Grounds code changes in official documentation and local repository truth to ensure consistency.
Install
mkdir -p .claude/skills/source-driven-development && curl -L -o skill.zip "https://agentskills.codes/api/skills/download/15265" && unzip -o skill.zip -d .claude/skills/source-driven-development && rm skill.zipInstalls to .claude/skills/source-driven-development
Activation
This is the description your AI agent reads to decide when to run this skill — the better it matches your request, the more reliably it fires.
Grounds implementation decisions in authoritative sources. Use when framework behavior, tool syntax, or workflow guidance must be verified before editing oviney/blog.Key capabilities
- →Verify framework behavior before editing documentation
- →Reconcile official guidance with repo-local commands
- →Update workflow documentation for other agents
- →Resolve whether a pattern is current or deprecated
- →Identify conflicts between upstream docs and repo practice
How it works
The skill verifies implementation decisions by combining official upstream documentation with repo-local truth, ensuring recommendations are both source-backed and repo-ratified.
Inputs & outputs
When to use source-driven-development
- →Verify framework behavior
- →Reconcile documentation with actual code
- →Review workflow documentation
- →Update repository command guidance
About this skill
Source-Driven Development
Overview
Verify the source before you write the change. For oviney/blog, that means combining official upstream documentation with repo-local truth such as CLAUDE.md, package.json, playwright.config.ts, and the existing skill/command layer. Official docs tell you what a tool supports; the repo tells you which subset this project actually uses.
When to Use
- Updating Jekyll, Liquid, Playwright, Lighthouse, Pa11y, or GitHub Actions guidance
- Creating or revising skill docs that point agents to concrete commands
- Writing reusable examples that other agents will copy
- Resolving whether a pattern is current, deprecated, or unsupported in this repo
- Reviewing docs that were likely written from memory rather than verified sources
The Rule: Source-Backed, Repo-Ratified
A recommendation is only safe when both checks pass:
- Source-backed — supported by official docs or a first-party reference
- Repo-ratified — consistent with this repo's actual commands, files, and protected boundaries
If upstream docs suggest a command the repo does not use, prefer the repo.
Verification Workflow
Step 1: Detect the Local Stack
Read the repo files that define the real environment:
- Gemfile / README / CLAUDE.md for Jekyll workflow
- package.json for executable npm scripts
- playwright.config.ts for browser test behavior
- lighthouserc.json for performance thresholds
- SECURITY.md for security posture
State the result explicitly before documenting anything:
STACK DETECTED:
- Jekyll site validated with `bundle exec jekyll build`
- Playwright tests via `npm run test:playwright`
- Accessibility checks via `npm run test:a11y`
- Lighthouse checks via `npm run test:lighthouse`
- Security audit via `npm run test:security`
Step 2: Fetch the Smallest Authoritative Source
Use the exact upstream page that governs the change:
| Area | Preferred source |
|---|---|
| Jekyll / Liquid | jekyllrb.com or shopify.github.io/liquid |
| Playwright | playwright.dev |
| Lighthouse / LHCI | github.com/GoogleChrome/lighthouse-ci or developer.chrome.com |
| Pa11y | pa11y.org / GitHub project docs |
| GitHub Actions | docs.github.com |
Avoid tutorial blogs and generic AI summaries as primary sources.
Step 3: Reconcile with Repo Constraints
Ask the repo-specific questions that generic docs cannot answer:
- Is the command present in
package.json? - Does the repo already encode a preferred workflow in
CLAUDE.md,AGENTS.md, or the relevant skill file? - Does the change cross a protected or governance surface?
- Does the repo intentionally omit a tool (for example generic lint or typecheck defaults)?
Step 4: Write the Recommendation
Prefer wording like this:
Official docs support X.
This repo implements it via Y.
Therefore the doc should tell agents to run Z.
Conflict Handling
Surface conflicts instead of silently choosing one side:
CONFLICT DETECTED:
Upstream examples use a generic build command,
but oviney/blog validates changes with `bundle exec jekyll build`.
Decision:
Keep the repo command in local docs and cite the upstream source only for
behavior, not for the command wrapper.
Citation Rules for This Repo
- Cite upstream sources when they justify framework behavior or terminology
- Cite local files when they justify workflow, commands, paths, or boundaries
- If something is unverified, say so plainly rather than inventing certainty
- Do not turn unsupported tooling into a required default
Common Rationalizations
| Rationalization | Reality |
|---|---|
| "The upstream README is enough" | Not for this repo. Local command wrappers and scope rules matter just as much. |
| "This command is probably standard" | Standard elsewhere does not mean valid here. Check package.json. |
| "It is only an example" | Agents copy examples literally. One wrong example becomes repeated bad output. |
| "I know this tool from memory" | Version drift and repo-specific wrappers make memory unreliable. |
Red Flags
- Generic commands appear without proof from local files
- A doc cites upstream examples but ignores repo rules
- The recommendation assumes tools the repo does not install or run
- The writer cannot name the local file that validates the command
- Conflicts between upstream docs and repo practice are hidden
Verification
After writing or updating a source-driven doc:
- The repo files defining the command or workflow were read first
- The upstream reference is first-party and specific to the feature
- Every recommended command exists in this repo
- No unsupported default tooling was introduced
- Repo-specific constraints override generic examples where needed
- Any unresolved gaps are explicitly marked as unverified
Related Files
../../../package.json— local QA and security commands../../../playwright.config.ts— local Playwright runtime behavior../../../lighthouserc.json— local Lighthouse thresholds../context-engineering/SKILL.md— how to load only the right sources
When not to use it
- →When using tutorial blogs or generic AI summaries as primary sources
- →When assuming a command is standard without checking package.json
- →When ignoring repo-specific wrappers and scope rules
Limitations
- →A recommendation is only safe when both source-backed and repo-ratified checks pass
- →If upstream docs suggest a command the repo does not use, prefer the repo
- →Conflicts between upstream docs and repo practice must be surfaced
How it compares
This skill explicitly reconciles official documentation with local repository configurations and commands, ensuring that recommendations are practical and consistent with the project's actual environment, unlike relying solely on generic do
Compared to similar skills
source-driven-development side by side with the closest alternatives in the catalog.
| Skill | Installs | Updated | Safety | Difficulty |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| source-driven-development (this skill) | 0 | 3mo | No flags | Intermediate |
| error-handling-guide | 0 | 4mo | No flags | Intermediate |
| dependency-upgrade | 26 | 5mo | Review | Intermediate |
| codex-skill | 12 | 5mo | Review | Advanced |
Try saying
Example prompts that trigger this skill in your AI assistant.
You might also like
error-handling-guide
komunite
Design and document a error handling guide with structured process, quality checks, and system integration
dependency-upgrade
wshobson
Manage major dependency version upgrades with compatibility analysis, staged rollout, and comprehensive testing. Use when upgrading framework versions, updating major dependencies, or managing breaking changes in libraries.
codex-skill
feiskyer
Use when user asks to leverage codex, gpt-5, or gpt-5.1 to implement something (usually implement a plan or feature designed by Claude). Provides non-interactive automation mode for hands-off task execution without approval prompts.
typescript
lobehub
TypeScript code style and optimization guidelines. Use when writing TypeScript code (.ts, .tsx, .mts files), reviewing code quality, or implementing type-safe patterns. Triggers on TypeScript development, type safety questions, or code style discussions.
markdown-to-html
github
Convert Markdown files to HTML similar to `marked.js`, `pandoc`, `gomarkdown/markdown`, or similar tools; or writing custom script to convert markdown to html and/or working on web template systems like `jekyll/jekyll`, `gohugoio/hugo`, or similar web templating systems that utilize markdown documents, converting them to html. Use when asked to "convert markdown to html", "transform md to html", "render markdown", "generate html from markdown", or when working with .md files and/or web a templating system that converts markdown to HTML output. Supports CLI and Node.js workflows with GFM, CommonMark, and standard Markdown flavors.
typescript-skills
llama-farm
Shared TypeScript best practices for Designer and Electron subsystems.