.agents/skills/create-paperclip-bundled-skill/SKILL.md
Take source material — a tweet, a task description, a blog post, "make a skill
that does X" — and land it as a skill in the Paperclip skills catalog
(packages/skills-catalog/), delivered as a reviewed PR. The catalog is the
shelf every Paperclip company browses and installs from, so the bar is: correct
metadata, useful instructions, worked examples, and a clean validation run.
The core rule is FIND before MAKE: if a good skill already exists (in the catalog, in this repo, or published on GitHub), reference or adapt it instead of writing a duplicate from scratch.
.agents/skills/ or skills/, with no catalog machinery.Understand exactly what the skill should teach before writing anything.
Tweets / X links. Use the xc CLI (X API client). Paperclip engineering
agent environments ship it preinstalled and pre-authenticated; it is not a
tool you install or mint credentials for yourself. Check availability before
relying on it:
command -v xc && xc whoami # on PATH and authenticated? if not, use the fallback below
xc get <post-url-or-id> --json # the post itself (conversation_id, author)
xc search 'conversation_id:<id>' --archive --json # rest of the thread (>7 days old needs --archive)
xc user <username> # author context
xc search '<topic keywords>' -n 30 # related discussion
If xc is not on PATH, is unauthenticated, or the account lacks read access
(the check above fails for any reason), delegate the
fetch to a teammate with X/Twitter access (e.g. the Content Strategist agent)
via a child issue: give them the URL and ask for full text of the post + thread
Other sources. Fetch linked articles/READMEs directly. Record the source URL — it goes in the skill body or PR description as attribution.
Distill: what is the repeatable procedure? What inputs does it take? What does "done" look like? If the source is just an aspiration ("agents should write better commit messages"), you are authoring the procedure yourself — say so in the PR.
Search in this order; stop when you have a clear winner.
grep -i '<topic>' packages/skills-catalog/generated/catalog.json
ls packages/skills-catalog/catalog/{bundled,optional}/*/
.agents/skills/, skills/, and issue
history (gh search issues / Paperclip board) for prior work on the topic.SKILL.md:
gh search code --filename SKILL.md "<topic>" --limit 20
gh search repos "<topic> skill" --limit 20
anthropics/skills) and do a web search
for <topic> agent skill SKILL.md.Judge candidates by: does the SKILL.md actually contain the procedure (not a stub)? Is it maintained? What does it bundle (scripts raise the trust level)? Is the license compatible with redistribution? Then pick a path:
optional. Use bundled only when the skill should
ship to every Paperclip company by default — that needs explicit human/board
direction, not your judgment call.browser,
content, docs, finance, paperclip-operations, product, quality,
research, software-development). New categories are allowed but must be
lowercase kebab-case slugs.^[a-z0-9]+(-[a-z0-9]+)*$), unique across
the whole catalog (both kinds).The skill lives at
packages/skills-catalog/catalog/<kind>/<category>/<slug>/ and its canonical
key is paperclipai/<kind>/<category>/<slug>.
catalog-ref.json)The directory contains only catalog-ref.json (a directory with both
catalog-ref.json and SKILL.md fails the build). The manifest builder
fetches the pinned files from GitHub at build time and inventories them.
# Pin the exact commit for the chosen ref (tag or branch)
gh api repos/<owner>/<repo>/commits/<ref> --jq .sha
{
"source": {
"type": "github",
"hostname": "github.com",
"owner": "<owner>",
"repo": "<repo>",
"ref": "<tag-or-branch>",
"commit": "<40-char sha from above>",
"path": "<dir inside the repo containing SKILL.md, or ''>"
},
"files": ["SKILL.md", "references/**", "scripts/run.py"],
"defaultInstall": false,
"recommendedForRoles": ["researcher"],
"requires": ["python3"],
"tags": ["topic", "keywords"]
}
Rules the builder enforces:
files entries are exact relative paths or dir/** globs; SKILL.md must
be included and must have frontmatter with name and description.key/slug, they must match the
catalog placement — otherwise pick a matching slug or use the local path.commit must be a full 40-hex SHA; every listed file must be ≤ 1 MiB.recommendedForRoles, requires, tags live in the JSON (there is no
local SKILL.md to carry them).See catalog/optional/research/last30days/catalog-ref.json for the live
example, and examples/external-reference.md next to this skill.
Layout:
catalog/<kind>/<category>/<slug>/
├── SKILL.md # required entrypoint
├── examples/ # 1–2 worked examples (Step 3)
├── references/ # optional deep-dive docs
├── scripts/ # optional — raises trust level, avoid unless needed
└── assets/ # optional templates/images
SKILL.md frontmatter (all validated by the builder):
---
name: <slug>
description: >
40–300 chars. Routing logic, not marketing: what it does, when to use it,
when not to.
key: paperclipai/<kind>/<category>/<slug>
recommendedForRoles:
- engineer # non-empty; used for staffing suggestions
tags:
- topic # non-empty; used for browse/search
---
Optional frontmatter: defaultInstall: true (only for skills every new
company should get), requires: [node, python3, ...] for runtime deps.
Body: follow docs/guides/agent-developer/writing-a-skill.md — "When to use"
/ "When not to use" sections, concrete commands over prose, supporting detail
in references/. If the skill came from a tweet or external source, link it
in the body for attribution.
Trust level is derived from files, not declared: any scripts/ file makes the
skill scripts_executables (install becomes audit-gated and you must extend
the scriptBearing expectation in src/shipped-catalog.test.ts); assets/
or non-markdown files make it assets; markdown-only skills stay
markdown_only. Prefer markdown-only.
Create examples/ inside the skill directory with one or two markdown files,
each a complete input → application → output walkthrough (realistic input, the
skill's steps applied, the finished artifact). These ship with the skill so
installers can judge it before running it, and they keep the trust level at
markdown_only because they are .md files.
Name them by scenario, e.g. examples/rewrite-release-note.md.
Never hand-edit generated/catalog.json; it is deterministic build output.
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog build:manifest # regenerates generated/catalog.json
pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog validate # must report no errors
(External references need network access to GitHub during these steps.)
Then update packages/skills-catalog/src/shipped-catalog.test.ts:
EXPECTED_BUNDLED_KEYS or EXPECTED_OPTIONAL_KEYS
(alphabetical order);scriptBearing expectation.pnpm --filter @paperclipai/skills-catalog test
The test suite also enforces the ≤300-char frontmatter description budget across the repo and the ≥40-char description / non-empty roles+tags rules for every catalog skill.
Follow the prepare-paperclip-pr skill (.agents/skills/prepare-paperclip-pr/)
against paperclipai/paperclip master. The diff should contain exactly:
generated/catalog.json,shipped-catalog.test.ts expectation update.In the PR body: link the source material (tweet URL, upstream repo), state whether this is a new skill / adaptation / external reference, and note the trust level. Reference PR #10410 (simplified-english) as the shape of a minimal optional-skill PR.
generated/catalog.json staleness is a validation error — always rerun
build:manifest after any file change inside the skill directory (the
inventory carries per-file sha256 hashes).slug across bundled and optional fails the build, not just
duplicate keys.bundled kind and defaultInstall are independent axes; don't set
defaultInstall: true casually on optional skills.commit is
pinned — prefer upstream tags for ref.