Draft answer-first RFCs for proposed repository changes.
npx skills add https://github.com/eugenelim/agent-ready-repo --skill new-rfc-eugenelim
Please help me install this Agent Skill. Skill: new-rfc Source: https://github.com/eugenelim/agent-ready-repo/tree/main/.agents/skills/new-rfc Command: npx skills add https://github.com/eugenelim/agent-ready-repo --skill new-rfc-eugenelim
This Skill helps you turn a proposed change into a clear, research-backed RFC that gives reviewers a decision to make instead of a vague discussion to rescue.
Use the new-rfc skill to draft a repository RFC for a proposed change, starting with the ask and then filling in research, options, risks, evidence, and open questions.
High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.
Draft an RFC for an architecture change by leading with the recommended decision and request, then separating the proposal into research-backed options, repository precedent, and risk analysis before a self-review gate. This structure gives reviewers a clear decision to make.
Structure an RFC for cross-cutting design decisions using an answer-first format that organizes problem and goals, options considered, risks, evidence, and open questions. This review-ready organization replaces vague discussions with explicit decision framing.
You need an RFC when proposed changes involve cross-cutting convention changes, reversals of prior decisions, or major process changes where discussion must happen before implementation begins. It forces explicit decision framing and risk analysis.
Research prior art and de-risk assumptions by checking repository precedent, looking for external prior art, and testing the riskiest assumption within your proposal. This research-backed approach requires verifiable citations and explicit non-goals to bound the scope.
Yes, you can use this RFC drafting process for convention reversals of prior decisions. It applies structured decision framing, research-backed options, and a mandatory self-review gate before handoff to ensure the reversal is rigorously justified.
Include the ask, the recommended decision, problem and goals, options considered, risk analysis, verifiable evidence, open questions, and follow-on artifacts. This review-ready structure ensures reviewers have everything needed to approve or reject the proposal.
maxculen86Generate delta specifications with structured requirements and scenarios from change proposals.
SHGrowthAnalyze platform gaps and orchestrate spec writing for Open Mercato.
EngineerWithAICreate and manage Architecture Decision Records in multiple formats.
TheGreatLCreate and manage architecture decision records with multiple format templates.
