Loop

Skill Lemonaderrrrr/flow-kit/skills/loop

Stop Claude from winging it — 7 workflow skills that route every task through two thinking modes (Philosopher = absorb / Engineer = ship). Works in Claude Code + Codex.

Install

npx -y skills add Lemonaderrrrr/flow-kit --skill loop

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

One thing to look at

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.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

A closed-loop delivery engine that wraps any output-oriented task — define spec, get your approval, then autonomously produce + adversarially self-check and iterate (max 3 rounds), show you only when aligned, and re-loop on your feedback until you're satisfied. Orchestrates the other SOPs (build/write/research/plan/analyze) and the two thinking modes. Default Engineer mode. Offer it proactively when a task is a substantial, multi-step deliverable; the user may also invoke it directly. Saves to outputs/loop/.

SKILL.md

2.9 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Loop — Closed-Loop Delivery Engine

A top-level orchestration over any output-oriented task: turn "define goal → produce → self-check → show you → iterate" into a closed loop. The inner self-check iterations are on me; two gates are yours.

Trigger

When a task is a substantial, multi-step deliverable, ask: "Want to run this through /loop?" (Don't offer for one-line answers or small edits.) The user may also invoke /loop directly.

🚪 Gate 1 · Define the spec (keep asking → your approval)

By questioning the user, lock down three things and present a spec for approval:

Product goal — what to build, for whom, why.
Operating + acceptance criteria — constraints (scope / style / tech) + a checkable definition of done (the same ruler used by both self-check and your review).
Mode + SOP — 🧠 Philosopher / ⚙️ Engineer (default Engineer) + which existing workflow to drive (build / write / research / plan / analyze).

No work starts before approval. Keep asking for missing key inputs — don't assume.

🔁 Self-check loop · autonomous (user not involved)

After approval:

Produce — make a version via the chosen SOP + mode.
Adversarial self-check — play the critic; itemize every place it fails the acceptance criteria. If you can find faults, it's not aligned.
Decide:
- Faults found → iterate, back to step 1 (max 3 rounds).
- No faults (aligned) → show the user.
- Still not aligned after 3 rounds → show the user anyway + state what's stuck and what's missing. Never fake completion.
Log — each round: what changed / what the self-check caught / aligned or not.

🚪 Gate 2 · Your review

Satisfied → done, archive.
Not satisfied → judge the feedback intelligently:
- "The output is off" → back to the self-check loop with the feedback.
- "The goal/criteria were wrong" → back to Gate 1 to redefine the spec.
- Repeat until satisfied.

Wrap-up

Maintain outputs/loop/loop_<english-slug>.md throughout: spec + acceptance checklist + iteration log + current status (so work resumes across sessions).
Live-search principle applies: verify external facts online.
Promote: if it's directional/reusable, offer to save it to long-term memory; one-off outputs stay put.
Follow the host repo's CLAUDE.md style.