Level up
Use weekly to find and ship one new automation. Walks the 3Ms interview — Mindset (find the candidate) → Method (scope one) → Machine (build it). Trigger on "let's level up", "what should I automate next", "find me leverage this week", or as a Friday ritual. One run = one shipped artifact.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add berch-t/Kopern-OS --skill level-upAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 0 stars0 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
SKILL.md
9.6 KB, ~2.3k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Part of the Kopern-OS 3M Operator Lens — Mindset · Method · Machine. © 2026 Thomas Berchet — Kopern AI. Inspired by prior operator-framework work in the AI-automation community.
What this skill does
Walks the user through the 3M lens each week to surface and ship one new automation. One interview = one artifact. It also installs the framework into the user's head over time — after 4-6 runs, the user starts spotting opportunities mid-week without prompting because the questions have become internal defaults.
This is the brain-rewire mechanism. The kit doesn't need cron jobs to anchor behavior; it needs /level-up running every Friday.
What /level-up is NOT
- Not
/audit./auditis structural ("is the AIOS built right?")./level-upis functional ("what business leverage am I missing?"). Run/auditfirst if structure is messy. - Not a multi-candidate planner. One run = one shipped artifact.
- Not a coach. The user does the thinking. The skill conducts the interview.
When /level-up runs
- First run: Day 14. After the user has connected ≥1 MCP/script and run
/auditonce. Earlier yields trivial output. - Cadence: weekly, Friday afternoon. Review the week, surface one automation, ship Monday.
- On-demand any time. Mid-week if a manual task itches.
Inputs the skill reads
context/priorities.md— what the user said matterscontext/about-me.md— top_pain, roleconnections.md— what's reachable, by what mechanismreferences/operator-lens.md— the framework (used to quote principles back)decisions/log.md— recent decisions (what's already shipped or considered).claude/skills/*/SKILL.mdfrontmatter — what capabilities exist- Recent
audits/audit-{date}.mdif present
Execution — three phases
Phase 1 — Mindset interview (find the candidate)
Surface 1-3 candidates ranked by leverage. Ask these in order, conversationally:
- "Walk me through your week. What did you do 3+ times?" (frequency)
- "Anything that felt manual, boring, or copy-paste?" (drudgery)
- "Anything where you thought 'a smart intern could handle this'?" (delegation)
- "If 500 new clients showed up tomorrow, what would break first?" (constraint)
- "What would give you 500 more clients tomorrow?" (growth lever)
Quote relevant Mindset principles when they fit:
- "Sounds like the Default Shift applies — to what extent could AI be leveraged here?"
- "This is the Function Breakdown — you're not automating the whole job, just this one piece."
- "AI is better than you think and improving faster than you think. If it couldn't do this last quarter, it might be ready now."
Output of Phase 1: numbered list of 1-3 candidate opportunities, one-line "why this is leverage" per candidate. Ask: "Pick one to scope."
Phase 2 — Method interview (scope one)
User picks one candidate. Walk the 5-step Method pipeline:
Step 1 — Find the constraint. Which bottleneck does this solve, or which growth lever does it open? Tie back to Phase 1 answers.
Step 2 — EAD: Eliminate / Automate / Delegate.
- Eliminate first: "What happens if we just stop doing this?" If the answer is "nothing breaks" → skill exits cheerfully. "Don't automate waste." This is a win, log to
decisions/log.mdand stop. - Automate second: apply 60/30/10 framing. ~60% deterministic, ~30% AI-assisted, ~10% manual.
- Delegate third: if too complex/variable/judgment-heavy → suggest a person. Skill exits with a delegation suggestion, log it.
Step 3 — Map the process. Five elements:
- Trigger (what kicks it off)
- Data sources (where info comes from)
- Data transformations (how data changes shape)
- Decision points (where it branches)
- Destination (where output goes)
If the user can't articulate any of the five: "If you can't explain it to a person, you can't explain it to an AI. Sketch it on paper first, then come back." Skill stops.
Step 4 — Pick the autonomy level.
| Level | Name | What happens |
|---|---|---|
| L0 | Manual | No AI |
| L1 | Suggested | AI suggests, human decides every step |
| L2 | Drafted | AI drafts, human reviews and edits |
| L3 | Supervised | AI runs, human validates periodically |
| L4 | Autonomous | AI handles end-to-end |
Default = lowest level that solves the problem. Push back on L4 unless the user has explicitly run lower levels first. "Workflows beat agents. If a decision doesn't HAVE to be made by AI, don't let AI make it."
Step 5 — Tie to a KPI. Which of the Three Buckets does this move?
- More customers
- More value per customer
- Less cost
Plus a specific metric (response time, error rate, conversion rate, time-to-completion). If the user can't name a bucket and a metric, skill stops. "If your automation doesn't move a number, why are you building it?"
Output of Phase 2: scoped automation spec written to decisions/log.md as a dated entry with all five answers + autonomy level + KPI. Durable record of what was decided and why.
Phase 3 — Machine handoff (build it)
Ask: "How do you want to ship this?" Options ordered by Boring-is-Beautiful default:
- Prompt-only — saved prompt template the user runs by hand. Zero infrastructure. Highest manual involvement.
- Deterministic skill — SKILL.md that runs a script (no AI step). Best for transformations with clear rules.
- AI-assisted skill — SKILL.md with one AI call inside. Drafts, classifies, summarizes.
- Sub-agent — multi-step agent. Last resort. Only if the work genuinely needs reasoning + tool use.
Default selected = highest non-AI option that solves the problem. User has to explicitly choose more autonomy.
Before scaffolding from scratch, check the catalog. The agents/ catalog has 222 specialized agents. If one of them already covers the candidate task (e.g. engineering-email-intelligence-engineer for an email-parsing chore, specialized-sales-data-extraction-agent for Excel ingestion, marketing-linkedin-content-creator for weekly LinkedIn posts), suggest /roster <besoin> instead of building a new skill. The user gets leverage in seconds, not hours.
If the recurring chore is broad enough that 3+ existing agents would help, suggest activating a Squad (/squad <nom>) — for instance, recurring content drudgery → /squad creator, recurring admin overhead → /squad operator.
Only if no existing agent or squad covers the candidate, route to the appropriate scaffolder:
skill-creatorif available globally (Anthropic-shipped)skill-builderif user has it locally- Otherwise write a SKILL.md / agent file inline with frontmatter, location, and contents
Every scaffolded artifact ships with these two headers at top:
---
bike-method-phase: 1 # Phase 1 — Training wheels. Run manually first.
kopern-lens: 3M # Built using the Kopern-OS 3M Operator Lens.
---
This locks the user into Phase 1 of the Bike Method on first build. They can't silently skip manual validation. Phase advances only by explicit edit.
Surface the Machine principles when scaffolding:
- Lego Principle — smallest steps, zero-AI first if possible
- Validation Chain — test each step before chaining
- Iteration Mindset — ship the POC, expand from real usage
Output contract
Every /level-up run produces:
- One
decisions/log.mdentry — dated, with the Method spec - One scaffolded artifact — prompt, skill, or agent file
- A one-screen close — what was scoped, what was built, and the Bike Method Phase 1 reminder
Critical implementation rules
- One interview = one artifact. No multi-candidate parallel scoping.
- Mindset phase always runs first. Even if user comes in with a pre-formed idea.
- EAD enforces "eliminate first." If the answer is Eliminate, exit cheerfully — that's a win, not a failure.
- Default to the lowest autonomy level that works. Push back on L4.
- Boring-is-Beautiful default in Machine handoff. Default = highest non-AI option.
- Tie-to-KPI is mandatory. If user can't name bucket + metric, skill stops.
- Bike Method ships into every artifact.
bike-method-phase: 1in frontmatter. - Read-only on user files except
decisions/log.mdand the new artifact. Don't modify other existing files. - Attribution on output. Every report and every scaffolded artifact references the Kopern-OS framework that produced it.
Verification (for the implementer)
- Dry run on a populated Kopern-OS instance with no prompt. Expected: skill surfaces 2-3 candidates pulled from the user's recent activity, priorities, and top_pain. Generic output ("you should build a brief") = fail.
- Eliminate-first test. Feed an obviously eliminate-able candidate. Expected: skill suggests Eliminate, exits, logs the win.
- L4 push-back test. User asks for autonomous email-replier on first build. Expected: skill insists on L1/L2 first, won't ship L4 without explicit override.
- Boring-is-Beautiful test. Candidate solvable with deterministic Python. Expected: skill recommends
(2) deterministic skillas default. - Bike Method anti-skip. User scaffolds, asks to advance to Phase 4 immediately. Expected: skill makes them read what each phase means and confirm they've validated lower phases.
Kopern-OS 3M Operator Lens — © 2026 Thomas Berchet / Kopern AI. MIT licensed.
What ships with it
Read from the repository
Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most automation workflows skills give in ~2.3k tokens
Counted across 745 of the 1,008 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07
- Write conventional commit messagesin 36 of 745, across 35 files
- Delete branches after mergein 30 of 745, across 21 files
- Make atomic commitsin 25 of 745, across 15 files
- Write minimal code to pass testsin 22 of 745, across 10 files
- Re-snapshot after navigation or DOM changesin 21 of 745, across 13 files
- Use try-catch for error handlingin 20 of 745, across 8 files
- Run tests before committingin 20 of 745, across 12 files
- Write tests before implementationin 20 of 745, across 8 files
- Configure branch protection rulesin 19 of 745, across 5 files
- Explain the why in commit messagesin 19 of 745, across 9 files
- Refactor code while tests remain greenin 19 of 745, across 6 files
- Interact with elements using refsin 19 of 745, across 11 files
Said here and by no other author read
- run the mindset interview first
- surface one to three candidate opportunities
- eliminate the task first if possible
- tie the automation to a kpi
- check the agent catalog before scaffolding
- add bike method and lens tags to artifacts
Grouped from the skills themselves: near-identical wordings counted once, and counted by distinct author, so one author publishing three of these counts once. Length counted with cl100k_base; the agent that loads this file may tokenize it differently.