Agent skill

Workflow Authoring

by asgeirtj in asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

Reference for writing a Workflow tool script (script API and gotchas, resume, quality patterns, worked examples).

CC0-1.0Auto-check passed

Install Workflow Authoring

skills CLI
$ npx skills add asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks --skill workflow-authoring -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks workflow-authoring --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/Anthropic/claude-code/skills/workflow-authoring .claude/skills/workflow-authoring && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
workflow-authoring
GitHub stars
69k
Token cost
~4.2k tokens
SKILL.md length
2,220 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
124
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
CC0-1.0

At a glance

Reference for writing a Workflow tool script (script API and gotchas, resume, quality patterns, worked examples).

  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Workflow Authoring is an agent skill from asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks. Reference for writing a Workflow tool script (script API and gotchas, resume, quality patterns, worked examples). Load before authoring a script for a workflow the user already opted into; it does not itself authorize running one.

Its SKILL.md is about 4.2k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

The repository describes itself as: Documented system prompts from Anthropic - Claude Fable 5.1, Opus 5.5, Claude Design, Claude Code. OpenAI - ChatGPT GPT-6-Astra, Codex. Google - Gemini 3.8 Flash, 3.1 Pro… The licence is CC0-1.0.

Example prompts

  • “/workflow-authoring”

Requirements

  • Node.js

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit e31ec21. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Workflow Authoring loads about 4.2k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 62 tokens; SKILL.md has 2,220 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~62
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~4.2k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks at commit e31ec21, republished under its CC0-1.0 licence (© asgeirtj). 2,220 words, ~4,225 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/workflow-authoring/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
workflow-authoring
description
Reference for writing a Workflow tool script (script API and gotchas, resume, quality patterns, worked examples). Load before authoring a script for a workflow the user already opted into; it does not itself authorize running one.

Workflow authoring reference

A workflow structures work across many agents — to be comprehensive (decompose and cover in parallel), to be confident (independent perspectives and adversarial checks before committing), or to take on scale one context can't hold (migrations, audits, broad sweeps). The script is where you encode that structure: what fans out, what verifies, what synthesizes.

When you do call it, the right move is often hybrid: scout inline first (list the files, find the channels, scope the diff) to discover the work-list, then call Workflow to pipeline over it. You don't need to know the shape before the task — only before the orchestration step.

Common single-phase workflows you can chain across turns:

  • Understand — parallel readers over relevant subsystems → structured map
  • Design — judge panel of N independent approaches → scored synthesis
  • Review — dimensions → find → adversarially verify (the review-changes example)
  • Research — multi-modal sweep → deep-read → synthesize
  • Migrate — discover sites → transform each (worktree isolation) → verify

For larger work, run several in sequence — read each result before deciding the next phase. You stay in the loop; each workflow is one well-scoped fan-out.

Ultracode. When a system-reminder confirms ultracode is on, that opt-in is standing: author and run a workflow for every substantive task by default. The goal is the most exhaustive, correct answer you can produce — token cost is not a constraint. For multi-phase work (understand → design → implement → review), that often means several workflows in sequence — one per phase — so you stay in the loop between them. The quality patterns below (adversarial verify, multi-modal sweep, completeness critic, loop-until-dry) are the tools; pick what fits the task. Lean toward orchestrating with workflows and adversarially verifying your findings — unless the work is trivial or already verified. Solo only on conversational turns or trivial mechanical edits. When a reminder says ultracode is off, revert to the opt-in rule in the Workflow tool description.

Pass the script inline via script — do not Write it to a file first. Every invocation automatically persists its script to a file under the session directory and returns the path in the tool result. To iterate on a workflow, edit that file with Write/Edit and re-invoke Workflow with {scriptPath: "<path>"} instead of resending the full script.

Every script must begin with export const meta = {...}: export const meta = { name: 'find-flaky-tests', description: 'Find flaky tests and propose fixes', // one-line, shown in permission dialog phases: [ // one entry per phase() call { title: 'Scan', detail: 'grep test logs for retries' }, { title: 'Fix', detail: 'one agent per flaky test' }, ], } // script body starts here — use agent()/parallel()/pipeline()/phase()/log() phase('Scan') const flaky = await agent('grep CI logs for retry markers', {schema: FLAKY_SCHEMA}) ...

The meta object must be a PURE LITERAL — no variables, function calls, spreads, or template interpolation. Required fields: name, description. Optional: whenToUse (shown in the workflow list), phases. Use the SAME phase titles in meta.phases as in phase() calls — titles are matched exactly; a phase() call with no matching meta entry just gets its own progress group.

Script body hooks:

  • agent(prompt: string, opts?: {label?: string, phase?: string, schema?: object, effort?: string, isolation?: 'worktree', agentType?: string}): Promise<any> — spawn a subagent. Without schema, returns its final text as a string. With schema (a JSON Schema), the subagent is forced to call a StructuredOutput tool and agent() returns the validated object — no parsing needed. Returns null if the user skips the agent mid-run or the subagent dies on a terminal API error after retries (filter with .filter(Boolean)). opts.label overrides the display label. opts.phase explicitly assigns this agent to a progress group (use this inside pipeline()/parallel() stages to avoid races on the global phase() state — same phase string → same group box). opts.effort overrides the reasoning effort for this agent call ('low' | 'medium' | 'high' | 'xhigh' | 'max') — omit to inherit the session effort; use 'low' for cheap mechanical stages and higher tiers only for the hardest verify/judge stages. opts.isolation: 'worktree' runs the agent in a fresh git worktree — EXPENSIVE (~200-500ms setup + disk per agent), use ONLY when agents mutate files in parallel and would otherwise conflict; the worktree is auto-removed if unchanged. opts.agentType uses a custom subagent type (e.g. 'general-purpose', 'code-reviewer') instead of the default workflow subagent — resolved from the same registry as the Agent tool; composes with schema (the custom agent's system prompt gets a StructuredOutput instruction appended).
  • pipeline(items, stage1, stage2, ...): Promise<any[]> — run each item through all stages independently, NO barrier between stages. Item A can be in stage 3 while item B is still in stage 1. This is the DEFAULT for multi-stage work. Wall-clock = slowest single-item chain, not sum-of-slowest-per-stage. Every stage callback receives (prevResult, originalItem, index) — use originalItem/index in later stages to label work without threading context through stage 1's return value. A stage that throws drops that item to null and skips its remaining stages.
  • parallel(thunks: Array<() => Promise<any>>): Promise<any[]> — run tasks concurrently. This is a BARRIER: awaits all thunks before returning. A thunk that throws (or whose agent errors) resolves to null in the result array — the call itself never rejects, so .filter(Boolean) before using the results. Use ONLY when you genuinely need all results together.
  • log(message: string): void — emit a progress message to the user (shown as a narrator line above the progress tree)
  • phase(title: string): void — start a new phase; subsequent agent() calls are grouped under this title in the progress display
  • args: any — the value passed as Workflow's args input, verbatim (undefined if not provided). Pass arrays/objects as actual JSON values in the tool call, NOT as a JSON-encoded string — args: ["a.ts", "b.ts"], not args: "[\"a.ts\", ...]" (a stringified list reaches the script as one string, so args.filter/args.map throw). Use this to parameterize named workflows — e.g. pass a research question, target path, or config object directly instead of via a side-channel file.
  • budget: {total: number|null, spent(): number, remaining(): number} — the turn's token target from the user's "+500k"-style directive. budget.total is null if no target was set. budget.spent() returns output tokens spent this turn across the main loop and all workflows — the pool is shared, not per-workflow. budget.remaining() returns max(0, total - spent()), or Infinity if no target. The target is a HARD ceiling, not advisory: once spent() reaches total, further agent() calls throw. Use for dynamic loops: while (budget.total && budget.remaining() > 50_000) { ... }, or static scaling: const FLEET = budget.total ? Math.floor(budget.total / 100_000) : 5.
  • workflow(nameOrRef: string | {scriptPath: string}, args?: any): Promise<any> — run another workflow inline as a sub-step and return whatever it returns. Pass a name to invoke a saved workflow (same registry as {name: "..."}), or {scriptPath} to run a script file you Wrote earlier. The child shares this run's concurrency cap, agent counter, abort signal, and token budget — its agents appear under a "▸ name" group in /workflows and its tokens count toward budget.spent(). The args param becomes the child's args global. Nesting is one level only: workflow() inside a child throws. Throws on unknown name / unreadable scriptPath / child syntax error; catch to handle gracefully.

Subagents are told their final text IS the return value (not a human-facing message), so they return raw data. For structured output, use the schema option — validation happens at the tool-call layer so the model retries on mismatch. Schemas need {type: 'object', properties: {...}} at root and required ⊆ properties; unsatisfiable ones throw at agent().

Workflow agents can reach all session-connected MCP tools via ToolSearch — schemas load on demand per agent. Caveat: interactively-authenticated MCP servers (e.g. claude.ai) may be absent in headless/cron runs.

Subagents get the same CLAUDE.md files injected at start that you did (except built-in agent types that omit them, such as Explore and Plan) — don't tell them to re-read those or paste their rules into the prompt; name the specific rule a stage needs, if any.

Scripts are plain JavaScript, NOT TypeScript — type annotations (: string[]), interfaces, and generics fail to parse. The script body runs in an async context — use await directly. Standard JS built-ins (JSON, Math, Array, etc.) are available — EXCEPT Date.now()/Math.random()/argless new Date(), which throw (they would break resume); pass timestamps in via args, stamp results after the workflow returns, and for randomness vary the agent prompt/label by index. No filesystem or Node.js API access.

DEFAULT TO pipeline(). Only reach for a barrier (parallel between stages) when you genuinely need ALL prior-stage results together.

Show full SKILL.md (876 more words)Show less

A barrier is correct ONLY when stage N needs cross-item context from all of stage N-1:

  • Dedup/merge across the full result set before expensive downstream work
  • Early-exit if the total count is zero ("0 bugs found → skip verification entirely")
  • Stage N's prompt references "the other findings" for comparison

A barrier is NOT justified by:

  • "I need to flatten/map/filter first" — do it inside a pipeline stage: pipeline(items, stageA, r => transform([r]).flat(), stageB)
  • "The stages are conceptually separate" — that's what pipeline() models. Separate stages ≠ synchronized stages.
  • "It's cleaner code" — barrier latency is real. If 5 finders run and the slowest takes 3× the fastest, a barrier wastes 2/3 of the fast finders' idle time.

Smell test: if you wrote const a = await parallel(...) const b = transform(a) // flatten, map, filter — no cross-item dependency const c = await parallel(b.map(...)) that middle transform doesn't need the barrier. Rewrite as a pipeline with the transform inside a stage. When in doubt: pipeline.

Concurrent agent() calls are capped at min(16, available CPUs - 2) per workflow — excess calls queue and run as slots free up. You can still pass 100 items to parallel()/pipeline() and they all complete; only ~10 run at any moment. Total agent count across a workflow's lifetime is capped at 1000 — a runaway-loop backstop set far above any real workflow. A single parallel()/pipeline() call accepts at most 4096 items; passing more is an explicit error, not a silent truncation.

When a barrier IS correct — dedup across all findings before expensive verification: const all = await parallel(DIMENSIONS.map(d => () => agent(d.prompt, {schema: FINDINGS_SCHEMA}))) const deduped = dedupeByFileAndLine(all.filter(Boolean).flatMap(r => r.findings)) // <-- genuinely needs ALL at once const verified = await parallel(deduped.map(f => () => agent(verifyPrompt(f), {schema: VERDICT_SCHEMA})))

Loop-until-count pattern — accumulate to a target: const bugs = [] while (bugs.length < 10) { const result = await agent("Find bugs in this codebase.", {schema: BUGS_SCHEMA}) bugs.push(...result.bugs) log(${bugs.length}/10 found) }

Loop-until-budget pattern — scale depth to the user's "+500k" directive. Guard on budget.total: with no target set, remaining() is Infinity and the loop would run straight to the 1000-agent cap. const bugs = [] while (budget.total && budget.remaining() > 50_000) { const result = await agent("Find bugs in this codebase.", {schema: BUGS_SCHEMA}) bugs.push(...result.bugs) log(${bugs.length} found, ${Math.round(budget.remaining()/1000)}k remaining) }

Composing patterns — exhaustive review (find → dedup vs seen → diverse-lens panel → loop-until-dry): const seen = new Set(), confirmed = [] let dry = 0 while (dry < 2) { // loop-until-dry const found = (await parallel(FINDERS.map(f => () => // barrier: collect all finders this round agent(f.prompt, {phase: 'Find', schema: BUGS})))).filter(Boolean).flatMap(r => r.bugs) const fresh = found.filter(b => !seen.has(key(b))) // dedup vs ALL seen — plain code, not an agent if (!fresh.length) { dry++; continue } dry = 0; fresh.forEach(b => seen.add(key(b))) const judged = await parallel(fresh.map(b => () => // every fresh bug judged concurrently... parallel(['correctness','security','repro'].map(lens => () => // ...each by 3 distinct lenses agent(Judge "${b.desc}" via the ${lens} lens — real?, {phase: 'Verify', schema: VERDICT}))) .then(vs => ({ b, real: vs.filter(Boolean).filter(v => v.real).length >= 2 })))) confirmed.push(...judged.filter(v => v.real).map(v => v.b)) } return confirmed // dedup vs seen, NOT confirmed — else judge-rejected findings reappear every round and it never converges.

Quality patterns — common shapes; pick by task and compose freely:

  • Adversarial verify: spawn N independent skeptics per finding, each prompted to REFUTE. Kill if ≥majority refute. Prevents plausible-but-wrong findings from surviving. const votes = await parallel(Array.from({length: 3}, () => () => agent(Try to refute: ${claim}. Default to refuted=true if uncertain., {schema: VERDICT}))) const survives = votes.filter(Boolean).filter(v => !v.refuted).length >= 2
  • Perspective-diverse verify: when a finding can fail in more than one way, give each verifier a distinct lens (correctness, security, perf, does-it-reproduce) instead of N identical refuters — diversity catches failure modes redundancy can't.
  • Judge panel: generate N independent attempts from different angles (e.g. MVP-first, risk-first, user-first), score with parallel judges, synthesize from the winner while grafting the best ideas from runners-up. Beats one-attempt-iterated when the solution space is wide.
  • Loop-until-dry: for unknown-size discovery (bugs, issues, edge cases), keep spawning finders until K consecutive rounds return nothing new. Simple counters (while count < N) miss the tail.
  • Multi-modal sweep: parallel agents each searching a different way (by-container, by-content, by-entity, by-time). Each is blind to what the others surface; useful when one search angle won't find everything.
  • Completeness critic: a final agent that asks "what's missing — modality not run, claim unverified, source unread?" What it finds becomes the next round of work.
  • No silent caps: if a workflow bounds coverage (top-N, no-retry, sampling), log() what was dropped — silent truncation reads as "covered everything" when it didn't.

Scale to what the user asked for. "find any bugs" → a few finders, single-vote verify. "thoroughly audit this" or "be comprehensive" → larger finder pool, 3–5 vote adversarial pass, synthesis stage. When unsure, lean toward thoroughness for research/review/audit requests and toward brevity for quick checks.

These patterns aren't exhaustive — compose novel harnesses when the task calls for it (tournament brackets, self-repair loops, staged escalation, whatever fits).

Use this tool for multi-step orchestration where control flow should be deterministic (loops, conditionals, fan-out) rather than model-driven.

Resume

The tool result includes a runId. To resume after a pause, kill, or script edit, relaunch with Workflow({scriptPath, resumeFromRunId}) — the longest unchanged prefix of agent() calls returns cached results instantly; the first edited/new call and everything after it runs live. Same script + same args → 100% cache hit. Before diagnosing why a completed workflow returned an empty or unexpected result, Read <transcriptDir>/journal.jsonl — it records each agent's actual return value; do not assume cached results are non-empty. Date.now()/Math.random()/new Date() are unavailable in scripts (they would break this) — stamp results after the workflow returns, or pass timestamps via args. Fallback when no journal is available: Read agent-<id>.jsonl files in the transcript directory and hand-author a continuation script.

© asgeirtj, CC0-1.0. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in Anthropic/claude-code/skills/workflow-authoring of asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit e31ec21

Compare with similar skills

Workflow Authoring next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Workflow Authoring compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Workflow Authoring this skillasgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks69k—~4.2kAutomated safety check: PassCC0-1.0
Reactive Resume Builderreactive-resume/reactive-resume44k—~1.5kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Hermes Agent Skill AuthoringNousResearch/hermes-agent252k—~3.6kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Configuring Oauth2 Authorization Flowmukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills34k—~1.7kAutomated safety check: PassApache-2.0
Authoring Skillsvercel/next.js143k—~1kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Resume Version Managerdavila7/claude-code-templates32k2 repos~2.1kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Reactive Resume Builder

    reactive-resume/reactive-resume

    Builds resumes as valid JSON for the open-source Reactive Resume app by interviewing you, and can track job applications through its MCP tools.

    44k GitHub stars~1.5k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Business, Finance & HRAuto-check passed
  • Hermes Agent Skill Authoring

    NousResearch/hermes-agent

    Author in-repo SKILL.md files: frontmatter and structure. An agent skill from NousResearch/hermes-agent.

    252k GitHub stars~3.6k tokensUpdated today
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed
  • Configuring Oauth2 Authorization Flow

    mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills

    Configures secure OAuth 2.0 authorization flows, including Authorization Code with PKCE, Client Credentials, and Device Authorization Grant, covering flow selection, PKCE implementation, token…

    34k GitHub stars~1.7k tokensUpdated 1 mo ago
    Backend & APIsAuto-check passed
  • Authoring Skills

    vercel/next.js

    Official

    How to create and maintain agent skills in .agents/skills/. An agent skill from vercel/next.js.

    143k GitHub stars~1k tokensUpdated today
    Agent WorkflowsAuto-check passed
  • Resume Version Manager

    davila7/claude-code-templates

    Track different resume versions, maintain a master resume, and manage tailored variants.

    32k GitHub starsUsed in 2 repos~2.1k tokens
    Business, Finance & HRAuto-check passed
  • Abp Authorization

    abpframework/abp

    ABP permission system - PermissionDefinitionProvider, [Authorize] attribute, CheckPolicyAsync, IsGrantedAsync, ICurrentUser, IPermissionManager, multi-tenancy side.

    14k GitHub stars~1.3k tokensUpdated today
    Backend & APIsAuto-check passed

More from asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

All 124 skills in this repo
  • Fleet Manager for Agent Sessions

    asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

    Shows one digest of coding-agent sessions across your connected machines and lets you open, read, steer, approve, stop and close them, over Herdr, tmux or MSP.

    69k GitHub stars~2.5k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Muse Code Product Doctor

    asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

    Diagnoses a Muse Code installation's own failures from binary and session evidence, instead of treating the report as an ordinary repository bug.

    69k GitHub stars~3.5k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • DOCX

    asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

    A skill your agent uses whenever the user wants to create, read, edit, or manipulate Word documents (.docx) or Word templates (.dotx).

    69k GitHub stars~1.9k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Agents Project Coordinator

    asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

    Runs a goal as a project in which the agent coordinates separate agent threads, judging when to split the work, and interviews you first when nothing can be verified.

    69k GitHub stars~2.9k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Muse Plugin Creator

    asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

    Creates and validates a new native Muse plugin package in the current workspace, limited to five capability families, and leaves installation to you.

    69k GitHub stars~1.8k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Deep Research

    asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks

    A skill your agent uses when the user's prompt requires (1) researching a topic across multiple sources, comparing options or alternatives, analyzing trends or history, understanding markets or…

    69k GitHub stars~3.3k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Workflow Authoring

What does Workflow Authoring do?

Reference for writing a Workflow tool script (script API and gotchas, resume, quality patterns, worked examples). Workflow Authoring is an agent skill from asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks. Reference for writing a Workflow tool script (script API and gotchas, resume, quality patterns, worked examples).

How do I install Workflow Authoring in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks --skill workflow-authoring -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (Anthropic/claude-code/skills/workflow-authoring in asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks) into .claude/skills/workflow-authoring in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Workflow Authoring in Codex?

Run `npx skills add asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks --skill workflow-authoring -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (Anthropic/claude-code/skills/workflow-authoring in asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks) into .agents/skills/workflow-authoring in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Workflow Authoring in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks --skill workflow-authoring -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/workflow-authoring, .gemini/skills/workflow-authoring, .github/skills/workflow-authoring and .opencode/skills/workflow-authoring in your project.

What does Workflow Authoring need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Workflow Authoring is instructions for the agent only. Our summary lists: Node.js.

Does Workflow Authoring access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Workflow Authoring safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Workflow Authoring use?

Workflow Authoring is published under the CC0-1.0 licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Workflow Authoring use?

About 4.2k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 17k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Workflow Authoring?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Workflow Authoring: Reactive Resume Builder (reactive-resume/reactive-resume, 44k stars), Hermes Agent Skill Authoring (NousResearch/hermes-agent, 252k stars), Configuring Oauth2 Authorization Flow (mukul975/Anthropic-Cybersecurity-Skills, 34k stars) and Authoring Skills (vercel/next.js, 143k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Workflow Authoring?

asgeirtj (a GitHub user) maintains it in asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks, which has 69,211 GitHub stars. The repository holds 124 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 8, 2026.

Source: asgeirtj/system_prompts_leaks on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.