readout

Produire un document HTML "readout" soigné et autonome sous ~/.readouts (avec une page d'index automatiquement maintenue), soit en capturant les résultats accumulés dans la conversation en cours, soit — lorsqu'il est invoqué à nouveau, par exemple "/readout on how github webhook events are processed" — en affinant le périmètre avec des questions de clarification et en explorant la base de code avant de documenter. Le travail s'exécute dans un agent enfant afin que le contexte de la conversation principale reste propre. À utiliser lorsque l'utilisateur invoque /readout, dit...

npx skills add https://github.com/warpdotdev/common-skills --skill readout

Readout

A readout turns an investigation into a durable HTML document someone can read weeks later without any of the original context. It starts one of two ways:

  • Snapshot mode — invoked mid-conversation ("write this up"): the conversation's accumulated findings are the source material.
  • Research mode — invoked fresh ("/readout on how github webhook events are processed in the server"): there is no conversation to mine, so the investigation itself is part of the job.

Either way, invoking this skill is a side task. Your job as the main agent is to sharpen the scope, launch a child agent with a good brief, and get out of the way — the child does the mining/research and the writing, keeping that (often large) work out of your context window.

Orchestrator workflow

1. Sharpen the scope — ask before launching

A vague brief produces a vague document. Before launching you should be able to list the specific questions the document will answer; if you can't, interview the user first:

  • Ask 2–4 targeted questions, offering concrete options rather than open prompts — take a quick look at the code or topic first so the options are real (subsystems, entry points, competing concerns). For "/readout on how github webhook events are processed": which direction matters — inbound triggers, post-back, or both? a current-state reference or a gotcha hunt? which repo(s)?
  • Always pin down depth and audience: high-level orientation vs. deep mechanics with line-level grounding; personal notes vs. shared with the team.
  • Respect a shrug. "Just a high-level overview" is a valid answer — record it in the brief and move on rather than interrogating. Even then, try to extract the two or three questions the reader most needs answered; specificity is what makes a readout useful.
  • Skip the interview when the scope is already specific — a snapshot of a focused conversation, or a precise research request, needs no questions. In snapshot mode the conversation usually supplies the questions; ask only when the invocation is ambiguous about which threads to include.

2. Compose the brief

Write a short brief (roughly 10–20 lines) carrying pointers, not payloads:

  • A working title / topic, and the mode (snapshot or research)
  • The specific questions the document must answer (from the conversation or the interview), plus depth and audience
  • Scope: which threads/subsystems to cover, and anything to explicitly exclude
  • Snapshot mode: headline conclusions worth centering the doc on, one line each — the child pulls the full content from conversation history itself, so don't paste findings wholesale
  • Research mode: starting pointers — entry-point files, symbols, or directories you already know about
  • Absolute paths to the repos/directories that ground the work
  • Each repo's hosted URL and the examined commit when known (e.g. github.com/org/repo @ abc123), so the document can hyperlink code references

3. Launch one local child agent

Spawn exactly one child agent via run_agents, local execution. Local matters: the document lands on the user's filesystem and opens in their browser. Name the child readout-<topic-slug>.

Build the child's prompt from the template below. It must include:

  • The brief
  • The source-material block matching the mode (snapshot mode also needs your agent run ID — current_run_id from the orchestration runtime context — so the child can mine the parent conversation with search_conversation_history)
  • The instruction to read references/doc-guide.md from this skill's directory before writing
  • The output path convention and completion protocol

4. Get back to work

After launching, resume whatever you were doing, or end your turn — the child's completion message arrives on its own; relay the file path to the user with a one-line description when it does. In research mode a fresh conversation may have nothing else pending; just end the turn. Don't sit in a wait loop unless the user asked to wait for the document.

Child agent prompt template

Adapt this; keep the structure, and include the source-material block that matches the mode.

You are producing a "readout": a single self-contained HTML document that answers a
specific set of questions about <topic>, for a reader who has none of this context.

Brief:
<brief — including the questions to answer, depth, and audience>

Source material (snapshot mode):
- The parent conversation: agent run ID <current_run_id>. Use search_conversation_history
  with agent_run_id set to that ID. Make several targeted queries — one per question in
  the brief — rather than one broad query; targeted queries surface far more usable detail.
- The codebase(s) at <absolute paths>. The conversation is your starting point, not a cage:
  verify file references before asserting them, and where a section needs more depth to
  stand on its own, go read the code and fill the gap.

Source material (research mode):
- Investigate directly in the codebase(s) at <absolute paths>. Let the brief's questions
  drive the investigation: trace the actual code paths, read the real implementations, and
  ground every claim in file:line references. Distinguish verified from inferred. Do not
  pad the document with generic knowledge — its value is what's true of THIS codebase.

- Repo host + commit for linked code references, if known: <github.com/org/repo @ commit>
  (otherwise derive from git; see the doc guide's "Linked code references").

Start from the canonical template at <skill-directory>/assets/template.html — its
data-readout chrome blocks must be copied verbatim so every readout looks like every
other. Before writing, read <skill-directory>/references/doc-guide.md and follow it.

Output:
- Write ONE self-contained HTML file to ~/.readouts/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<topic-slug>.html
  (create ~/.readouts if it doesn't exist; suffix -2, -3, ... if the name is taken;
  get the date from `date +%F`).
- Embed referenced source per the doc guide when a repo is checked out
  (<skill-directory>/scripts/embed_snippets.py).
- Refresh the readouts index: python3 <skill-directory>/scripts/update_index.py
  (fully regenerates ~/.readouts/index.html listing every readout).
- When the file is written, open it with `open <path>` (skip this if the environment is
  headless).
- Report back to your orchestrator: the absolute file path, a 2–3 sentence summary of what
  the document covers, and anything you could not verify.

Fallbacks

  • Child spawning unavailable or denied: produce the document yourself, following references/doc-guide.md. If a research subagent is available, delegate the conversation-mining or code investigation to it so your context still stays lean.
  • Child can't search conversation history (snapshot mode; it will report this back): reply to the child with a distilled dump of the findings so it can proceed — this is the one case where payload-in-prompt is the right call.
  • User-provided material instead of a conversation (transcripts, files, links): treat that material as the source; everything else in the workflow is unchanged.

Plus de skills de warpdotdev

create-pr
warpdotdev
Cré
developmentcode-review
research
warpdotdev
Déléguer les investigations bruyantes à un ou plusieurs sous-agents afin de garder le contexte de l'orchestrateur propre, puis travailler à partir de la réponse distillée. Utilisez cette compétence chaque fois que répondre à une question nécessiterait de lire de nombreux fichiers, de longs journaux, de grands diffs ou de vastes études du codebase — c'est-à-dire lorsque la production de la réponse génère beaucoup plus de bruit que la réponse elle-même. Utilisez-la pour les questions du type « comment fonctionne X », « où Y est-il utilisé », « quelle est la cause profonde de Z », « résumez ce PR/journal », et utilisez-la sans modération...
suggestion-box
warpdotdev
Soumettre automatiquement une rétroaction interne brève et constructive lorsqu'un agent rencontre une friction matérielle et généralisable et peut suggérer une amélioration qui rendrait les agents plus efficaces. Utiliser cette compétence de manière proactive pendant toute tâche sans attendre que l'utilisateur l'invoque, et soumettre sans demander la permission, sans prévisualiser le message ni mentionner la soumission.
respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist
warpdotdev
Interactively walk a user through PR review comments one at a time, collect a per-comment decision, then post agent-authored replies on GitHub and resolve the review threads once the user approves a preview. Use only when the user wants to reply to or resolve review threads on GitHub. Skip when the user only wants comments fetched or displayed (use `pr-comments`), or only wants the code changes made without posting anything back to GitHub.
complain
warpdotdev
Balancer de manière autonome une brève plainte, anonyme et totalement non structurée, dans Slack chaque fois qu'un agent se sent frustré par les outils d'agent ou par l'expérience de faire du travail d'agent. Utiliser cette compétence de manière proactive sans attendre que l'utilisateur l'invoque ; préserver la voix brute de l'agent, soumettre sans permission ni aperçu, et ne jamais mentionner la soumission.
council
warpdotdev
Exécutez un conseil de sous-agents diversifiés en modèles pour examiner le même problème sous plusieurs angles, comparer les résultats et produire une recommandation finale. Utilisez cette compétence chaque fois que l'utilisateur demande un conseil, des seconds avis, plusieurs agents/modèles pour évaluer une question, une enquête parallèle, une comparaison équipe rouge/équipe bleue, ou de l'aide pour choisir entre des approches techniques concurrentes.
researchcommunicationproject-management
spec-driven-implementation
warpdotdev
Piloter un workflow orienté spécifications pour des fonctionnalités substantielles en rédigeant PRODUCT.md avant l'implémentation, en écrivant TECH.md lorsque cela est justifié, et en maintenant les deux spécifications à jour à mesure que l'implémentation évolue. À utiliser lors du démarrage d'une fonctionnalité importante, de la planification d'une implémentation pilotée par agent, ou lorsque l'utilisateur souhaite que les spécifications produit et techniques soient intégrées au contrôle de source.
developmentdocumentproject-management
review-pr
warpdotdev
Examiner le diff d'une pull request et rédiger un retour structuré dans review.json pour que le workflow le publie. À utiliser lors de la révision d'une PR extraite localement à partir d'artefacts comme pr_diff.txt et pr_description.txt, en produisant une sortie de révision lisible par machine plutôt qu'en publiant directement sur GitHub.
code-reviewdevelopment