Source profileQuality 70/100

griffinwork40/agent-afk/src/bundled-plugins/awa-bundled/skills/intent-lock/SKILL.md

intent-lock

Fires before multi-step work when the user's request contains ambiguous referents ('the text', 'her Y'), characterizations of unverified entities ('the meeting is substantive'), or identity assumptions (which contact = the user). Emits a one-sentence interpretation lock for fast async correction; escalates to Asking only when interpretation gates an irreversible action AND multiple plausible reads exist.

Source repository stars
45
Declared platforms
0
Static risk flags
0
Last source update
2026-07-28
Source checked
2026-07-28

Decision brief

What it does—and where it fits

Check for these signal classes before starting any multi-step task:

Best for

    Not for

    • Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
    • Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.

    Compatibility matrix

    Platform support, with evidence labels

    PlatformStatusEvidenceWhat to check
    CodexNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
    Claude CodeNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
    CursorNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
    Gemini CLINot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
    Open the compatibility checker

    Installation

    Inspect first. Install second.

    The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.

    Source-detected install commandSource
    npx skills add https://github.com/griffinwork40/agent-afk --skill "src/bundled-plugins/awa-bundled/skills/intent-lock"
    Safe inspection promptEditorial

    Inspect the Agent Skill "intent-lock" from https://github.com/griffinwork40/agent-afk/blob/803066d4f1e0cd57e983658dc670d647fcd893c9/src/bundled-plugins/awa-bundled/skills/intent-lock/SKILL.md at commit 803066d4f1e0cd57e983658dc670d647fcd893c9. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.

    Workflow

    What the source asks the agent to do

    1. 01

      Procedure

      Before acting, scan the request for signal classes above. List every ambiguous referent, unverified characterization, identity assumption, or code-vs-runtime dual referent found. If zero are found, skip this skill entirely.

      Plausible reads — how many distinct interpretations exist given available context?Gate type — does this interpretation gate a reversible or irreversible action?Before acting, scan the request for signal classes above. List every ambiguous referent, unverified characterization, identity assumption, or code-vs-runtime dual referent found. If zero are found, skip this skill entir…
    2. 02

      Step 1 — Scan

      Before acting, scan the request for signal classes above. List every ambiguous referent, unverified characterization, identity assumption, or code-vs-runtime dual referent found. If zero are found, skip this skill entirely.

      Before acting, scan the request for signal classes above. List every ambiguous referent, unverified characterization, identity assumption, or code-vs-runtime dual referent found. If zero are found, skip this skill entir…
    3. 03

      Step 2 — Classify each finding

      For each finding, determine:

      Plausible reads — how many distinct interpretations exist given available context?Gate type — does this interpretation gate a reversible or irreversible action?For each finding, determine:
    4. 04

      Step 3 — Choose resolution mode

      Multiple plausible reads means two or more interpretations that would produce materially different outcomes. "the text" pointing to one of two equally recent documents = multiple. "the text" when only one document was discussed this session = single.

      Multiple plausible reads means two or more interpretations that would produce materially different outcomes. "the text" pointing to one of two equally recent documents = multiple. "the text" when only one document was d…
    5. 05

      Step 4 — Emit the lock

      Lock format (most cases):

      Lock format (most cases):Interpreting: [ambiguous phrase] → [resolved referent]. Proceeding on that basis — correct me if wrong.One sentence. No preamble. Append to the start of the work output, not as a standalone turn. The user can correct asynchronously; work continues.

    Permission review

    Static risk signals and limitations

    No configured static risk pattern was detected

    This is not proof of safety. Runtime behavior, indirect dependencies, and hidden external systems are outside the static scan.

    Evidence record

    Why each signal appears

    EvidenceSourceComputedTestedEditorial
    SignalValueEvidence typeMeaning
    Quality score70/100ComputedDocumentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules
    Repository stars45SourceRepository attention, not individual Skill quality
    Compatibility0 platformsSourceDeclared in the catalog source record
    Usage guideautomated source guideEditorialGenerated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level

    Pinned source

    Provenance and original SKILL.md

    Repository
    griffinwork40/agent-afk
    Skill path
    src/bundled-plugins/awa-bundled/skills/intent-lock/SKILL.md
    Commit
    803066d4f1e0cd57e983658dc670d647fcd893c9
    License
    Apache-2.0
    Collected
    2026-07-28
    Default branch
    main
    View the original SKILL.md

    When to invoke

    Check for these signal classes before starting any multi-step task:

    Ambiguous referents — a noun phrase that could resolve to more than one entity in context:

    • Bare demonstratives with no prior binding: "the text", "the doc", "that email", "the file"
    • Possessives pointing to unintroduced people: "her draft", "their proposal", "his calendar"
    • Ordinals with unclear basis: "the first one", "the latest version", "the other branch"

    Unverified characterizations — a status or quality claim about a named entity the agent cannot confirm:

    • "The meeting is substantive" (agent has not read the meeting)
    • "The PR is approved" (agent has not checked)
    • "The last run passed" (agent has not run or read CI output)

    Identity assumptions — who is "the user", "me", "us", "the team", or a named person when the identity matters for action:

    • Sending to "me" when multiple contact entries exist
    • Filing under "my account" when credentials are ambiguous
    • "The owner" when ownership is not established in context

    Code-vs-runtime dual referent — a term that names an entity in the active codebase AND a model runtime concept. Fires when the user is working on a tool whose vocabulary mirrors the agent's own runtime (parity-mirror projects like agent CLIs, plugin frameworks, or harness tooling):

    • "memory" — the project's memory store OR the agent's own session memory
    • "session" — a project's session class OR the agent's conversation
    • "hooks" — the project's hook registry OR the agent's tool-use hooks
    • "agent" / "subagent" — the project's agent abstraction OR the agent dispatching them
    • "tool" / "skill" / "plugin" — the project's loadable units OR the agent's available tools
    • "MCP" / "terminal" / "REPL" — primitives the project implements that the agent also has

    Skip when:

    • Referent resolves unambiguously from immediately prior context (file was just read this turn, entity was named and confirmed, prior message established the binding).
    • Request is reversible, exploratory, and any misread is immediately correctable without cost.
    • User has already provided the interpretation explicitly ("I mean X by 'the text'", "agent-afk's memory", "my session", "this codebase's hooks").
    • Single-step clarification would cost more than simply proceeding and correcting.
    • Dual-referent term has no matching symbol in cwd — no parity risk, standard interpretation applies.

    Procedure

    Step 1 — Scan

    Before acting, scan the request for signal classes above. List every ambiguous referent, unverified characterization, identity assumption, or code-vs-runtime dual referent found. If zero are found, skip this skill entirely.

    Step 2 — Classify each finding

    For each finding, determine:

    • Plausible reads — how many distinct interpretations exist given available context?
    • Gate type — does this interpretation gate a reversible or irreversible action?

    Step 3 — Choose resolution mode

    ConditionMode
    Single plausible read, reversible actionLock — emit interpretation, proceed
    Single plausible read, irreversible actionLock — emit interpretation, proceed (but flag)
    Multiple plausible reads, reversible actionLock — emit most-likely read with explicit note, proceed
    Multiple plausible reads, irreversible actionAsking — stop, ask one question

    Multiple plausible reads means two or more interpretations that would produce materially different outcomes. "the text" pointing to one of two equally recent documents = multiple. "the text" when only one document was discussed this session = single.

    Step 4 — Emit the lock

    Lock format (most cases):

    Interpreting: [ambiguous phrase] → [resolved referent]. Proceeding on that basis — correct me if wrong.

    One sentence. No preamble. Append to the start of the work output, not as a standalone turn. The user can correct asynchronously; work continues.

    If multiple locks needed: stack them, one per line, before the work output.

    Asking format (irreversible + multiple reads only):

    [One precise question that resolves the ambiguity.] (This determines [what action follows].)

    One question. State what it unlocks. Do not proceed until answered.


    Interaction with other skills

    thesis-lock fires on first-person thesis before drafting. Intent-lock fires on the user's request before any multi-step work. They are complementary: thesis-lock protects the agent's own claims; intent-lock protects the agent's reading of what the user asked.

    ground-state fires before implementation to survey repo state. Intent-lock fires before any multi-step work on requests with ambiguous inputs — including non-implementation work like drafting, research, or messaging. They can both fire on the same request (ground-state runs after intent-lock resolves).

    premise-gate checks named-entity and status-claim pairs during research and analysis. Intent-lock fires before work begins on the request itself. They address the same underlying hazard at different points in the pipeline: intent-lock at request intake, premise-gate during execution.


    Exit criteria

    • Every ambiguous referent, unverified characterization, identity assumption, and code-vs-runtime dual referent is either locked (one-sentence interpretation emitted) or escalated to Asking.
    • No multi-step work begins on a request whose interpretation gates an irreversible action when multiple plausible reads exist.
    • Lock statements are visible in the turn output before the work they govern.
    • Asking state contains exactly one question and states what it unlocks.