agentsclimarketplace

Scope

Skill boshu2/agentops/images/gemini/skills/scope

Review the bead or caller intent write scope for completeness and ambiguity. Triggers: "review write scope", "check scope boundaries", "scope this change".From its SKILL.md

Install
npx -y skills add boshu2/agentops --skill scope

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

SKILL.md

3.9 KB, 673 tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Scope — Review a proposed write scope

Review the write scope in the existing bead or caller intent. This skill is advisory: it does not create a second planning artifact, write a lock, install a hook, block an edit, or claim paths.

Inputs

  • One active behavior and its acceptance scenarios.
  • Proposed include and exclude patterns.
  • Known generated companions and fixture/projection paths.
  • Explicit non-goals.

Procedure

  1. Map each acceptance criterion to the smallest source paths that may change.
  2. Add owned generated companions that must move with those sources.
  3. Check whether any include/exclude patterns overlap or are too broad to prove.
  4. Identify likely paths the proposal omitted.
  5. Return a corrected proposal and the reasons for each change, then stop.

The caller decides whether to adopt the proposal in the original intent source, and Validate independently compares runtime-derived changed paths with that scope.

Axiom-kernel framing

Derive the scope from axioms, not enumeration instinct. State the small set of facts the acceptance makes true — "behavior X lives in root A", "projection B is generated from A", "history under C is frozen" — and derive every include and exclude pattern from exactly one axiom. A pattern with no supporting axiom is unjustified breadth; an axiom with no pattern is a gap. Both go in the review output. Scopes assembled by listing directories that feel related are the vibes perimeter failure mode: they cannot be defended when Validate finds a path on the boundary, because nobody can say why the line is where it is. Stop condition: the review is complete when the axiom-to-pattern mapping has no unmapped members on either side.

Byte-verified recovery ceremony

When the review finds that protected paths were already touched — or the caller asks how a scope violation should be unwound — the advisory answer is a ceremony, not a hand-wave: identify the known-good source for each affected path (committed state, snapshot, or generated-from-source), restore, then verify byte-for-byte that restored content matches the known-good bytes (content hash comparison, not visual diff or "looks right"). Recovery declared on inspection alone is the eyeballed restore failure mode: a file that looks restored can still differ in bytes that matter. The ceremony's stop condition is a hash match for every affected path; any path with no known-good source to verify against is reported as unrecoverable-as-scoped, and the caller decides.

Output

write_scope:
  include: ["bounded/source/**"]
  exclude: ["bounded/source/generated-by-other-owner/**"]
generated_companions: ["bounded/generated/**"]
gaps: []
ambiguities: []

Checks

  • Patterns are normalized repository-relative paths.
  • Includes cover the behavior without granting unrelated directories.
  • Excludes do not contradict required changes.
  • Generated companions are explicit.
  • No ownership, scheduling, Git, hook, retry, release, or delivery state is introduced.

Failure behavior

If the scope cannot be made unambiguous from the supplied acceptance, report the missing facts and stop. The caller may revise the intent in a new action.

What ships with it

Read from the repository

Just SKILL.md. No reference files, no scripts.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 325,949. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.