Agentsmd scaffold
Generate or update repository-specific AGENTS.md instruction files from real repo evidence. Use when asked to create, design, scaffold, split, or improve root or scoped AGENTS.md files for Codex/Claude/agent workflows, especially when a repo needs directory-specific rules, validation commands, generated-file boundaries, or a short agent onboarding router.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add majiayu000/spellbook --skill agentsmd-scaffoldAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- runs commandsInstructs the agent to run 2 commands, including `python3 scripts/scan_repo_context.py <repo-root>` and 1 more.
SKILL.md
5.9 KB, ~1.3k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
AGENTS.md Scaffold
Use this skill to generate a small, evidence-backed AGENTS.md stack for a
repository. The output may be a plan, exact proposed file contents, or applied
files when the user explicitly asks to write them.
This skill is for instruction scaffolding. Use repo-agent-context-audit first
when the user only asks whether the repo's agent context is healthy.
Operating Contract
Default to a scoped plan before editing. Only write or modify AGENTS.md,
CLAUDE.md, WARP.md, hooks, settings, or generated docs when the user has
explicitly asked to apply the scaffold.
Direct actions:
- Run read-only discovery, scanner commands, and repo command inspection.
- Produce a scoped
AGENTS.mdplan with evidence and validation commands. - Draft exact file contents when the user asks for proposed text.
Escalate before:
- Creating or editing high-context files when the user only asked for an audit.
- Rewriting existing
AGENTS.md,CLAUDE.md, orWARP.mdinstead of adding a short pointer or scoped complement. - Batch-normalizing multiple repositories.
Evidence-backed pushback:
- Challenge new scoped files when the directory has no distinct local rules.
- Challenge guessed commands, ownership, or generated-file rules unless repo evidence supports them.
Feedback loop:
- Promote repeated false starts into
references/scaffold-agents.md, scanner signals, or eval prompts.
Workflow
1. Discover Existing Context
Run the scanner from this skill directory when possible:
python3 scripts/scan_repo_context.py <repo-root>
python3 scripts/scan_repo_context.py <repo-root> --json
Then inspect the files that matter:
- existing
AGENTS.md,CLAUDE.md,WARP.md,.claude/instructions.md, and.github/copilot-instructions.md README.md,CONTRIBUTING.md, package manifests, Makefiles, CI workflows, and documented test commands- generated files and their generators
- high-risk directories such as migrations, deploy scripts, auth, secrets, payments, registry metadata, generated clients, and production operations
Do not infer commands or ownership from names alone. Use scanner output as a lead, then verify with actual files.
2. Choose The Instruction Stack
Read references/scaffold-agents.md before proposing files. Choose the
smallest stack that changes agent behavior:
- root
AGENTS.mdfor repo-wide routing and validation - nested
AGENTS.mdonly where directory rules differ from root - no nested file for directories that only need ordinary README context
- no bulk normalization across multiple repos until a few examples have been manually validated
3. Produce A Candidate Plan
Before editing, report:
## Scoped AGENTS Plan
| Path | Why here | Rules to include | Validation |
|---|---|---|---|
| `AGENTS.md` | <repo evidence> | <root topics> | `<command>` |
| `<dir>/AGENTS.md` | <repo evidence> | <scoped topics> | `<command>` |
## Files To Preserve
- `<existing high-context file>` - <how it will be referenced or left alone>
## Open Facts
- <missing command or ownership fact that cannot be inferred>
4. Scaffold On Request
When applying the scaffold:
- keep root files short, normally 80-150 lines
- keep nested files focused on that directory's ownership, source-of-truth rules, and validation commands
- include real commands and paths, not placeholders, unless the fact is truly missing
- preserve existing high-context files unless the user requested a rewrite
- pair every prohibition with a concrete alternative, helper, generator, or command
Decision Gates
| Situation | Action |
|---|---|
Existing CLAUDE.md or WARP.md is already a good router | Add a short AGENTS.md pointer only if cross-runtime routing helps. |
| Root instruction file exceeds roughly 200 lines | Propose root router plus scoped files or references. |
| Directory has generated outputs | Add scoped rules naming source of truth and regenerate/check commands. |
| Directory has distinct safety rules | Add scoped rules with escalation boundaries. |
| Directory has ordinary implementation files only | Keep guidance in root unless conventions differ. |
| Commands cannot be verified from repo evidence | Leave an open fact instead of guessing. |
Gotchas
- Do not add nested
AGENTS.mdfiles for every directory. Add them only where local rules differ from root. - Do not guess build, test, lint, or generator commands from framework names. Cite the manifest, CI workflow, script, or docs that prove the command.
- Do not overwrite an existing
CLAUDE.md,WARP.md, orAGENTS.mdjust to normalize naming. Preserve it, point to it, or propose a split first. - Do not put long architecture explanations in root
AGENTS.md; route to references or existing docs instead.
Verification
After applying changes:
- run the repo's narrow validation command for the affected scope
- run any repo-wide registry, docs, typecheck, lint, or test command named in the new instructions when practical
- rerun
python3 scripts/scan_repo_context.py <repo-root>if using the bundled scanner to confirm scoped files are discoverable
If verification cannot run, report the exact missing precondition and the command that should be run later.
Resources
scripts/scan_repo_context.py: read-only scanner for high-context files, command hints, specs, local skills, and scopedAGENTS.mdcandidates.references/scaffold-agents.md: scaffold selection rules and templates for root, generated metadata, scripts/tools, skill libraries, and tests.evals/evals.json: lightweight prompts for future behavior checks.
What ships with it: 3 files
19.9 KB alongside SKILL.md, 1 of them executable
evals/
- evals.json1.4 KB
references/
- scaffold-agents.md5.5 KB
scripts/
- scan_repo_context.pyruns13.0 KB
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most project setup skills give in ~1.3k tokens
Counted across 1,553 of the 3,091 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-09-06
- Write the configuration filein 36 of 1553
- Create the directory structurein 35 of 1553, across 33 files
- Verify the setupin 31 of 1553, across 28 files
- Run the setup scriptin 30 of 1553, across 29 files
- Pre-determine the required sample sizein 29 of 1553, across 12 files
- Check if the configuration already existsin 29 of 1553
- Document every testin 26 of 1553, across 10 files
- Start with a hypothesisin 26 of 1553, across 11 files
- Ask one question at a timein 22 of 1553
- Test a single variable per testin 21 of 1553, across 9 files
- Read product marketing context before asking questionsin 19 of 1553, across 8 files
- Do not peek and stop earlyin 18 of 1553, across 7 files
Said here and by no other author read
- Default to a scoped plan before editing
- Produce a scoped AGENTS.md plan
- Draft exact file contents when asked
- Keep root files short
- Keep nested files focused on directory ownership
- Preserve existing high-context files
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.