agentsclimarketplace

Explain

Skill mehrad-dm/mastermind/skills/explain

⚗️ Experimental — A genius-builder brain for your AI coding tools: sharp defaults, real judgment, and the discipline to check their own work. For Claude Code, Codex, Cursor & Copilot. Just markdown; it improves itself over time.

Install
npx -y skills add mehrad-dm/mastermind --skill explain

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

2 things to look at

  • 29 days oldThe repository was created 29 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
  • 13 stars13 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

Use when an internal package, module, or shared component has little or no usage documentation and people (or future AI sessions) keep using it wrong — "document this", "write docs for our library", onboarding someone onto an internal API, or handing a package to another team.

SKILL.md

4.3 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Document Package — make an internal package self-explaining to any model

Most internal packages ship with no usage docs, so every consumer — a teammate, or an AI — reads the source, guesses the intended usage, and gets the gotchas wrong. This skill fixes that: one colocated usage doc per public unit, capturing the API and the non-obvious rules, so the next reader is correct on the first try. It applies to any package — a UI component kit, a utils library, a services/API layer, a hooks package, an internal SDK.

Why it matters for portability: these docs are the layer that makes your package understandable to any model. If you move from one AI tool to another, the new model still understands your package immediately — the knowledge lives in the repo, not in one model's head.

Ask first — always

This writes files into the user's repo. Confirm before doing anything: "I can generate AI-friendly usage docs for <package> so any model (and teammate) understands it correctly — one doc per public unit, with the gotchas. Want me to? (I'll show one sample first.)" Show a sample doc for one unit and get a thumbs-up before fanning out across the package.

Method

  1. Discover the public units. Read the package's public entry (index.ts/exports) for the real list — components, exported functions, hooks, services, classes. Note any existing docs' style and match it.

  2. Read the source of truth, then write. For each unit: the implementation, its types, its variants/options, its tests/stories, and one real usage in the codebase. Verify every claim against the code (never document a guess; mark "unverified" or omit).

  3. Write a colocated doc (a README.md/doc beside the unit) with a consistent template:

    • Title + one-line purpose + what it's built on.
    • Signature / API — a table: params/props/args · type · default · description; what it returns.
    • Quick start — the minimal correct usage (real import path).
    • Variants / options / states (where applicable) — with a code example each.
    • Composition — how it combines with siblings.
    • Examples — the handful of real scenarios people actually need.
    • Gotchas — the highest-signal section: rules the API doesn't enforce but people get wrong (default values, which state hides what, reserved-but-unimplemented options, ordering constraints).
    • Errors / accessibility / TypeScript — as relevant to the unit's kind.
  4. Prioritize the gotchas. The API table can be inferred from types; the gotchas cannot. That's the value.

  5. Stamp it so drift is detectable. The code is the SSOT; the doc is derived — so record what it was derived from, the way engineering/ROUTER.md records a hash per node. End each doc with a footer naming the source file(s), the repo commit SHA at generation time, and a short content hash of each source (git rev-parse --short HEAD, git hash-object <file>):

    <!-- generated-from: src/Button.tsx@a1b2c3d (hash 9f4e21bc) · regenerate if the hash differs -->
    

    Detecting drift is then a one-liner anyone (or any model) can run: re-hash the source and compare to the footer — git hash-object src/Button.tsx — or git log a1b2c3d..HEAD -- src/Button.tsx to see whether the unit changed since. Mismatch → treat the doc as stale: re-read the source and regenerate that unit before trusting it. No build script required; if the repo already has a docs check or pre-commit hook, wire the same comparison into it rather than inventing a second mechanism.

Guardrails

  • Derive from source, never invent. Unconfirmable behavior → "unverified" or omit.
  • One doc per unit, colocated — found next to the thing it describes, travels with it.
  • Match the package's existing doc style if any exists; consistency beats your template.
  • Confirm scope + a sample before mass-generating — the template must fit before you fan out.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. 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.