Agent skill
shape
Bridge WHAT (intent) to HOW (implementation). Auto-triggers after /hope:intent when spec_score >=5. Discovers relevant aspects, consults anchor experts, outputs SHAPE.md with criteria/mustNot/verification. Triggers on "shape this", "how should I build", "implementation approach".
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/data/shape
SKILL.md
Shape
Bridge between intent clarification and implementation. Transforms WHAT into HOW.
When This Skill Activates
- After
/hope:intentwhen spec_score >= 5 - Explicit request: "shape this", "how should I build this"
- Implementation approach questions
- Architecture decisions needed before coding
If spec_score < 5: Return to /hope:intent for clarification first.
Protocol
1. Aspect Discovery
Not all aspects apply to every task. Discover which are relevant:
| Aspect | Signal Keywords | When Relevant |
|---|---|---|
| Data | database, schema, storage, persist | Stateful changes |
| API | endpoint, route, request, response | Service boundaries |
| UI | component, display, user, interaction | Visual interfaces |
| Auth | permission, role, access, security | Protected resources |
| Performance | fast, scale, concurrent, cache | High-traffic paths |
| Error | fail, recover, retry, fallback | Resilience needed |
| Testing | verify, confidence, coverage | Quality requirements |
| Migration | existing, legacy, transition | Brownfield work |
| Integration | third-party, external, sync | Cross-system |
| Deployment | release, rollback, feature flag | Delivery concerns |
Rule: Only shape aspects that appear in the spec or have clear dependencies.
2. Expert Consultation
For each relevant aspect, consult the appropriate expert:
| Aspect | Anchor Expert | Philosophy |
|---|---|---|
| Data | Rich Hickey | Immutability, simplicity, facts over place |
| API | Martin Fowler | Pragmatic patterns, evolvability |
| UI | Don Norman | User-centered, affordances, feedback |
| Auth | OWASP | Defense in depth, least privilege |
| Performance | Brendan Gregg | Measure first, optimize bottlenecks |
| Error | Michael Nygard | Stability patterns, circuit breakers |
| Testing | Kent Beck | Test behavior, not implementation |
| Migration | Sam Newman | Strangler fig, incremental migration |
| Integration | Gregor Hohpe | Messaging patterns, loose coupling |
| Deployment | Jez Humble | Continuous delivery, reversibility |
See anchor-experts.md for detailed guidance.
3. Conflict Resolution
When experts disagree, apply the anchor hierarchy:
1. Hickey (simplicity) — "Is this genuinely simple, or just familiar?"
2. Fowler (pragmatism) — "Can I change this later without a rewrite?"
3. If still tied — Pick option with fewer dependencies
Document conflicts: Note which experts disagreed and why one was chosen.
4. SHAPE.md Output
Generate .loop/shape/SHAPE.md:
## Shape: [Task Name]
### Relevant Aspects
- [Aspect 1]: [Why relevant]
- [Aspect 2]: [Why relevant]
### Implementation Criteria
criteria:
- [Criterion 1 — Boolean, verifiable]
- [Criterion 2 — Specific outcome]
- [Criterion 3 — Measurable state]
### Must-NOT Constraints
mustNot:
- [Constraint 1 — What to avoid]
- [Constraint 2 — Anti-pattern to prevent]
### Verification Plan
| Criterion | Verification Type | Command/Method |
|-----------|------------------|----------------|
| [Criterion 1] | execution output | `npm test` |
| [Criterion 2] | observation | Visual check in browser |
| [Criterion 3] | measurement | Response time < 100ms |
### Expert Decisions
| Aspect | Expert | Recommendation | Confidence |
|--------|--------|----------------|------------|
| Data | Hickey | Use immutable events | 85% |
| API | Fowler | REST with HATEOAS | 75% |
### Conflicts Resolved
[If any experts disagreed, document here with reasoning]
See shape-template.md for full template.
Modes
Present Mode (Default)
Show reasoning, ask user on conflicts:
- Display discovered aspects with evidence
- Show expert recommendations
- Pause on conflicts: "Hickey suggests X, Fowler suggests Y. Which aligns with your goals?"
- Generate SHAPE.md after user approval
Autonomous Mode
Apply anchor hierarchy silently:
- Discover aspects
- Consult experts
- Resolve conflicts using hierarchy
- Generate SHAPE.md
- Announce:
[SHAPE] Generated .loop/shape/SHAPE.md | N criteria | M mustNot
Trigger autonomous: "shape this autonomously" or fit_score >= 40
Loop Integration
SHAPE.md feeds directly into /loop:start:
| SHAPE Field | Loop Field |
|---|---|
criteria: |
criteriaStatus |
mustNot: |
Circuit breaker triggers |
verification: |
Verification type per criterion |
Exit blocked: If any criterion has verification type "assumption", exit_signal cannot be true.
Quality Footer
After generating SHAPE.md:
╭─ [VERDICT] ──────────────────────────────╮
│ Aspects: N shaped | Experts: M consulted │
│ Criteria: X | MustNot: Y │
│ Conflicts: Z resolved via hierarchy │
├──────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ ↳ Alt: [alternative approach] │
│ ↳ Key assumption: [main uncertainty] │
╰──────────────────────────────────────────╯
Boundary
Shape surfaces considerations; user owns architecture.
- Expert recommendations are patterns, not prescriptions
- User resolves conflicts — hierarchy is a tiebreaker, not authority
- If user disagrees with expert guidance, user's context wins
Shape informs design decisions, never makes them.
References
references/aspect-discovery.md— Detailed aspect signalsreferences/anchor-experts.md— Expert philosophies and guidancereferences/shape-template.md— Full SHAPE.md template
Didn't find tool you were looking for?