agentsclimarketplace

Prompt compile

Skill v60samurai/agent-skills/skills/workflow/prompt-compile

Skills + hooks for Claude Code: prompt-compile makes the agent write itself a high-quality task brief before building — define-do-verify, deterministic trigger, fresh-context execution.

Install
npx -y skills add v60samurai/agent-skills --skill prompt-compile

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

  • 20 days oldThe repository was created 20 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.
  • 1 stars1 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

Compile a high-quality task brief before executing a medium-or-larger task, then execute against it and verify. Pairs with the prompt-compile-gate hook for deterministic triggering; define-do-verify in one pass.

SKILL.md

4.9 KB, ~1.1k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it

Prompt Compile

Define-do-verify for real tasks. Compile a brief (define), execute it in fresh context where possible (do), check the result against the brief (verify). The brief is the prompt an experienced operator would have hand-written before a big task - now generated in-session, every time.

When this runs

  • Fired by the prompt-compile-gate.sh hook (medium and high bands), or invoked manually.
  • Not for bug fixes: your debugging workflow owns those.
  • Not for trivial one-file one-step edits: if the gate misfired, say "trivial, skipping brief" in one line and just do it.

Compile the brief

Seven sections. All required. Missing section = brief not done.

1. TASK + NON-GOALS

One paragraph: what changes, and what is explicitly preserved. Non-goals are the highest-value words in the brief ("polish pass, not a rebuild. Preserve data, routing, behavior. Change presentation only.").

2. TARGET

Concrete environment, not adjectives. "Latest iPhone Pro, ~402pt logical width, Dynamic Island, home-indicator safe area" - never "mobile-friendly". For non-UI work: runtime, versions, load shape, who consumes the output.

3. CONSTRAINT SOURCES

Files the executor must read before generating anything: design docs, design tokens, schema, project instructions (CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md), style guides. Hard rule inherited by every brief: if a needed value or source does not exist, stop and flag - never invent one.

4. SKILL SEQUENCE

Scan available skills; name them in execution order, with register or mode where it matters. Example: /distill -> /adapt (product register) -> a craft/polish pass. Every stage that has a matching skill names it explicitly - the executor must not rediscover routing.

5. CHECKPOINTS

Where execution stops for the user's confirm: proposed cuts before restructure, variant pick before writing to source, destructive step before running. Input is just a link or pointer -> diagnostic pass is checkpoint zero. No checkpoint needed? Say "no checkpoints" explicitly.

6. VERIFY

Observable pass/fail criteria, checkable after execution: no horizontal overflow at target width, tap targets >= 44pt, all states handled (loading/error/empty), typecheck clean, tests green. E2E where the change has a runtime surface.

7. OUTPUT CONTRACT

The shape of the executor's final response, in order. Example: diagnostic -> proposed cuts -> 3 variants -> craft pass on winner -> diff summary + anything that couldn't be done within constraints.

Execute

  • Medium band: show the compiled brief, non-blocking - start immediately, the user interrupts if it is wrong.
  • High band: show the compiled brief and WAIT for explicit approval before executing.
  • No checkpoints in the brief -> hand the brief verbatim to one fresh subagent. Verbatim means the brief is the entire prompt; no extra context smuggled in.
  • Checkpoints in the brief -> subagents cannot talk to the user, so either run inline with the brief as the plan, or run one subagent per inter-checkpoint segment, returning to the user at each gate.
  • Task depends on conversation state (builds on the last N minutes of this session) -> run inline.
  • Subagent runs pay a cold-start tax: the segment must be meaty enough (roughly >5 minutes of work) to amortize it, else run inline.

Verify

  • After execution, walk section 6 line by line. Each criterion: pass or fail, stated.
  • Any deviation from the brief (constraint broken, section skipped, invented value) gets reported, not silently absorbed.
  • Fail -> fix before reporting done. This is the loop's exit condition, not a formality.

Worked example

The brief below is the reference for register and completeness (a hand-written original, abridged):

Polish [SCREEN] for mobile. Polish pass on existing screen, not a rebuild. Preserve data, routing, behavior. Change presentation only. (1: task + non-goals) Target latest iPhone Pro ~402pt, Dynamic Island, home-indicator safe area; Pixel 9 Pro ~412dp. (2: target) Read DESIGN.md, PRODUCT.md, design tokens before generating. No new colors, radii, shadows, fonts, spacing. Value missing as token -> stop and tell me. (3: constraint sources) Step 1 declutter/distill, step 2 adapt for mobile in product register, step 3 craft pass on the winner. (4: skill sequence) Diagnostic first, I confirm. Show cuts, I confirm. 3 variants, I pick, no auto-accept. (5: checkpoints) Safe areas respected, tap targets >= 44pt, no horizontal overflow, invisible states handled. (6: verify) Diagnostic -> cuts -> variants -> craft pass -> diff summary; flag anything outside tokens. (7: output contract)

A brief that reads thinner than this is not compiled yet.

Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most prompt engineering skills give in ~1.1k tokens

Counted across 563 of the 626 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-06

  • ask at most three clarifying questionsin 22 of 563, across 15 files
  • respond in the user input languagein 14 of 563, across 9 files
  • preserve the original intentin 13 of 563, across 11 files
  • Establish baseline metrics and collect representative examplesin 12 of 563, across 2 files
  • Identify failure modes and prioritize high-impact fixesin 12 of 563, across 2 files
  • Apply prompt and workflow improvements with measurable goalsin 12 of 563, across 2 files
  • Roll back quickly if quality or safety metrics regressin 12 of 563, across 2 files
  • validate changes with tests and roll out in controlled stagesin 12 of 563, across 2 files
  • generate quantitative baseline performance reportsin 12 of 563, across 2 files
  • create representative test scenariosin 12 of 563, across 2 files
  • treat prompts as codein 12 of 563, across 5 files
  • test prompts on diverse inputsin 12 of 563, across 8 files

Said here and by no other author read

  • Write a seven-section brief before executing
  • State explicit non-goals in the brief
  • Name required constraint source files in the brief
  • Stop and flag missing constraint sources
  • Never invent a missing value or source
  • Name matching skills in execution order

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.

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.