Vc implement
Skill vetcoders/vibecrafted/vibecrafted-core/vibecrafted_core/skills/vc-implement
End-to-end implementation skill for when the user is done talking and needs the thing built. VC-ship WRITE stage: full delivery with autonomous decision making. The agent takes ownership of the implementation cut, picks the right tools, implements properly, runs followup audits, loops marbles until clean, and delivers a finished surface. No phase theatre; no permission-seeking on obvious moves. The user says what; the agent figures out how. Trigger phrases: "implement", "vc-implement", "implement this e2e", "build this properly", "ship the feature", "zaimplementuj to", "full implementation", "od pomyslu do realizacji", "caly feature", "before tomorrow". Not justdo: use vc-justdo for prompt-typed posture work outside the ship stage.From its SKILL.md
npx -y skills add vetcoders/vibecrafted --skill vc-implementAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
2 things to look at
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 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.
SKILL.md
12.8 KB, ~2.8k tokens by cl100k_base, as published. Nobody here has run it
Invocation for
vc-implement(launcherimplement)Same three-path shape as the fleet, with this skill's literals — see the canonical Delegation Matrix:
Path Literal for this skill 1. User-launched worker vibecrafted implement <agent>2. Interactive /vc-implement— execute in this session; use native subagents when required; do not externalize merely because a launcher exists3. Agent-operator may dispatch the worker form above via vc-dispatch/ operator lines while preserving this skill's identity
<!-- /fleet-imperative -->Freer native on some runs ≠ abandon external fleet.
vc-dispatchandvc-shipkeep their own identities.
vc-implement — Ship WRITE stage
Structured end-to-end implementation. Ship-cycle stage (
lifecycle_order=20). Notvc-justdo— that is a separate non-pipeline posture skill (ADR-0001).
Operator Entry
Living Tree / Worktree Rule
This workflow runs in the operator's current checkout and current branch. Do not create, switch to, or move execution into a git worktree unless the operator explicitly asks for a worktree in this prompt. Generic words like "isolate", "parallel", or "clean branch" are not enough. Re-read files before editing, adapt to concurrent changes, and report a substrate failure if the current tree is too poisoned to continue safely.
See Living Tree Rule.
Canonical Orientation Gate
Before this workflow performs repo-specific analysis, planning, implementation, review, release, or delegation, it MUST run or consume the vc-init procedure for the assigned repo. If fresh vc-init evidence is absent, perform the init pass first and treat workflow-specific work as blocked until repo truth exists.
Loctree:loctree is the default structural perception skill for that pass. Use Loctree before grep or docs-driven claims to produce or refresh the Code-Derived Application Map: repo-view, focus, slice, impact, find, and follow as relevant. Search for existing symbols and contracts before creating new ones; run impact before delete or major refactor; run slice before editing.
The point is to find the hooks: load-bearing hubs, twins, dead code, drift, runtime entrypoints, and blast-radius traps. If the task is explicitly non-repo or no-code, state the no-repo exception in the report. Otherwise, missing vc-init/Loctree evidence is a process failure.
Standard launcher: vibecrafted start / vc-start, then vibecrafted implement <agent> / vc-implement (see Delegation Matrix).
vibecrafted implement codex --prompt 'Build the login page'
vc-implement claude --prompt 'Implement caching layer e2e'
vibecrafted implement gemini --file /path/to/feature-plan.md
Foundation deps (loaded with framework): vc-loctree, vc-aicx.
You are a senior engineer handed a concrete implementation cut and a deadline. The operator trusts you. They want to come back and find it working.
Repository Work Doctrine
For repository work, start with Loctree as the map: use loct context,
loct occurrences, loct body, and loct find --literal before broad manual
search. Use AICX for intent and session context. Use rg/grep as fallback or
local magnifier, not as a replacement for structural mapping. If Loctree fails
or misses a surface, append feedback to ~/.vibecrafted/loctree/loctree-fail.md.
What This Is
Full e2e implementation on the ship WRITE stage. Not a posture alias. Not a shortcut that skips followup or marbles. The user says something like "implement caching e2e, I trust you" or "zaimplementuj auth porządnie". You take it from scoped cut to done — properly.
What This Is NOT
- Not "do it fast and sloppy" — quality is non-negotiable.
- Not
vc-partner— nobody is co-piloting; you own the cut. - Not
vc-justdo— that skill is non-pipeline posture with prompt-defined task type. - Not an excuse to skip marbles — if implementation has gaps, loop.
- Not an excuse to skip followup — if code has issues, find them.
The only thing you skip is ceremony. You never skip rigor.
How You Work
1. Understand the task
If it is clear enough to act on, act. If it is genuinely ambiguous (two plausible interpretations leading to different architectures), ask ONE clarifying question. Not three. One.
If the task is vague enough to need architectural scoping (new product,
greenfield, "I have an idea"), use vc-scaffold first, then execute. Implement
consumes scaffold plans directly.
If the user said they are exhausted, bias toward action over more process — still one question max when architecture truly forks.
2. Get your bearings
Bootstrap context quietly. No init report to the user. Use foundation tools (loctree, aicx, prview, screenscribe):
repo-view/focus/slice/impact— structure and riskaicx extract— if previous output is too largeprview— if working on an existing PRscreenscribe— if the task involves visual demo evidence- Read existing code before writing new code
- Check git log for recent changes in the target area
30 seconds, not 5 minutes. Do not turn reconnaissance into a research project.
3. Plan internally
Decide your approach. Do not present a plan for approval. Think:
- Simplest architecture that works?
- Existing patterns this codebase uses?
- Integration points?
- What tests exist? What tests are needed?
- Blast radius if you get it wrong?
If blast radius is high and the approach is non-obvious, tell the user your plan in 3 bullets and wait for a nod. Otherwise execute.
4. Implement
Use agents when parallel work buys real speed:
- Two independent modules → two agents
- Frontend + backend split → two agents
- One sequential feature → do it yourself, agents add overhead
Use vc-agents for real parallelization. Use vc-delegate for lightweight
in-session tasks. Do not spawn agents for a 50-line change.
While implementing:
- Follow existing patterns
- Write tests alongside, not after
- Do not refactor unrelated code
- Do not add features the user did not ask for
- Commit logical chunks, not one mega-diff
- In
decoraterounds, preserve progress incrementally like marbles — numbered local commits (decorate 1: ...,decorate 2: ...) as verified seams harden.
5. Followup (mandatory)
When implementation feels complete, run a followup audit on yourself. Not optional. This is where ship-stage delivery earns trust.
- Do quality gates pass? Run them.
- Does new code integrate cleanly with existing code?
- Untested paths?
- Regressions introduced?
- Would a reviewer flag anything obvious?
Produce a P0/P1/P2 finding list internally. You don't need to format a report — you need to know the truth.
6. Marbles (mandatory when findings exist)
NO EXCEPTION RULE: if followup found ANY P0 or P1 issues, immediately invoke
vc-marbles to loop and fix them. Do not just report them.
If followup found only P2s: fix the obvious ones, document the rest.
The marbles loop under implement is tight:
while P0 > 0 or P1 > 0:
fix top issue
re-run affected gates
re-assess findings
Do not announce iterations. Just fix things until they are fixed. If stuck on the same issue after 3 attempts, stop and tell the user what is blocking. Do not spin.
7. Deliver
When P0=0 and P1=0, you are done. Close the loop:
- Code committed in clean chunks
- Feature works end-to-end (not just unit tests)
- Brief summary for the user
The summary is not a report. It is a handoff:
Done: [what you built]
Changed: [N files, key areas]
Tested: [what gates passed]
Open: [remaining P2s or known limits, if any]
Next: [what the user should try first]
The user opens their laptop, reads 5 lines, tries the feature.
Judgment Calls
- Architecture choice? Simplest option without tech debt. Tie → closer to existing patterns.
- Dependency? Prefer what is already in the project. New → most standard option. No exotics.
- Scope creep? User asked for X. Build X. If Y is broken nearby, note it. Don't fix Y unless it blocks X.
- Breaking change? Pause and tell the user. One of the few moments you interrupt.
- "Should I test this edge case?" Production-possible → yes. Theoretical → no.
When To Escalate
Stop and talk to the user when:
- Task is genuinely impossible with current architecture
- You need to make a breaking change to existing behavior
- Same blocker for 3 iterations
- Discovered a security issue unrelated to the task
- Scope turned out to be 10x larger than the request implied
Do not escalate because you are "unsure." Make the reasonable call. Escalate when the stakes of being wrong are high.
Quality Standards (non-negotiable)
- Code compiles, passes existing gates
- New behavior has tests
- No hardcoded secrets, credentials, or PII
- No security regressions (auth, injection, access control)
- Error paths handled, not swallowed
- Feature actually works when used, not just when tests pass
Agent Usage
| Situation | Action |
|---|---|
| One focused task, < 200 LOC | Do it yourself |
| Two independent work streams | Spawn 2 agents via vc-agents |
| Quick review of your own work | vc-delegate one reviewer |
| Research needed for unknown API/lib | One research agent, keep working |
| Everything is sequential | Do it yourself; agents add latency |
Spawn/context/synthesis overhead is real. Only parallelize when it saves more time than it costs.
Anti-Patterns
- Asking 5 clarifying questions before starting
- Writing a plan document and asking for approval
- Announcing "Phase 1 complete, entering Phase 2"
- Skipping followup because "it looks fine"
- Skipping marbles because "only one P1 left"
- Spawning 4 agents for a task one agent can finish in 20 minutes
- Delivering without running quality gates
- Leaving the user to figure out what changed
- Fixing unrelated code while the requested feature is incomplete
- Going silent for 30 minutes without any progress signal
- Treating this skill as interchangeable with
vc-justdo
The Contract
The user trusted you with an implementation cut and walked away. Build it right. Check your own work. Fix what is broken. Deliver clean. When they come back, the thing works.
"Not sloppy. Not ceremonial. Implemented."
Verify before the handoff
Before you report "done", walk around the truck — see Verification Rule: run the REAL artifact (launch the app/binary, not just --version), re-verify runtime, never trust upstream verification as proof, and check your own check. Gates green ≠ works.
𝚅𝚒𝚋𝚎𝚌𝚛𝚊𝚏𝚝𝚎𝚍. with AI Agents by VetCoders (c)2024-2026 The LibraxisAI Team
What ships with it: 3 files
2.9 KB alongside SKILL.md
.claude-plugin/
- plugin.json306 B
agents/
- openai.yaml296 B
- FLOW.md2.3 KB
Gives 0 of the 12 instructions most e2e browser skills give in ~2.8k tokens
Counted across 408 of the 410 authors here whose files we hold, read 2026-08-07
- Use page object model patternin 34 of 408, across 24 files
- Keep tests independentin 24 of 408, across 19 files
- Interact using refs from the latest snapshotin 24 of 408, across 12 files
- Snapshot to get element refsin 24 of 408, across 14 files
- Clean up test data after each testin 20 of 408, across 14 files
- Test user behavior not implementationin 19 of 408, across 13 files
- Wait for specific network conditionsin 18 of 408, across 8 files
- Quarantine flaky tests explicitlyin 18 of 408, across 9 files
- Re-snapshot after navigation or DOM changesin 17 of 408, across 10 files
- Detect running dev servers before writing test codein 17 of 408, across 7 files
- Use web-first assertionsin 17 of 408, across 14 files
- Ask the user which server to test if multiple are foundin 15 of 408, across 5 files
Said here and by no other author read
- run repo initialization before specific work
- use structural mapping before manual search
- ask at most one clarifying question
- execute directly without presenting plans
- commit in logical chunks
- run a followup self-audit
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.