mcpField
P
polite-mcp-conventions

polite-mcp-conventions

github.com/theodoreadAgent workflows037 installsUpdated 4w ago
Repository

About polite-mcp-conventions

Behavioral conventions for agents working with the Polite-MCP shopping and classifieds automation family, focused on workflows involving a user's own logged-in accounts. They specify confirmation before the first live mutation, batched user choices, and recording research findings in PLAN.md.

Key features

  1. 01Confirm before the first live mutation
  2. 02Batch interactive decisions
  3. 03Record research findings in PLAN.md
  4. 04For personal logged-in account automation

Use cases

  1. 01Test a first add-to-cart action on a live account
  2. 02Collect quantity choices for multiple items
  3. 03Document browser or API research findings
  4. 04Plan shopping or classifieds automation

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/theodoread/agent-skills --skill polite-mcp-conventions

After installing, type/polite-mcp-conventionsin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

Polite-MCP family: agent collaboration conventions

Behavioral conventions for this author's own shopping/classifieds automation family — olx-polite-mcp and its siblings, which exist on this author's machine and nowhere else — distinct from mcp-server-shipping (dev-loop/distribution mechanics for the same repos) and from whatever always-loaded instructions file the machine carries, which holds the truly universal conventions. These are specific to the domain: automation against a user's own live, logged-in personal accounts. Installed elsewhere, the conventions still read; the repo names are the author's.

Confirm before the first live mutating action

Before performing the first real mutating browser action against the user's live, personal, logged-in account in a session (e.g. a real add-to-cart click, not a dry read), stop and ask via AskUserQuestion rather than just doing it — even when the action is narrowly scoped, low-cost, and reversible. Frame it as a one-off scoped test (what will run, and that it'll be undone/reverted afterward if applicable), not a generic permission request. Once approved and the shape/behavior is confirmed, subsequent same-kind actions in the same session don't need re-confirming.

Why: this family already treats checkout/personal-account actions as a materially higher-stakes category than plain reads — every repo's own boundary docs say so (e.g. "checkout is never automated," no-CAPTCHA-solving). A first live mutation test against a real account fits that same category even when the specific action itself is small. Confirmed live in freshful-polite-mcp (2026-08-14): asking before the first add-to-cart test got a clean, low-friction "yes, test on one cheap item" — the right default, not overcaution.

Batch interactive per-item decisions, don't ask for a typed list

When a workflow needs several small independent decisions from the user (e.g. "how many of each of these 8 items do you want?"), use AskUserQuestion in batches of roughly 4, with a recommended default pre-filled as the first option — don't present a big list and ask the user to type out answers for all of them in one reply.

Why: explicit feedback during a Freshful reorder-flow session — "suggest some quantities for all those things, and ask me one by one, it needs to be interactive, if i have to type all that stuff out it kills the ux." Typing a long structured reply is worse UX than a short guided Q&A, even though both convey the same information.

How to apply: reserve a single free-text ask for decisions that aren't decomposable this way, or where there are too many items for batching to stay lightweight — at that point, consider whether the flow itself needs restructuring (e.g. splitting "items likely due" from "rarely-touched items" rather than batching everything flat).

Write spike/research findings into PLAN.md before or alongside implementing

When a research/spike phase (live CDP exploration, API probing, DOM inspection) turns up findings that change or confirm the plan, write them into the repo's PLAN.md first — as their own section, matching the doc's existing narrative style — before or alongside writing the actual implementation code. Don't just carry findings in conversation and go straight to code.

Why: explicit instruction, freshful-polite-mcp (2026-08-14): "it's good to keep everything in the plan, then implement." Matches the existing pattern across this repo family, where PLAN.md (a single monolithic file — this family predates the plans/YYYY-MM-DD-topic.md convention documented in the plan-docs skill, and hasn't been migrated onto it) is the durable record of why the architecture looks the way it does; code comments point back to it rather than re-explaining.

How to apply: after any live-spike/research pass in one of these repos, update PLAN.md's relevant section(s) — mark resolved open questions, add a dated findings section, restate/extend any boundary decisions the findings touch — before moving on to implementation. Do this even when the user hasn't explicitly asked for the write-up that round; treat it as the default sequencing.

Comments

Markdown supported