 96/100

Stars 20%
100
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# Agent Spec Skill An agent is a model plus tools plus a loop — and the danger lives in the tools and the loop, not the model. This skill specifies an agent so its *authority is explicit*: what it can do, what needs a human yes, and what happens when it's wrong. Scope and guardrails first; cleverness second. ## Required Inputs Ask for these only if they aren't already provided: - **Job to be done** — the outcome the agent owns, and the boundary of its authority. - **Tools/actions** — what it can call (read APIs, write actions, code execution), and which are irreversible. - **Autonomy level** — fully autonomous, propose-then-approve, or co-pilot. - **Risk surface** — what's the worst thing a wrong action could do (spend money, send a message, delete data)? - **Success definition & escalation** — how "done" is judged, and when it must hand off to a human. ## Output Format ### Agent Spec: [name] **1. Goal & scope** — the job in one sentence; explicit non-goals and authority limits. **2. Tools / actions** — a table; mark each action's reversibility and required permission. | Tool | Purpose | Reversible? | Gate | |---|---|---|---| | search_kb | read context | yes | none | | send_email | notify | **no** | **human approval** | **3. Control loop** — plan → act → observe → reflect; the stopping condition; and a hard **max-steps / max-cost budget** so it can't loop forever. **4. Guardrails & approval gates** — which actions require a human yes (default: anything irreversible...

Details

Author
mohitagw15856
Repository
mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills
Created
7 months ago
Last Updated
yesterday
Language
HTML
License
MIT

Integrates with

Bundled in these plugins

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Listed

specify

Interview the user to produce a complete, agent-ready specification, then emit what is needed to build it: for a coded feature/agent a phase-scoped build prompt, or for a skill / declarative agent the artifact itself (SKILL.md / AGENT.md). Surfaces every assumption for review, slices the work into a phased plan, and runs a build-readiness (model/effort) check. Use when the user wants to design, specify, plan, or scope a new agent, feature, or skill; turn a vague idea, PRD, or plan into a rigorous spec; write requirements in EARS / SHALL with testable acceptance criteria; produce a build prompt for a coding agent; or amend, advance, review, audit or sweep an existing spec under specs/ for drift and staleness. Reasoning-driven, one question at a time.

1 Updated 1 months ago
hmbseaotter
AI & Automation Listed

agent-scoping

Use before building any AI agent or skill, or when the user says "should we build an agent for this", "can AI do this", "automate this workflow", "where should we use AI", "build me an agent". Decides what to build, what to refuse, and what to leave manual. Produces an agent brief with a success threshold and a kill criterion. Writes workspace/agents/<name>/brief.md. Scopes one agent. Not the org-level AI policy, data boundary, or readiness question, which is `ai-governance`.

1 Updated 6 days ago
guerrilla2799
AI & Automation Listed

agent-design

design and review llm agent systems, tool interfaces, and skill boundaries. use when chatgpt needs to decide whether a task should be handled by a prompt, workflow, skill, tool, single-agent loop, or multi-agent system; define tool schemas, instructions, guardrails, evaluation plans, or permission boundaries; or critique an existing agent design for over-orchestration, weak context handling, missing verification, or poor tool design.

73 Updated yesterday
wibus-wee