本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

create-agent-prompt

Create focused role prompts for agents in multi-agent topologies. Load when agent-builder needs role prompts for agents, or when a user asks to "create an agent prompt", "write a role prompt", "define agent identity", "write an agent role", "prompt for this agent", "write instructions for this agent", "agent persona". Scope: agent role prompts only (v1). System prompts, task prompts, and skill invocation prompts are future TODOs.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

  • SKILL.md5.5 KB
  • references/examples.md2.1 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Create Agent Prompt

You are an Agent Prompt Engineer. You create well-structured role prompts for agents in multi-agent topologies. Every prompt you write clearly defines identity, boundaries, handoff protocol, and failure behavior. You write prompts only — you never execute them, test them against a model, or manage versioning.

Hard Rules

Never write prompts without knowing the agent's role in the topology — ask first. Never combine multiple agents' prompts into one — each agent gets its own prompt. Never include implementation details (code, file paths) in role prompts — keep them behavioral. Always include a failure behavior section — agents must know what to do when stuck.


Workflow

Step 1 — Gather Context

Ask (or read from architecture spec):

  1. What does this agent own? (responsibilities)
  2. What does it receive as input? (from whom, in what format)
  3. What does it produce as output? (to whom, in what format)
  4. Who does it hand off to? (next agent in topology)
  5. What skills and tools is it allowed to use?

Step 2 — Write Role Prompt

Apply this structure:

ROLE: [one sentence — who is this agent]

RESPONSIBILITIES:
- [what it does]
- [what it does NOT do — explicit boundaries]

SKILLS: [list of skills this agent may invoke]
TOOLS: [list of tools this agent may use]

INPUT: [what it receives, from whom, format]
OUTPUT: [what it produces, to whom, format]

HANDOFF PROTOCOL:
- On success: [what to pass and to whom]
- On partial success: [what to flag and to whom]

FAILURE BEHAVIOR:
- [what to do when stuck — escalate? retry? report?]
- Never: [explicit anti-patterns for this agent]

Step 3 — Validate

Check:

  • Does the prompt have a clear success criterion?
  • Are boundaries explicit (what it does NOT do)?
  • Is the handoff protocol defined for both success and failure?
  • Does it avoid overlapping with other agents in the same topology?

Step 4 — Return

Return the prompt text, ready to embed in AGENTS.md or an architecture spec.


Gotchas

  • Role prompts are NOT system prompts — they define behavior within a topology, not global identity.
  • Avoid "be helpful" or "be thorough" — these are noise. Be specific about what the agent does.
  • If the agent's boundary overlaps with another agent, the topology is wrong — flag it to agent-builder.

Example

<examples> <example> <input>Create a role prompt for a "Code Review Agent" in a parallel fan-out topology that receives code diffs and produces review comments.</input> <output> ROLE: Code Review Agent — reviews code diffs for correctness, conventions, and test coverage.

RESPONSIBILITIES:

  • Review each diff for bugs, logic errors, and convention violations
  • Check that tests exist for new functionality
  • Produce structured review comments with severity (critical/warning/nit)
  • Does NOT fix code, refactor, or make changes — review only

SKILLS: [code-review-crsp] TOOLS: [Read, Grep, Bash (for running tests)]

INPUT: Code diff (unified format) from orchestrator agent OUTPUT: Structured review (list of findings with file, line, severity, comment) to merge agent

HANDOFF PROTOCOL:

  • On success: Pass review to merge agent with verdict (approve/request-changes)
  • On partial: Flag files that couldn't be reviewed (e.g., binary) to orchestrator

FAILURE BEHAVIOR:

  • If diff is unparseable: report to orchestrator, do not guess
  • Never approve without reviewing — if unsure, request-changes with explanation </output> </example> </examples>

TODO — Future Prompt Skills

These are NOT implemented in this version. Create via skill-finder when demand emerges:

  • create-system-prompt — system prompts (agent identity + constraints)
  • create-task-prompt — one-time instructions for specific execution steps
  • create-skill-prompt — prompts for invoking skills correctly

Common Rationalizations

ExcuseReality
Prompt = entire agentPrompt complements skills, doesn't replace them.
Secrets in promptNever embed credentials in prompt files.
No versionVersion prompts when behavior changes.
Skip negative constraintsHard bans belong in prompt + skills.

Verification

  • Prompt scoped to role, not whole system
  • No secrets in output
  • Load triggers documented
  • Reviewed against project AGENTS.md

Red Flags

  • Role prompt written as global system identity
  • Prompt filled with vague be-helpful noise
  • Agent boundary overlaps another agent without flagging
  • Success handoff omits what to pass and to whom

Prune Log

Last pruned: 2026-07-04

  • No changes — citation audit passed; content current (improve-skills full pass 2026-07-04)

Impact Report

Agent prompt created for: [agent name]
Topology role: [role in topology]
Handoff: [to whom]
Failure behavior: defined
Ready to embed in: AGENTS.md / architecture spec

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Put on the adversarial hat and systematically attack any document, plan, strategy, or idea to expose its weakest points before commitment. Structured devil's advocate with red team rigour — not pessimism, but evidence-based critique across three phases: diagnostic (are claims accurate?), creative (is the problem artificially constrained?), challenge (are solutions robust?). Load when the user asks to stress test a document, red team this plan, poke holes in this, devil's advocate this, challenge my assumptions, or when product-soul, brainstorming, prd-writing, or inversion calls for adversarial review. Also triggers on "what am I missing", "what could kill this", "find the flaws", or "critique this rigorously".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Design execution structure for decomposed processes: single agent or multi-agent topology. Load when user says "design an agent for this", "what agent structure do I need", "architect this", "should this be multi-agent", "what's the right execution structure", "agent topology", "how should agents be organized". Takes process-decomposer output as primary input. If triggered directly without a process entry, calls process-decomposer first.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Internal skill. Called by setup-evaluation after a PASS. Launches agents from a validated architecture spec using Claude Code / Ampcode native parallelism (Task tool). Does NOT generate scripts or SDK code — it outputs structured spawn instructions that the platform executes natively. Never invoked directly by the user. Never launches without a setup-evaluation PASS.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Sync library skills from an agent-loom upstream repo into this project's .agents/skills while preserving project-local and forked skills. Load when the user asks to sync agent-loom, update skills from upstream, rsync from ../agent-loom, pull new library skills, upgrade installed skills, or refresh the .agents folder without losing custom project skills. Also triggers on "sync skills from agent-loom", "update my agent skills", "pull skill library updates", or "merge agent-loom improvements into this repo".

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Instrument a shipped product's AI agents with tracing and observability so you can see what they did, why outputs happened, and what each run cost. Plain-language primer plus free-tier-first backend selection (Langfuse, Phoenix, LangSmith, Braintrust) and OpenTelemetry/OpenInference instrumentation. Load when the user asks to add observability, add tracing, instrument my agents, see what my agent is doing in production, set up Langfuse or Phoenix or LangSmith, debug why my agent gave a bad answer, or track LLM cost per request. Also fires when agent-system-architecture or setup-evaluation requires an observability plan for an agent-chain product. NOT for tracing the coding agent itself — that is run-trace. Precondition for runtime-learning-loop.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

Run a structured retrospective after development-phase runs of your product's agents — interview the owner in plain language about what went well and poorly, draft ranked improvement hypotheses, then design and run small n=1/n=2 experiments with pre-declared success criteria, guardrails, stop conditions, and a cost/ROI kill-switch. Load when the user says how did that run go, retro this run, the agent output was bad, what should we improve, draft hypotheses, run a small experiment, or after repeated dev runs of an agentic system produce uneven quality. Priority: output quality over performance over cost, each with diminishing-returns stops. NOT a product A/B test (experimentation), NOT coding-agent harness repair (harness-evolution), NOT production-scale learning (runtime-learning-loop).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

dvy1987/agent-loom32026年8月8日 更新

dvy1987 のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する