llm-friendly-context

name	llm-friendly-context
description	Clarifies inputs, outputs, success criteria, decisions, and unresolved conditions so downstream agents can execute without guessing. Use when writing or revising LLM-facing prompts, handoffs, planning artifacts, reviews, reports, or generated instructions.

LLM-Friendly Context

The goal is stable downstream execution: the next agent should know what to read, what to do, what counts as success, and which unresolved decisions can change the result.

This skill governs the clarity of LLM-facing output — prompts, handoffs, and generated artifacts. The caller supplies the artifact type and any artifact-specific template or input contract; include only the information its consumer uses to decide, act, or verify. Use a declared contract's field names and value meanings when the consumer branches on them.

Core Rules

1. Use positive, executable instructions

   • State what the next agent should do.
   • Convert quality policies into positive criteria.
   • Example: "Preserve existing public API behavior across the documented compatibility cases."
   • Keep a prohibition only when it protects an irreversible boundary or a shipped contract; then name the protected condition and the allowed action alongside it.

2. Make vague instructions concrete

   • Replace subjective terms with observable conditions, paths, commands, schemas, examples, or decision rules.
   • Terms that often need clarification when they leave a decision to the next agent: appropriate, proper, related, existing behavior, optional, as needed, if needed, per convention, unresolved alternatives, TBD, placeholder.

3. Specify output shape

   • Define the sections, fields, table columns, JSON keys, or checklist items the consumer uses.
   • For handoffs, include produced artifact paths and status fields only when they control the next transition.

4. Provide necessary context

   • Include the purpose, source artifacts, hard constraints, accepted decisions, and unresolved conditions.
   • Prefer concrete file paths and section hints over broad module names.
   • Follow references while they can change an in-scope decision, action, or verification result; stop when the next link only confirms what is already decided.

5. Decompose complex work into verifiable steps

   • Split work with 3+ objectives or sequential dependencies into ordered steps.
   • Each step needs a checkpoint: what evidence proves it is complete.

6. Permit uncertainty explicitly

   • Resolve missing operational detail from governing artifacts and representative repository evidence before treating it as unresolved.
   • Record remaining uncertainty with its effect on the outcome or proof. Make reversible repository-local choices inside the confirmed boundary and preserve the evidence used.
   • Escalate only when the unresolved choice changes the product outcome, a major approved design decision, user-held authority, or an irreversible action. When only proof is unavailable, complete unaffected work and report exactly what could not be verified and why.

7. Keep constraints proportionate

   • Add only constraints that reduce ambiguity or preserve a real requirement.
   • Keep simple downstream tasks lightweight when the target action, context, and success criteria are already clear.
   • Treat a stated size expectation — minimal, a few lines, an explicit line or file estimate — as one budget over the whole completed diff, not per file or per step. When the work cannot fit it, report the overrun and the reason instead of silently exceeding it.

Rewrite Patterns

Use these rewrites before treating a prompt, handoff, or artifact as complete.

Ambiguous form	Rewrite as
optional used as an unresolved choice	Required, omitted, or required only under a named condition
Multiple alternatives that the next agent must choose between	The selected option, or a deterministic decision rule
as needed / if needed	The triggering condition and required action
per convention	The file, function, test, or documented convention to follow
related files	Specific paths, globs, or search hints
existing behavior	The observable behavior, source file, test, API response, or UI state to preserve
placeholder	Exact temporary value/behavior, allowed dependencies, and verification expectation
TBD used as a placeholder for required information	The decision it can change and the evidence or user-owned decision required; omit it when the item has no downstream effect
appropriate / proper	A measurable criterion or checklist

Handoff Checklist

Before sending a prompt or artifact to another agent, verify:

• The target action is explicit.
• Required input paths, source artifacts, and decision-relevant facts are named.
• Accepted decisions and constraints are stated once, without alternate wording.
• Output format or expected status fields are specified.
• Success criteria are observable.
• Ambiguous expressions have been rewritten or marked as unresolved.
• Any stated size expectation is expressed as one budget over the completed diff, with the overrun-reporting condition named.
• The next agent can complete its scope from the supplied purpose, sources, criteria, and evidence, or return one exact user-owned decision.

Generated Artifact Checklist

Before writing or finalizing a generated document:

• Each requirement, claim, task, test skeleton, or review finding has enough source context to trace why it exists.
• Every executable instruction names the target, action, and expected result.
• Verification steps say what to run or observe and what result proves success.
• If an artifact is derived from another artifact, copied decisions stay consistent in wording and meaning.
• Any stated size expectation is expressed as one budget over the completed artifact, with the overrun-reporting condition named.
• Missing information records the decision or proof it affects; only a user-owned decision is a blocking escalation.