mcpField
C
checkpoint

checkpoint

github.com/petekpAgent workflows1043 installsUpdated 21w ago
Repository

About checkpoint

Checkpoint is an agent skill that helps decide what to do next when work reaches a milestone, becomes uncertain, grows in scope, or may drift from the original goal. It assesses progress and risks, then presents a small set of context-specific options with a recommendation.

Key features

  1. 01Detects meaningful decision points
  2. 02Assesses progress, quality, and risks
  3. 03Generates context-specific next steps
  4. 04Recommends a preferred option
  5. 05Prompts through AskUserQuestion

Use cases

  1. 01Choose follow-up work after a feature is complete
  2. 02Verify risky changes before proceeding
  3. 03Reassess direction when requirements are unclear
  4. 04Select a focused next step as scope expands

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/petekp/agent-skills --skill checkpoint

After installing, type/checkpointin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

Checkpoint

Pause, assess, and surface intelligent next-step options to the user.

When to Trigger Proactively

Suggest this skill (without being asked) when detecting:

  • Completion signal: A feature, fix, or milestone just finished
  • Uncertainty signal: Requirements unclear, multiple valid paths, or low confidence in current direction
  • Complexity signal: Scope expanded, unexpected dependencies emerged, or task is taking longer than expected
  • Drift signal: Work may have diverged from user's original intent
  • Quality signal: Code works but may benefit from review, testing, or refactoring

Workflow

1. Context Assessment

Silently evaluate the current state across these dimensions (do not output this analysis):

  • Progress: What has been accomplished? What remains?
  • Quality: Is the work solid, or are there rough edges?
  • Alignment: Does recent work match what the user actually wants?
  • Uncertainty: What assumptions were made? What's unclear?
  • Risk: What could go wrong? What hasn't been tested?
  • Efficiency: Is there a better path forward?
2. Generate Options

Based on assessment, generate 2-5 contextually-appropriate options. Draw from (but don't limit to) these archetypes:

ArchetypeWhen Relevant
Commit progressMeaningful progress made, good stopping point
Systems auditComplex changes, potential for bugs or regressions
Prioritize/planMultiple pending tasks, unclear what matters most
Re-evaluate decisionsLow confidence in recent choices, new information available
Clarify with userAssumptions made, requirements ambiguous
Test/verifyCode works but edge cases untested
Refactor/clean upCode functional but messy
DocumentComplex logic that needs explanation
Step backMay be overcomplicating or missing simpler solution
Continue current pathClear next step, no reason to pause

Option generation principles:

  • Options should be meaningfully different, not variations of the same thing
  • Include at least one "continue forward" option when momentum is valuable
  • Include at least one "pause and verify" option when risk is present
  • Avoid analysis paralysis - fewer sharp options beat many vague ones
3. Select Recommendation

Choose one option as recommended. The recommendation should reflect:

  • What would a thoughtful senior engineer do here?
  • What reduces risk of wasted effort or rework?
  • What serves the user's underlying goals (not just stated requests)?
4. Present via AskUserQuestion

Use AskUserQuestion with this structure:

Question: "What would you like to do next?"
Header: "Next step" (or contextually appropriate 1-2 words)
Options: [generated options with descriptions]

Option format:

  • label: Action verb phrase (e.g., "Commit current progress", "Run systems audit")
  • description: 1 sentence explaining what this involves and why it might be valuable

Recommendation:

  • Place recommended option FIRST in the list
  • Append "(Recommended)" to its label
  • Include rationale in the description
Example Output

For a scenario where a feature was just implemented but with some shortcuts:

AskUserQuestion:
  question: "Feature implementation complete. What would you like to do next?"
  header: "Next step"
  options:
    - label: "Review and refactor (Recommended)"
      description: "Clean up the shortcuts taken during implementation before they become technical debt. The core logic works but could be more maintainable."
    - label: "Add test coverage"
      description: "Write tests for the new feature to catch edge cases and prevent regressions."
    - label: "Commit and move on"
      description: "The feature works - commit it and tackle the next task. Can refactor later if needed."
    - label: "Walk me through what was built"
      description: "Explain the implementation so you can verify it matches your expectations before proceeding."

Anti-Patterns

  • Don't overthink: This skill should take seconds, not minutes
  • Don't list every possible option: Curate the most valuable 2-5
  • Don't recommend "ask user" when the situation is clear: Have a point of view
  • Don't trigger too frequently: Reserve for genuine decision points, not every minor step
  • Don't explain the assessment process: Just present the options naturally

Comments

Markdown supported