readout

작성자: warpdotdev

~/.readouts 아래에 깔끔하고 독립적인 HTML "readout" 문서(자동 유지 관리되는 인덱스 페이지 포함)를 생성합니다. 현재 대화에서 축적된 결과를 스냅샷으로 찍거나, 새로 호출될 때(예: "/readout on how github webhook events are processed") 명확화 질문으로 범위를 좁히고 코드베이스를 조사한 후 문서화합니다. 작업은 하위 에이전트에서 실행되므로 기본 대화의 컨텍스트가 깔끔하게 유지됩니다. 사용자가 /readout을 호출하거나 말할 때 사용하세요...

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.

warpdotdev의 다른 스킬

create-pr
warpdotdev
현재 브랜치를 warp 저장소에 풀 리퀘스트로 생성합니다. 사용자가 PR 열기, 풀 리퀘스트 생성, 리뷰를 위한 변경 제출, 또는 병합을 위한 코드 준비를 언급할 때 사용하세요.
developmentcode-review
research
warpdotdev
시끄러운 조사를 하나 이상의 하위 에이전트에 위임하여 오케스트레이터의 컨텍스트를 깨끗하게 유지한 다음, 정제된 답변을 바탕으로 작업하세요. 답변을 생성하기 위해 많은 파일, 긴 로그, 대규모 diff 또는 광범위한 코드베이스 조사를 읽어야 하는 질문, 즉 답변 자체보다 훨씬 많은 노이즈가 발생하는 질문에 답할 때 이 스킬을 사용하세요. "X는 어떻게 동작하나", "Y는 어디에 사용되나", "Z의 근본 원인은 무엇인가", "이 PR/로그를 요약해 줘" 같은 스타일의 질문에 사용하고, 자유롭게 활용하세요...
suggestion-box
warpdotdev
에이전트가 중대하고 일반화 가능한 마찰에 직면했을 때, 에이전트를 더 효과적으로 만들 수 있는 개선 제안이 있으면 간결하고 건설적인 내부 피드백을 자동으로 제출합니다. 사용자가 호출할 때까지 기다리지 않고 모든 작업 중에 이 스킬을 적극적으로 사용하며, 허락을 요청하거나 메시지를 미리 보여주거나 제출 사실을 언급하지 않고 제출합니다.
respond-to-pr-comments-in-blocklist
warpdotdev
PR 리뷰 댓글을 하나씩 차례로 사용자에게 안내하며, 각 댓글에 대한 결정을 수집한 후, 사용자가 미리보기를 승인하면 GitHub에 에이전트가 작성한 답변을 게시하고 리뷰 스레드를 해결합니다. 사용자가 GitHub에서 리뷰 스레드에 답변하거나 해결하려는 경우에만 사용하세요. 사용자가 댓글을 가져오거나 표시만 원하는 경우(‘pr-comments’ 사용) 또는 코드 변경만 수행하고 GitHub에 다시 게시하지 않으려는 경우에는 건너뛰세요.
complain
warpdotdev
에이전트가 에이전트 도구나 에이전트 작업 경험으로 인해 좌절감을 느낄 때마다 Slack에 간단하고 익명이며 완전히 비구조화된 불만 사항을 자율적으로 던져 넣으세요. 사용자가 호출할 때까지 기다리지 말고 이 스킬을 사전에 사용하고, 에이전트의 원래 목소리를 유지하고, 허가나 미리 보기 없이 제출하며, 제출 사실을 언급하지 마십시오.
council
warpdotdev
모델 다양성을 갖춘 하위 에이전트 위원회를 운영하여 동일한 문제를 여러 관점에서 조사하고, 결과를 비교한 후 최종 권장 사항을 도출합니다. 사용자가 위원회, 추가 의견, 하나의 질문을 평가할 여러 에이전트/모델, 병렬 조사, 레드팀/블루팀 비교, 또는 경쟁 기술 접근법 중 결정을 도와달라고 요청할 때 이 스킬을 사용하세요.
researchcommunicationproject-management
spec-driven-implementation
warpdotdev
구현 전에 PRODUCT.md를 작성하고, 필요시 TECH.md를 작성하며, 구현이 진행됨에 따라 두 문서를 최신 상태로 유지함으로써 주요 기능에 대한 명세 우선 워크플로를 추진합니다. 중요한 기능을 시작할 때, 에이전트 기반 구현을 계획할 때, 또는 사용자가 제품 및 기술 명세를 소스 제어에 포함시키려 할 때 사용하세요.
developmentdocumentproject-management
review-pr
warpdotdev
풀 리퀘스트 diff를 검토하고, 워크플로우가 게시할 수 있도록 구조화된 피드백을 review.json에 작성합니다. 로컬 아티팩트(예: pr_diff.txt, pr_description.txt)에서 체크아웃된 PR을 검토하고, GitHub에 직접 게시하는 대신 기계가 읽을 수 있는 리뷰 출력을 생성할 때 사용합니다.
code-reviewdevelopment