mcpField
B
brooks-harness

brooks-harness

github.com/hyhmrrightAgent workflows1.6k144 installsUpdated 2d ago
Repository

About brooks-harness

brooks-harness is an orchestration skill for maintaining the brooks-lint repository, intended for its maintainers. It runs specialized agents in request-dependent stages, with a mandatory QA gate and defined retry, loop-back, and stop behavior.

Key features

  1. 01Selects stages by request type
  2. 02Runs specialized agents sequentially
  3. 03Makes QA mandatory
  4. 04Loops back or stops on failure
  5. 05Audits triggers when needed

Use cases

  1. 01Add or edit skills
  2. 02Update evaluation cases
  3. 03Check configuration and document consistency
  4. 04Release after QA passes

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/hyhmrright/brooks-lint --skill brooks-harness

After installing, type/brooks-harnessin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

brooks-lint — Maintenance Harness (Orchestrator)

This skill orchestrates work on the brooks-lint repo itself. It runs a sequential subagent pipeline: each stage is a dedicated agent defined in .codex/agents/. Use the available Codex collaboration tools with the matching agent role; inherit the parent model and permissions. If custom roles are not loaded, pass the role's developer_instructions from its TOML file to a standard subagent. Stages run sequentially. Every editing agent must preserve other contributors' changes and own only the files assigned by the orchestrator.

Pipeline

[orchestrator]
   Phase 0  context check
   Phase 1  classify request → select stages
   Phase 2  run selected stages in order, with a QA loop-back:
            skill-author → eval-curator → consistency-qa ─(FAIL)→ back to author
                                              │ PASS
                                              ▼
                            trigger-boundary-auditor   (only if a description changed)
                                              ▼
                                      release-manager  (only if release requested)
   Phase 3  report + collect feedback

Phase 0 — Context check

Determine the run mode before doing anything:

  • _workspace/brooks-harness/ exists + maintainer asks to redo part of a prior run → partial re-run: invoke only the affected stage(s), reusing prior notes.
  • _workspace/brooks-harness/ exists + a fresh request → new run: move the old folder to _workspace/brooks-harness_prev/, start clean.
  • No _workspace/brooks-harness/ → initial run: create it.

Run notes and the QA report live under _workspace/brooks-harness/. The real artifacts are the repo files themselves — agents edit skills/, evals/, manifests directly; _workspace/ only holds the run's notes and the PASS/FAIL verdict for audit.

Phase 1 — Classify the request

Pick the minimal set of stages. The QA stage is never skipped — every change is gated.

RequestauthorevalQAtrigger-auditrelease
Add a new skill✓ (via new-skill scaffold)✓✓✓—
Edit skill / guide content✓if codes changed✓if description changed—
Edit _shared/ framework✓if risk defs changed✓——
Codex / maintenance configuration——✓——
Eval suite only—✓✓——
Fix trigger descriptions✓—✓✓—
Release——✓—✓
Full: change + release✓as needed✓if applicable✓

Phase 2 — Run the pipeline

Spawn each selected stage as a subagent in order using Codex collaboration tools. Pass each agent (a) the task contract and (b) the previous stage's summary. Agents write their summaries to _workspace/brooks-harness/; read them between stages.

  1. skill-author — creates/edits the content. For a brand-new skill it invokes the new-skill scaffold. Returns the list of files touched + convention-relevant choices (new risk codes, new Step numbers, changed description trigger phrases).
  2. eval-curator — if skill-author reported new/changed risk codes or modes, adds the paired happy-path + false-positive scenarios and runs npm run evals.
  3. consistency-qa (gate — never skipped) — runs npm run validate + npm test + npm run evals, then the cross-document sync checks (manifests, all version-bearing text files, CHANGELOG, AGENTS/GEMINI book count, eval count). Writes a PASS/FAIL verdict. On FAIL: loop back to the agent named in the verdict (author or eval-curator), fix, then re-run QA. Repeat once; if it still fails, stop and report to the maintainer.
  4. trigger-boundary-auditor — run only if a description field changed. It read-only audits the six shipped skills' trigger surfaces for false-triggering and routing collisions. Surface its findings; if it flags a real collision, loop back to skill-author.
  5. release-manager — run only if a release was requested, and only after QA PASS. Cuts the release via the release skill.

Phase 3 — Report & feedback

Report: stages run, files changed, QA verdict, trigger-audit findings (if any), and the release URL (if any). Then offer the maintainer a feedback opening: "Anything to adjust in the result, the agent roles, or the pipeline order?" Record accepted changes in the AGENTS.md harness change-log table.

Conventions this harness enforces

  • Inherit the current Codex model and permissions; do not select a Claude model.
  • consistency-qa must be general-purpose (it runs npm scripts); the trigger-boundary-auditor is read-only.
  • No command wrappers are created — Codex discovers .agents/skills/.
  • Direct-to-main releases follow AGENTS.md. Commit, push, tag, or publish only when requested. Run the explicit validate/test/evals gate; Claude global rules and hooks do not execute in Codex.

Error handling

  • A stage that fails once is retried once with its error as input; a second failure stops the pipeline and reports to the maintainer (no silent skip).
  • QA FAIL never proceeds to release.
  • Conflicting data is reported with provenance, not deleted.
  • High-risk git ops (--no-verify, --force, history rewrites) require explicit maintainer authorization — release-manager stops and asks.

Test scenarios

Normal flow — "add a brooks-security skill": Phase 1 selects author+eval+QA+audit. skill-author runs new-skill brooks-security, creates SKILL.md (with a sibling-carving "Do NOT trigger for:" clause) + guide; eval-curator adds an S-code happy-path + a false-positive scenario; consistency-qa runs the gate → PASS; trigger-boundary-auditor confirms no collision with brooks-review/audit. Report lists files + PASS.

Error flow — QA FAIL on book-count drift: maintainer adds a thirteenth book but edits only source-coverage.md. consistency-qa's cross-doc check finds README still says "twelve" → FAIL, attributed to skill-author. Orchestrator loops back; skill-author updates README/AGENTS/GEMINI wording; QA re-runs → PASS. No release was requested, so the pipeline ends at Phase 3.

Comments

Markdown supported