agentic-walkthrough
Prove that a reported run caused its intended real effect. Walk the executor path from entry to effect, capture one observable…
Write, revise or review a charter: the one document that tells an executor what to deliver, what is out of bounds, what the owner already decided, and how each success check will be proven. Use when work needs a written brief before someone else does it, or when asked to write,
$ npx -y skills add sno-ai/sno-station-skills --skill charter --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/charterContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Write, revise or review a charter: the one document that tells an executor what to deliver, what is out of bounds, what the owner already decided, and how each success check will be proven. Use when work needs a written brief before someone else does it, or when asked to write,
name: charter
description: "Write, revise or review a charter: the one document that tells an executor what to deliver, what is out of bounds, what the owner already decided, and how each success check will be proven. Use when work needs a written brief before someone else does it, or when asked to write, change or check a charter."
requires:
programs: []
harness:
- {slot: 4.shell, need: required}
- {slot: 4.file-read-write, need: required}A charter is one markdown file that says what to deliver and how everyone will know it was delivered. A task is named by its charter filename. `charter` writes it; `deliver` carries a released charter out. Any kind of project uses it: software, documents, campaigns, research, operations. The owner is whoever owns the work (often the user); speak to them in the language they use.
Prerequisites: none to use it; its selftest needs bash and python3.
Read `references/template.md` for the file layout and `references/questions.md` before asking the owner anything.
A missing choice that would change the outcome is asked once, one question at a time, at the end of a message; independent work continues while it waits, and silence is not approval.
already answer.
fail by a real run or inspection. The expected result comes from the requirement or from independent data, never from pasting the program's own output. For a defect, the check reproduces the defect first.
and what would change if it failed. If nothing changes, leave it out. By default no checksums, sign-off records, warm-up runs, baselines, fixed snapshots or report formats are entry conditions.
the owner names it. Propose it as a question that says what it would check and what it would block; do not write it in as a requirement on your own judgment. A project may choose otherwise.
record or report failure never disables the main result; a real failure stays a failure.
by default no full suites unless the owner asks.
delete, overturn a recorded decision.
1. Read the request, adjacent notes and the existing work. Cite settled decisions without copying or locking their source. When the work depends on a third-party product, service or version, read its current official documentation and record the facts that constrain the work with the page and version. 2. Draft Owner decisions, Outcome, Scope and non-goals, and Success checks from the template. Length follows the work: a few lines for a small task, a sliced charter (named slices, each with its own checks) for a big one. There is one kind of charter, not sizes. 3. Read it as the executor: for each check, could someone tell pass from fail without asking? Walk one real example through it. Fix the gaps that would make the result fail. Do not run the future work to plan it. 4. One independent review for the owner's intent and concrete defects (`peer-review` when it is installed, otherwise a second agent). Fix material findings; no second round unless the owner asks. 5. Tell the owner what the charter will deliver and any genuine open decision, in plain words, ending with the one question. After the owner approves, set `status: released` and hand the path to the executor, or to whoever supervises the work.
By default an agent alone never releases a charter: it records the owner's decisions. When the owner is away, leave the charter as a `draft` for them to release; a project may choose otherwise.
A scope change updates the affected decisions and checks in the same edit, sets `updated`, and leaves the rest alone. A replaced charter gets `status: superseded` and a pointer to its successor. Delivery records `delivered` only through `deliver`; never infer it from the header.
Read the charter and the affected work. Report concrete mismatches, their consequences and the smallest corrections in one local file; do not edit the reviewed charter. Questions go in the conversation. Applying accepted corrections is Revise.
Sno Station Skills: 31 tested skills that turn Claude Code and Codex into one working team. Cross-vendor peer review, automatic handoff when an agent hits its quota, a one-page morning brief, work orders with proof, and a nightly loop that learns from your own sessions. Open source, installed with one sno setup.
Prove that a reported run caused its intended real effect. Walk the executor path from entry to effect, capture one observable…
Check external services, hosts, browser sessions, model endpoints, and agents before an end-to-end run. MANUAL-ONLY: load when a…
Classify one unexpected end-to-end test failure as a product defect or an environment fault needing a new preflight check.…
MANUAL-ONLY: challenge a product idea, design, PRD, or architecture from first principles. Use only when the user names this…
Write the least code that works, and cut what an AI agent over-built. Use on any coding task: write, fix, refactor, or review a…
Check agent-produced plans, tests, or code against the owner's actual intent. Find missing meaning, unrequested work, stale…