ワンクリックで
autonomy-bootstrap
Draft or refine clare/autonomy.yml boundaries and sources_of_truth via guided interview
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
メニュー
Draft or refine clare/autonomy.yml boundaries and sources_of_truth via guided interview
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Capture normalized agent interactions for local CLARE2 distillation
Scaffold an MCP server exposing CLARE verify and autonomy-check tools
Prepare release collateral by auditing docs, updating CHANGELOG, and committing/pushing changes; hand off publish to human due signing passphrase.
Code review for correctness, KISS/DRY/YAGNI/SOLID, security, language BKMs, tests, and docs
| name | autonomy-bootstrap |
| description | Draft or refine clare/autonomy.yml boundaries and sources_of_truth via guided interview |
| mode | agent |
What this skill does: Guides the user through creating or refining clare/autonomy.yml so AI boundaries and sources of truth match the real project architecture. When to use: Use when adopting CLARE in a new repository, reworking module boundaries, or tightening AI safety zones. Output: A proposed or updated clare/autonomy.yml plus a short checklist of follow-up setup actions.
CLARE's Limited principle requires explicit autonomy boundaries per path. CLARE's Reality-Aligned principle requires sources_of_truth for important domain concepts.
The canonical source for both in a CLARE project is clare/autonomy.yml.
When invoked, run this process.
Classify candidate paths into:
Decision matrix:
| Path characteristics | Suggested level | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Authentication, payments, legal/compliance workflows, production access controls | humans-only | High impact mistakes require intentional manual authorship |
| Core business logic, API handlers, shared domain models | supervised | AI can draft quickly, but behavior needs human review |
| Generated code, boilerplate wiring, test fixtures, low-risk utilities | full-autonomy | Fast regeneration and iteration are low risk |
Draft a modules section with specific path patterns and reasons.
Requirements:
Template:
modules:
- path: "src/generated"
level: full-autonomy
reason: "Generated artifacts are safe to regenerate"
- path: "src/payments"
level: humans-only
reason: "Financial controls require manual authorship"
- path: "src"
level: supervised
reason: "General product logic requires review"
- path: "*"
level: supervised
reason: "Default: require human review"
Ask for 3-8 domain concepts that often cause drift. If the team is unsure which concepts to pick, start with these prompts:
Common starting concepts by project type:
For each concept, capture:
Example:
sources_of_truth:
- concept: "User identity"
source_of_truth: "Auth provider schema"
defined_in: "infra/auth"
note: "Provider claims win when app model differs"
Concrete module examples:
# Backend API example
modules:
- path: "src/auth"
level: humans-only
reason: "Authentication and token policy are security critical"
- path: "src/generated"
level: full-autonomy
reason: "Generated clients are safe to regenerate"
- path: "src"
level: supervised
reason: "Application logic requires review"
- path: "*"
level: supervised
reason: "Default review boundary"
# Frontend SPA example
modules:
- path: "src/payments"
level: humans-only
reason: "Payment UX and flows require strict human control"
- path: "src/components/generated"
level: full-autonomy
reason: "Generated component wrappers can be regenerated"
- path: "src"
level: supervised
reason: "Feature code requires review"
- path: "*"
level: supervised
reason: "Default review boundary"
# Monorepo example
modules:
- path: "packages/security"
level: humans-only
reason: "Security controls and policies are high risk"
- path: "packages/*/generated"
level: full-autonomy
reason: "Generated artifacts are safe to refresh"
- path: "packages"
level: supervised
reason: "Most package logic needs review"
- path: "*"
level: supervised
reason: "Default review boundary"
Validate the draft before writing:
If constraints fail, fix and revalidate.
If user requests direct edits, write clare/autonomy.yml with:
If user requests plan-only output, return a complete patch preview instead.
Adoption recommendation:
After autonomy.yml is ready, recommend these CLARE setup actions:
Before marking complete:
Do not report completion if verify-ci.sh fails.