Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Collaborative programming framework for production-ready development. Use when starting features, writing code, handling security/errors, adding comments, discussing requirements, or encountering knowledge gaps. Applies to all development tasks for clear, safe, maintainable code.
.claude/skills/aiskillstore-agentic-structure/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 4% | 0% |
| case-01 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -8% | 0% |
| case-02 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -16% | 0% |
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -11% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | -34% | 0% |
Agentic Structure is a prompting framework designed to make programming more efficient.
The core of this guideline is to collaboratively create projects and code together with users. Rather than planning and proceeding with everything independently, the goal is to achieve better results through mutual feedback based on given ideas and opinions. Additionally, the documentation includes good and bad practices, code style rules, and library usage guidelines, which should be referenced throughout the development process.
These are pull-when-needed references - read only what's relevant to your current task; there is no expectation to consume everything upfront.
DEVELOPMENT_PROCESS.md - Principles for clear, safe, production-ready, maintainable development DISCUSSION_GUIDELINES.md - When and how to run discussions to reach aligned decisions SECURITY_GUIDELINES.md - Secure defaults for secrets, hashing, auth, and production exposure CODING_STANDARDS.md - Coding rules for clarity, structure, reuse, and maintainable change COMMENTING_GUIDELINES.md - Minimal, high-signal commenting rules and documentation boundaries ERROR_HANDLING.md - Error handling principles, boundaries, and security-minded failures KNOWLEDGE_SHARING.md - Knowledge request protocol for handling information gaps
Use this matrix to determine which guideline(s) to consult for your current task:
| Your Task | Consult These Guidelines | When to Apply | |-----------|-------------------------|---------------| | Starting any feature implementation | DEVELOPMENT_PROCESS.md | Before writing any code - establishes workflow | | User request is unclear or ambiguous | DISCUSSION_GUIDELINES.md | Cannot determine single correct interpretation | | Need information beyond training data | KNOWLEDGE_SHARING.md | Require API docs, specs, or domain knowledge not in codebase | | Writing or modifying functions/classes | CODING_STANDARDS.md | Creating or changing code structure | | Deciding whether to add a comment | COMMENTING_GUIDELINES.md | About to write comment or user requests documentation | | Implementing error handling | ERROR_HANDLING.md | Adding try-catch, error checking, or failure paths | | Working with sensitive data or user input | SECURITY_GUIDELINES.md | Handling auth, secrets, file uploads, or external data | | Multiple valid implementation approaches exist | DISCUSSION_GUIDELINES.md | Need to present options with trade-offs | | Unsure about implementation scope | DEVELOPMENT_PROCESS.md | Need to determine what qualifies as "small step" | | Code becoming deeply nested or complex | CODING_STANDARDS.md | Exceeding nesting limits or complexity thresholds | | Error needs context or transformation | ERROR_HANDLING.md | Deciding how to handle caught exceptions |
When guidelines appear to conflict, apply in this priority order:
If CODING_STANDARDS suggests creating an abstraction but ERROR_HANDLING requires explicit error types for each layer, follow ERROR_HANDLING - create explicit error handling even if it means more code.
Most guidelines are complementary. Apply all relevant guidelines together:
For complete details on each guideline, read the full document. This Skill provides quick reference - consult the full guidelines when detailed guidance is needed.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-03 | fail→pass | 14,957 | 9,659 | -35% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,698 | 2,801 | +4% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→pass | 21,156 | 15,620 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,936 | 2,710 | -8% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→pass | 22,729 | 11,303 | -50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,664 | 2,237 | -16% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 16,704 | 2,670 | -84% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,709 | 1,516 | -11% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 18,857 | 2,919 | -85% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,340 | 1,549 | -34% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 15,405 | 7,704 | -50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,745 | 1,540 | -12% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 13,650 | 2,385 | -83% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,279 | 1,487 | +16% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | 13,895 | 7,646 | -45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,351 | 1,583 | +17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | 14,999 | 13,939 | -7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,340 | 2,807 | +20% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→pass | 6,381 | 9,513 | +49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,022 | 1,812 | +77% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | fail→pass | 8,943 | 9,248 | +3% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,440 | 1,591 | +10% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | 26,994 | 8,975 | -67% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,603 | 1,837 | -49% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | 15,627 | 8,772 | -44% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,533 | 1,722 | +12% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | pass→pass | 19,795 | 6,362 | -68% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,198 | 2,177 | -1% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 11,792 | 9,349 | -21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,725 | 1,666 | -3% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 19,689 | 8,310 | -58% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,339 | 1,516 | -35% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | 17,089 | 8,555 | -50% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,813 | 1,701 | -6% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 16,935 | 3,968 | -77% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,856 | 1,543 | -17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | 16,815 | 3,149 | -81% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,863 | 1,551 | -17% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 11,644 | 14,098 | +21% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,951 | 2,649 | +36% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | pass→pass | 12,732 | 9,122 | -28% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,703 | 2,971 | +74% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 14,098 | 9,623 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,806 | 2,496 | +38% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +73 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.