event4u-app/agent-config

readme-writing-package

Use when creating or rewriting a README for a reusable package or library. Focus on installability, minimal usage example, compatibility, and developer onboarding.

96CollectingReads filesRuns scripts
See how to use itView GitHub source
npx skills add https://github.com/event4u-app/agent-config --skill "src/skills/readme-writing-package"

Quick start

Start using it in three steps

Install it or open the source, trigger it with a clear task, then follow the source workflow.

1

Install the Skill

npx skills add https://github.com/event4u-app/agent-config --skill "src/skills/readme-writing-package"
2

Describe the task

Use readme-writing-package to help me with: [describe your task]. Before you begin, tell me what input you need, the steps you will follow, and the expected output.

3

Follow the workflow

No structured workflow was detected; follow the original SKILL.md below.

Continue to the workflow

Direct answers

Answers to review before you install

What is readme-writing-package?

Focus on installability, minimal usage example, compatibility, and developer onboarding.

Who should use readme-writing-package?

It is relevant to workflows involving Documentation, Engineering, Research.

How do you install readme-writing-package?

SkillSignal detected this source-specific command: npx skills add https://github.com/event4u-app/agent-config --skill "src/skills/readme-writing-package". Inspect the repository and command before running it.

Which Agent platforms does it support?

The upstream source does not declare a dedicated Agent platform.

What permissions or risks should you review?

Static analysis detected read-files, exec-script signals. Review the cited source lines before installing; these signals are not a security audit.

What are the current evidence limits?

This page combines upstream documentation with deterministic repository, quality, and static-risk signals. It is not described as a manual test or security review.

SkillSignal brief

Decide whether it fits your work first

Focus on installability, minimal usage example, compatibility, and developer onboarding.

Useful in these contexts

Not yet included in a workflow collection

Core capabilities

DocumentationEngineeringResearch

Distilled from the source

Understand this Skill in one minute

About 8 min · 9 sections

When it is worth using

  1. Creating a README for a package, library, SDK, or framework extension

  2. Rewriting a package README after major changes (new API, version bump, new registry)

  3. Improving a weak package README (missing install, no example, no compatibility info)

  4. Documenting a package for Packagist, npm, or internal registries

Examples and typical usage

  1. Full README draft

  2. Detected package type + audience

  3. Compatibility summary

Repository stars
7
Repository forks
1
Quality
96/100
Source repository last pushed

Quality breakdown

Based on traceable docs and repository signals; stars are not treated as quality.

96/100
Documentation30/30
Specificity23/25
Maintenance20/20
Trust signals23/25

Compare before choosing

Related Agent Skills and source variants

These links are selected from shared tasks, functions, stacks, platforms, and same-name variants. Compare the source owner, documentation, permissions, and maintenance signals.

project-analyzer by event4u-app

ONLY when user asks for single-pass tech-stack detection or `agents/evidence/analysis/` write-up. Deep multi-pass audit → `universal-project-analysis`. Raw primitives → `project-analysis-core`.

build-with-exa by MoizIbnYousaf

Build applications and agents with Exa's API Platform: search, contents, answer, context, Agent API, monitors, websets, OpenAI-compatible endpoints, and exa-py / exa-js. Use when choosing Exa endpoints, writing Exa API calls, integrating semantic web search or research into products, or debugging Exa request shapes. Load references/ on demand for endpoint details.

seo-machine by MoizIbnYousaf

Build an organic-traffic operating system for any site or app: a multi-phase, resumable engine that ships programmatic landing pages (alternatives, comparisons, use-cases, playbooks) on top of real keyword research. Use when the user says 'SEO machine', 'build organic traffic', 'rank on Google', 'we need traffic', 'alternatives pages', 'comparison pages', '/for/ pages', 'programmatic SEO', or 'build an SEO engine'. Distinct from `seo-audit` (one-off diagnostic) and `seo-content` (single-article

astropy by k-dense-ai

Core Python library for astronomy and astrophysics workflows that need Astropy APIs, including units/quantities, coordinates, FITS I/O, tables, time systems, WCS, and cosmology. Use when implementing or debugging astronomical data analysis code with Astropy.

test-performance by event4u-app

Use when optimizing test suite performance — database setup, seeder optimization, parallel testing, CI pipeline efficiency, or RefreshDatabase alternatives.

View original Skill.mdThis page is parsed directly from the repository SKILL.md without editorial rewriting. Collected: Jul 28, 2026 · about 8 min

readme-writing-package

When to use

  • Creating a README for a package, library, SDK, or framework extension
  • Rewriting a package README after major changes (new API, version bump, new registry)
  • Improving a weak package README (missing install, no example, no compatibility info)
  • Documenting a package for Packagist, npm, or internal registries

Do NOT use when:

  • Documenting a full application, CLI tool, or internal team repo → use readme-writing instead
  • Only fixing minor typos or updating a single section
  • Writing deep reference docs that belong in /docs

Goal

Package README that makes adoption easy. A developer should know within 30 seconds: what it does, whether it fits their stack, how to install it, and how to use it.

Core principles

  • User adoption over internal architecture — consumer first, maintainer second
  • Install + first example = most important sections — everything else is secondary
  • Compatibility must be explicit — don't imply broad support without evidence
  • First code example must be real, minimal, and verified — no pseudo-code
  • README = onboarding, /docs = reference — keep README focused
  • Re-analyze every time — never write from cached knowledge; verify the manifest, source, and CI matrix in this session
  • Preserve existing visual identity — banner, badges, hero images, and logo lockups stay byte-identical unless the user explicitly asks to change them

Procedure

0. Re-analysis gate — MANDATORY before any writing

Before drafting, produce an evidence ledger from a fresh inspection of the package — manifest, source, CI, examples. Do not rely on prior turns or the existing README prose.

ledger:
  package:       <name + version from manifest>
  description:   <verbatim from manifest>
  install_cmd:   <verified against the manifest's package manager>
  requirements:  <language version, framework version, ext-*, services>
  public_api:    <entry classes / functions / exports from source>
  test_command:  <real command from manifest scripts / Taskfile>
  doc_targets:   <list of /docs files actually linked from the new draft>
  visual_keep:   <line range of existing README header / banner / badges to preserve>

If any cell is unknown, run ls, grep, find, or read the file before writing — never invent. When the user asks to keep the existing banner or badge row, reproduce it byte-for-byte from the source.

1. Identify package type and audience

TypeAudienceREADME focus
LibraryAny developerInstall → Usage → API surface
Framework extensionFramework usersRequirements → Install → Register → Use
PluginPlugin host usersCompatibility → Install → Config → Use
SDKAPI consumersAuth → Install → First request → Response handling
Internal shared packageTeam membersPurpose → Install → Integration → Dev workflow

2. Inspect package truth sources

Read and verify files that define actual package behavior (confirm each claim against the source — never paraphrase from memory):

  • Manifest: composer.json, package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, go.mod, or *.gemspec — name, description, requirements, scripts
  • Source entrypoints — public API surface, main classes/functions
  • Config files — publishable configs, defaults
  • CI workflows — what gets tested, supported versions matrix
  • Tests — reveal actual API usage patterns
  • CHANGELOG.md / releases — current state, breaking changes
  • Examples directory — if present

Extract: package name, purpose, install command, runtime requirements, supported versions, public API, setup steps, test/lint commands.

3. Choose sections

Priority order for packages:

  1. Title + one-line summary — always
  2. Why / what problem — if not obvious from name
  3. Requirements / compatibility — always (versions, extensions, frameworks)
  4. Installation — always (exact command, post-install steps)
  5. Minimal usage example — always (most important section)
  6. Configuration / setup — if config publish, env vars, or registration needed
  7. More examples / common use cases — if API has multiple entry points
  8. Development / testing — for maintainers/contributors
  9. Contributing — if open or team project
  10. License — if applicable

Skip sections that have no real content. Never pad.

4. Write requirements and compatibility

State only what is tested and supported. Pull the values from the package's manifest, not from memory. Examples per stack:

## Requirements (PHP)

- PHP ^8.2
- Laravel 11.x (optional integration)
- ext-json
## Requirements (JS / TS)

- Node.js >= 20
- TypeScript >= 5.4 (for typed consumers)
- npm / pnpm / yarn / bun
## Requirements (Python)

- Python >= 3.11
- pip / poetry / uv
- Optional: `fastapi >= 0.110` for the FastAPI integration
## Requirements (Go)

- Go >= 1.22
## Requirements (Rust)

- Rust >= 1.78 (stable)
- `cargo` workspace member or standalone crate
## Requirements (Ruby)

- Ruby >= 3.2
- Bundler >= 2.5
- Optional: Rails 7.1+ for the Rails integration

Do NOT imply broad compatibility if only tested in a narrow range. Include language version, framework version, required extensions, and services.

5. Write installation that actually works

Document the exact install command and any required follow-up. Use the package manager native to the stack — never edit manifests by hand.

# PHP / Composer
composer require vendor/package
# Optional Laravel integration:
php artisan vendor:publish --tag=package-config
# JS / TS — pick whichever the consumer uses
npm install <package>
pnpm add <package>
yarn add <package>
bun add <package>
# Python
pip install <package>
poetry add <package>
uv add <package>
# Go
go get github.com/<owner>/<package>@latest
# Rust
cargo add <package>
# Ruby
bundle add <package>
# or, for a standalone gem:
gem install <package>

Validate each step against the actual codebase. Include post-install steps (config publish, service / module / provider registration, env vars, codegen, migrations) if the package requires them.

6. Write the minimal working example

This is the most critical section. Rules:

  • Smallest possible working example — one use case, one result
  • Real API calls, not pseudo-code
  • Copy-pasteable without hidden setup
  • Show expected result or effect if helpful
  • Must match the actual package API (verify against source)

Bad: abstract, large, requires unexplained setup. Good: 5-15 lines, directly relevant, immediately runnable.

7. Keep architecture out of README — use reference-split

Move deep content to dedicated docs. Recommended layout for packages:

README.md              ← entry: what, why, install, minimal usage
docs/
  installation.md      ← full install matrix, post-install steps
  usage.md             ← extended examples, common patterns
  architecture.md      ← internal design, decisions
  api.md               ← full API reference
  migration.md         ← version upgrade guides

For multi-platform install (> 5 variants), prefer a single table with deep links over stacked inline blocks. For occasionally-needed detail (long platform quirks, troubleshooting), use <details> — never for install, first example, or requirements.

→ See docs/guidelines/docs/readme-size-and-splitting.md for thresholds, deep-link-table pattern, collapsibles, and anti-patterns (premature splitting, duplication between README and /docs/).

Per-AI catalog pattern (multi-platform AI / CLI packages)

For packages that target many AI assistants or platforms (CLI installers, agent-config tools, language SDKs with 10+ targets), prefer a flat per-AI catalog over a giant matrix. One line per target, install command on the left, aligned trailing comment naming the platform:

npx <package> init --tools=claude-code      # Claude Code
npx <package> init --tools=cursor           # Cursor
npx <package> init --tools=windsurf         # Windsurf
# ... one line per supported target

Pair the catalog with a separate "Global install" subsection (same flags plus --global) and an "Other commands" subsection. Reference example: README.md § Pick specific AIs in this repository — or any well-structured external skill README that lists per-target install commands in a flat catalog.

Use the catalog when the package's primary install action varies by platform; use a matrix table (Tool / Rules / Skills / Commands) for capability comparison. They serve different jobs — install vs. coverage.

README = enough to adopt. Docs = enough to master.

8. Validate links and detect orphans — MANDATORY

For every internal link in the new draft:

  1. Resolve the path. test -f files, test -d directories. Strip #anchor and ?query before the check.
  2. For every anchor link, grep the target for the heading slug.
  3. Build the link-delta vs. the old README — kept / added / dropped. For every dropped target, search the rest of the repo (grep -r over AGENTS.md, docs/, dist/agent-src*/, packages/). No other reference → mark orphan-candidate.

Surface the orphan-candidate list to the user — never delete silently.

9. Validate

  • Install command is correct and complete
  • Compatibility/requirements match the manifest (composer.json, package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, go.mod, *.gemspec) and the CI matrix
  • First example matches real API (verified against source code)
  • All documented commands exist in repo
  • No invented features or capabilities
  • Consumer can get started without reading source code
  • Deep content is in docs, not README (see size guideline)
  • Multi-platform install uses a table, not stacked blocks
  • No duplication between README and /docs/
  • First screen contract — within ~40 lines: name, one-sentence pitch, install command, requirements (or pointer)
  • Banner / badges / hero from Step 0 visual_keep are byte-identical to source
  • Every internal link resolved per Step 8 — zero broken file or anchor links
  • Orphan-candidate list produced even if empty

Output format

  1. Full README draft
  2. Detected package type + audience
  3. Compatibility summary
  4. Link deltakept / added / dropped with orphan-candidates flagged
  5. Evidence ledger (Step 0) so the user can audit assumptions
  6. Uncertainties needing confirmation
  7. Suggested follow-up docs if README would become too large

Gotcha

  • Model writes package READMEs like app READMEs (too much architecture, not enough install/usage)
  • Model tends to invent compatibility claims or setup steps
  • First example is often too large, too abstract, or uses pseudo-code
  • Model over-explains internals before showing how to use the package
  • Existing README may be outdated — verify against the actual manifest (composer.json, package.json, pyproject.toml, Cargo.toml, go.mod, *.gemspec) and source, not the old prose
  • Model forgets post-install steps (config publish, service / module / provider registration, env vars, codegen, migrations) — list whichever the stack requires

Frugality Standards

Apply the Frugality Charter to every package README you author.

Examples in this artifact:

  • Per the charter's default-terse rule, the package README opens with one sentence: what installs, what it does.
  • Per the cite-don't-restate principle, link upstream docs for advanced topics; ship the minimal usage example only.
  • Per the post-action summary suppression, no "What's new" block — that belongs in CHANGELOG.md.

Pre-save self-check:

  1. Does the opening pitch include marketing adjectives?
  2. Is the minimal usage example over 10 lines when 5 would suffice?
  3. Are CI badges shipped without verifying that they resolve?
  4. Does the doc duplicate CHANGELOG content?

Do NOT

  • Do NOT invent package capabilities or compatibility
  • Do NOT skip the minimal working example
  • Do NOT prioritize internal architecture over user onboarding
  • Do NOT document commands not present in the repo
  • Do NOT hide requirements or version constraints
  • Do NOT write a giant example when a 10-line one would do
  • Do NOT overload README with reference material — link to /docs

→ Final prose pass for audience-facing output: humanizer — remove AI-writing tells before delivery.

Skill path
src/skills/readme-writing-package/SKILL.md
Commit SHA
0adf49a8ae84
Repository license
MIT
Data collected