/agent-sort
Build an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a specific repo by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes. Use when ECC should be trimmed to what a project actually needs instead of loading the full
$ npx -y skills add affaan-m/everything-claude-code --skill agent-sort --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/agent-sort
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Build an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a specific repo by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes. Use when ECC should be trimmed to what a project actually needs instead of loading the full
SKILL.md
agent-sort.SKILL.mdname: agent-sort
description: Build an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a specific repo by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes. Use when ECC should be trimmed to what a project actually needs instead of loading the full bundle.
metadata:
origin: ECC
Agent Sort
Use this skill when a repo needs a project-specific ECC surface instead of the default full install.
The goal is not to guess what "feels useful." The goal is to classify ECC components with evidence from the actual codebase.
When to Use
- A project only needs a subset of ECC and full installs are too noisy
- The repo stack is clear, but nobody wants to hand-curate skills one by one
- A team wants a repeatable install decision backed by grep evidence instead of opinion
- You need to separate always-loaded daily workflow surfaces from searchable library/reference surfaces
- A repo has drifted into the wrong language, rule, or hook set and needs cleanup
Non-Negotiable Rules
- Use the current repository as the source of truth, not generic preferences
- Every DAILY decision must cite concrete repo evidence
- LIBRARY does not mean "delete"; it means "keep accessible without loading by default"
- Do not install hooks, rules, or scripts that the current repo cannot use
- Prefer ECC-native surfaces; do not introduce a second install system
Outputs
Produce these artifacts in order:
1. DAILY inventory 2. LIBRARY inventory 3. install plan 4. verification report 5. optional `skill-library` router if the project wants one
Classification Model
Use two buckets only:
- `DAILY`
- should load every session for this repo
- strongly matched to the repo's language, framework, workflow, or operator surface
- `LIBRARY`
- useful to retain, but not worth loading by default
- should remain reachable through search, router skill, or selective manual use
Evidence Sources
Use repo-local evidence before making any classification:
- file extensions
- package managers and lockfiles
- framework configs
- CI and hook configs
- build/test scripts
- imports and dependency manifests
- repo docs that explicitly describe the stack
Useful commands include:
rg --files
rg -n "typescript|react|next|supabase|django|spring|flutter|swift"
cat package.json
cat pyproject.toml
cat Cargo.toml
cat pubspec.yaml
cat go.mod
Parallel Review Passes
If parallel subagents are available, split the review into these passes:
1. Agents
- classify `agents/*`
2. Skills
- classify `skills/*`
3. Commands
- classify `commands/*`
4. Rules
- classify `rules/*`
5. Hooks and scripts
- classify hook surfaces, MCP health checks, helper scripts, and OS compatibility
6. Extras
- classify contexts, examples, MCP configs, templates, and guidance docs
If subagents are not available, run the same passes sequentially.
Core Workflow
1. Read the repo
Establish the real stack before classifying anything:
- languages in use
- frameworks in use
- primary package manager
- test stack
- lint/format stack
- deployment/runtime surface
- operator integrations already present
2. Build the evidence table
For every candidate surface, record:
- component path
- component type
- proposed bucket
- repo evidence
- short justification
Use this format:
skills/frontend-patterns | skill | DAILY | 84 .tsx files, next.config.ts present | core frontend stack
skills/django-patterns | skill | LIBRARY | no .py files, no pyproject.toml | not active in this repo
rules/typescript/* | rules | DAILY | package.json + tsconfig.json | active TS repo
rules/python/* | rules | LIBRARY | zero Python source files | keep accessible only
3. Decide DAILY vs LIBRARY
Promote to `DAILY` when:
- the repo clearly uses the matching stack
- the component is general enough to help every session
- the repo already depends on the corresponding runtime or workflow
Demote to `LIBRARY` when:
- the component is off-stack
- the repo might need it later, but not every day
- it adds context overhead without immediate relevance
4. Build the install plan
Translate the classification into action:
- DAILY skills -> install or keep in `.claude/skills/`
- DAILY commands -> keep as explicit shims only if still useful
- DAILY rules -> install only matching language sets
- DAILY hooks/scripts -> keep only compatible ones
- LIBRARY surfaces -> keep accessible through search or `skill-library`
If the repo already uses selective installs, update that plan instead of creating another system.
5. Create the optional library router
If the project wants a searchable library surface, create:
- `.claude/skills/skill-library/SKILL.md`
That router should contain:
- a short explanation of DAILY vs LIBRARY
- grouped trigger keywords
- where the library references live
Do not duplicate every skill body inside the router.
6. Verify the result
After the plan is applied, verify:
- every DAILY file exists where expected
- stale language rules were not left active
- incompatible hooks were not installed
- the resulting install actually matches the repo stack
Return a compact report with:
- DAILY count
- LIBRARY count
- removed stale surfaces
- open questions
Handoffs
If the next step is interactive installation or repair, hand off to:
- `configure-ecc`
If the next step is overlap cleanup or catalog review, hand off to:
- `skill-stocktake`
If the next step is broader context trimming, hand off to:
- `strategic-compact`
Output Format
Return the result in this order:
STACK
- language/framework/runtime summary
DAILY
- always-loaded items with evidence
LIBRARY
- searchable/reference items with evidence
INSTALL PLAN
- what should be installed, removed, or routed
VERIFICATION
- checks run and remaining gaps
Read more
name: agent-sort description: Build an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a specific repo by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes. Use when ECC should be trimmed to what a project actually needs instead of loading the full bundle. metadata: origin: ECC
Agent Sort
Use this skill when a repo needs a project-specific ECC surface instead of the default full install.
The goal is not to guess what "feels useful." The goal is to classify ECC components with evidence from the actual codebase.
When to Use
- A project only needs a subset of ECC and full installs are too noisy
- The repo stack is clear, but nobody wants to hand-curate skills one by one
- A team wants a repeatable install decision backed by grep evidence instead of opinion
- You need to separate always-loaded daily workflow surfaces from searchable library/reference surfaces
- A repo has drifted into the wrong language, rule, or hook set and needs cleanup
Non-Negotiable Rules
- Use the current repository as the source of truth, not generic preferences
- Every DAILY decision must cite concrete repo evidence
- LIBRARY does not mean "delete"; it means "keep accessible without loading by default"
- Do not install hooks, rules, or scripts that the current repo cannot use
- Prefer ECC-native surfaces; do not introduce a second install system
Outputs
Produce these artifacts in order:
1. DAILY inventory 2. LIBRARY inventory 3. install plan 4. verification report 5. optional `skill-library` router if the project wants one
Classification Model
Use two buckets only:
- `DAILY`
- should load every session for this repo
- strongly matched to the repo's language, framework, workflow, or operator surface
- `LIBRARY`
- useful to retain, but not worth loading by default
- should remain reachable through search, router skill, or selective manual use
Evidence Sources
Use repo-local evidence before making any classification:
- file extensions
- package managers and lockfiles
- framework configs
- CI and hook configs
- build/test scripts
- imports and dependency manifests
- repo docs that explicitly describe the stack
Useful commands include:
rg --files rg -n "typescript|react|next|supabase|django|spring|flutter|swift" cat package.json cat pyproject.toml cat Cargo.toml cat pubspec.yaml cat go.mod
Parallel Review Passes
If parallel subagents are available, split the review into these passes:
1. Agents
- classify `agents/*`
2. Skills
- classify `skills/*`
3. Commands
- classify `commands/*`
4. Rules
- classify `rules/*`
5. Hooks and scripts
- classify hook surfaces, MCP health checks, helper scripts, and OS compatibility
6. Extras
- classify contexts, examples, MCP configs, templates, and guidance docs
If subagents are not available, run the same passes sequentially.
Core Workflow
1. Read the repo
Establish the real stack before classifying anything:
- languages in use
- frameworks in use
- primary package manager
- test stack
- lint/format stack
- deployment/runtime surface
- operator integrations already present
2. Build the evidence table
For every candidate surface, record:
- component path
- component type
- proposed bucket
- repo evidence
- short justification
Use this format:
skills/frontend-patterns | skill | DAILY | 84 .tsx files, next.config.ts present | core frontend stack skills/django-patterns | skill | LIBRARY | no .py files, no pyproject.toml | not active in this repo rules/typescript/* | rules | DAILY | package.json + tsconfig.json | active TS repo rules/python/* | rules | LIBRARY | zero Python source files | keep accessible only
3. Decide DAILY vs LIBRARY
Promote to `DAILY` when:
- the repo clearly uses the matching stack
- the component is general enough to help every session
- the repo already depends on the corresponding runtime or workflow
Demote to `LIBRARY` when:
- the component is off-stack
- the repo might need it later, but not every day
- it adds context overhead without immediate relevance
4. Build the install plan
Translate the classification into action:
- DAILY skills -> install or keep in `.claude/skills/`
- DAILY commands -> keep as explicit shims only if still useful
- DAILY rules -> install only matching language sets
- DAILY hooks/scripts -> keep only compatible ones
- LIBRARY surfaces -> keep accessible through search or `skill-library`
If the repo already uses selective installs, update that plan instead of creating another system.
5. Create the optional library router
If the project wants a searchable library surface, create:
- `.claude/skills/skill-library/SKILL.md`
That router should contain:
- a short explanation of DAILY vs LIBRARY
- grouped trigger keywords
- where the library references live
Do not duplicate every skill body inside the router.
6. Verify the result
After the plan is applied, verify:
- every DAILY file exists where expected
- stale language rules were not left active
- incompatible hooks were not installed
- the resulting install actually matches the repo stack
Return a compact report with:
- DAILY count
- LIBRARY count
- removed stale surfaces
- open questions
Handoffs
If the next step is interactive installation or repair, hand off to:
- `configure-ecc`
If the next step is overlap cleanup or catalog review, hand off to:
- `skill-stocktake`
If the next step is broader context trimming, hand off to:
- `strategic-compact`
Output Format
Return the result in this order:
STACK - language/framework/runtime summary DAILY - always-loaded items with evidence LIBRARY - searchable/reference items with evidence INSTALL PLAN - what should be installed, removed, or routed VERIFICATION - checks run and remaining gaps
Your agent can write code, but ECC gives it a coordinated engineering system and toolbox: it plans before it builds, verifies changes with tests, reviews its own work from a fresh context, remembers what matters, and turns repeated wins into reusable skills
Repo: affaan-m/everything-claude-code
Other skills on ecc.
- /everything-claude-code
Development conventions and patterns for everything-claude-code. JavaScript project with conventional commits.
Open skill - /accessibility
Design, implement, and audit inclusive digital products using WCAG 2.2 Level AA
Open skill - /agent-architecture-audit
Full-stack diagnostic for agent and LLM applications. Audits the 12-layer agent stack for wrapper regression, memory pollution, tool discipline failures, hidden repair loops, and rendering corruption. Produces severity-ranked findings with code-first fixes. Essential for
Open skill - /agent-eval
Head-to-head comparison of coding agents (Claude Code, Aider, Codex, etc.) on custom tasks with pass rate, cost, time, and consistency metrics
Open skill - /agent-harness-construction
Design and optimize AI agent action spaces, tool definitions, and observation formatting for higher completion rates.
Open skill - /agent-introspection-debugging
Structured self-debugging workflow for AI agent failures using capture, diagnosis, contained recovery, and introspection reports.
Open skill

