Lean implementation
Implement the smallest safe change that satisfies a confirmed plan while preserving validation, boundaries, and handoff evidence.
Canonical skill profile. This page is generated from the repository contract. The linked
SKILL.mdremains the source of authority.
| Category | Version | Owner |
|---|---|---|
engineering |
0.1.0 |
adaptive-skills |
Jump to
- Overview
- When to use
- When not to use
- Core moves
- Expected output
- Verification
- Handoff signals
- Pairs well with
- Anti-patterns
View the canonical contract on GitHub.
Overview
Use this skill when the intent, scope, and validation target are already clear and the work is ready for a small implementation slice.
The skill keeps implementation lean without weakening safety. It helps the agent avoid broad rewrites, speculative abstractions, hidden policy choices, and unvalidated closure.
When to Use
- a bounded plan or Work Slice is ready for implementation
- the task needs a small code/docs/config change with explicit validation
- the main risk is implementation sprawl, not problem discovery
- the user asks to proceed after planning and the next action is a concrete change
When NOT to Use
- intent, expected behavior, or acceptance criteria are still ambiguous
- the work is primarily debugging; use
debugging - the work is primarily test strategy; use
testing - the work is primarily structural cleanup without behavior change; use
refactoring - architecture, security, accessibility, data integrity, or human approval decisions are unresolved
Core Moves
- Restate the smallest acceptable change and its explicit boundary.
- Inspect the existing pattern before editing.
- Make one coherent change without opportunistic refactors.
- Run the minimum reliable validation and record gaps.
- Handoff what changed, why, evidence, and the next safe step.
Optional Modules
- Contract change guard — Use when the slice changes a public contract, schema, API, policy, or documented behavior. Confirm compatibility, migration notes, and source references before closure.
- Safety exception escalation — Use when the lean path would skip security, accessibility, data integrity, privacy, or human-review obligations. Stop and route to the appropriate review skill or governance surface.
- Observation return — Use when the work is part of AletheIA or another governed harness. Emit a compact result with selected skill, validation evidence, unavailable fields, and boundary notes.
Activation Triggers
- Use contract change guard when another component, user, skill, harness, or document consumes the changed surface.
- Use safety exception escalation when being “lean” would remove validation, review, rollback, accessibility, security, privacy, or data-integrity evidence.
- Use observation return when the implementation should be visible as source-backed execution evidence in AletheIA, Resource Observatory, or a handoff record.
Expected Output
- smallest implemented change
- files or surfaces changed
- validation run and result
- known gaps or unavailable evidence
- compact handoff / observation-compatible summary
Verification
- The change matches the declared scope and does not add unrelated work.
- Existing local patterns were reused before introducing new structure.
- Validation evidence is proportional to risk and explicitly named.
- Safety, accessibility, security, data integrity, and human-review requirements were not weakened.
- Any unavailable evidence is marked
unavailablerather than inferred. - The handoff is sufficient for another reviewer to understand what changed and why.
Handoff Signals
- Intent or acceptance criteria become unclear during implementation.
- The slice requires architecture, security, accessibility, data, or governance review.
- Validation cannot be run or cannot cover the main risk.
- The smallest safe change is larger than the original boundary.
Pairs Well With
workflowtestingdebuggingrefactoringarchitecture-review
Anti-patterns
- Treating “lean” as permission to skip proof.
- Expanding a small slice into broad cleanup.
- Adding abstractions before reuse pressure exists.
- Mixing implementation with unresolved product or governance decisions.
- Claiming a skill can approve, block, close, merge, or deploy work.