Universal Creation Framework — Mega-Skill
The meta-pattern beneath all creation: Diverge then converge. Commit resources
progressively as uncertainty decreases. Validate through prototyping before full
commitment. Separate the act of creation from the act of evaluation. This framework
codifies that meta-pattern into a machine-readable format any AI platform can execute.
0. How to Use This Skill
This skill operates as a universal entry point for any creative or technical project.
It does not replace domain expertise — it orchestrates it. The framework:
- Classifies your project type using the decision tree in Section 1.
- Routes to the appropriate domain workflow (Section 3).
- Enforces six universal phases with explicit quality gates (Section 2).
- Adapts depth and formality based on scale, risk, and complexity (Section 1.2).
- Leverages platform-specific capabilities through thin adapter guidance (Section 5).
Platform invocation:
- Claude / Claude Code: Place this file in
.claude/skills/universal-creation-framework/SKILL.md
- OpenAI Codex: Place in
.agents/skills/universal-creation-framework/SKILL.md
- Manus: Paste the relevant section as a natural-language task description
- ChatGPT: Use as a Custom GPT system prompt or upload as a knowledge file
- Gemini / Firebase Studio: Reference as
airules.md or project instructions
- Any platform: Copy the relevant phase and domain section into your system prompt
1. Project Classifier — Entry Point
1.1 Primary Classification (What is the primary output?)
Answer the first applicable question to determine your domain:
| Question |
If YES → Domain |
| Is the primary output running software (app, API, OS, platform, tool)? |
SOFTWARE |
| Is the primary output a physical object (product, building, garment, artwork)? |
PHYSICAL-CREATIVE |
| Does the project require both physical AND digital outputs? |
HYBRID |
| Is the primary output content or media (video, podcast, book, article, course)? |
MEDIA |
| Is the primary output a business system, brand, or service? |
BUSINESS |
| Is the primary output scientific knowledge (research, study, protocol, paper)? |
SCIENTIFIC |
| Is the primary output an event, experience, or personal project? |
EVENTS |
1.2 Secondary Classification (How deep should we go?)
Evaluate three dimensions to determine workflow depth:
Scale:
PERSONAL — Solo creator, no formal governance needed
TEAM — 2–20 people, lightweight coordination required
ENTERPRISE — 20+ people or external stakeholders, full governance required
Risk:
EXPERIMENTAL — Failure is acceptable and informative
LOW — Failure has minor consequences
MEDIUM — Failure has significant but recoverable consequences
HIGH — Failure has major financial, reputational, or safety consequences
SAFETY-CRITICAL — Failure could harm people (medical, aerospace, infrastructure)
Complexity:
LIGHT — Single-phase or single-deliverable work (birthday party, simple blog post)
STANDARD — Multi-phase work with clear dependencies (mobile app, marketing campaign)
DEEP — Multi-team, multi-year, or multi-domain work (operating system, new medicine)
Depth matrix:
| Scale + Risk + Complexity |
Workflow Mode |
| Personal + Experimental/Low + Light |
Express — abbreviated phases, plain language, minimal gates |
| Team + Low/Medium + Standard |
Standard — full phases, structured gates, moderate documentation |
| Enterprise + Medium/High + Deep |
Rigorous — formal reviews, comprehensive QA, full documentation |
| Any + Safety-Critical + Any |
Safety — mandatory external review, FMEA, regulatory compliance |
2. The Six Universal Phases
Every project — from a birthday party to an operating system — follows this structure.
Depth and formality adapt; the structure does not.
Phase 1 — Discovery & Research
Purpose: Understand the problem space before committing to a solution.
Universal activities:
- Define the problem statement in one sentence
- Identify the primary stakeholders and their needs
- Survey the existing landscape (competitors, precedents, prior art)
- Surface key constraints (time, budget, technology, regulation, physics)
- Assess initial feasibility
- Document what success looks like
Domain adaptations:
- Software: Requirements gathering, user research, technical landscape survey
- Physical-Creative: Reference research, cultural/historical context, material feasibility
- Media: Audience analysis, competitive content audit, platform research
- Scientific: Literature review (use Elicit, Semantic Scholar, PubMed), hypothesis formulation
- Business: Market analysis, customer discovery, competitive intelligence
- Events: Vision definition, venue research, stakeholder alignment
Recommended tools by platform:
- Perplexity Deep Research (138M+ papers via Elicit integration)
- Claude with web search for competitive analysis
- Google Scholar, PubMed, ChEMBL for scientific domains
- SimilarWeb, SEMrush for market/content research
Gate 1 — Go/Hold/Kill decision:
| Criterion |
Required for GO |
| Problem statement |
Defined in ≤2 sentences |
| Evidence of viability |
At least 3 supporting data points |
| Initial feasibility |
No blocking constraints identified |
| Key constraints |
Documented |
| Stakeholder alignment |
Primary stakeholder has reviewed |
Phase 2 — Scoping & Planning
Purpose: Define exactly what will be built, how, by whom, and when.
Critical principle: Planning should consume approximately 60–75% of total effort
for optimal outcomes. Premature execution is the single most common cause of project
failure in AI-assisted work. (Source: Addy Osmani's AI-assisted development research)
Universal activities:
- Define scope boundaries (what is IN and explicitly what is OUT)
- Create a work breakdown structure (WBS) with dependencies
- Estimate resources: time, compute, cost, people
- Select the technology/methodology stack
- Identify and document risks with mitigations
- Define "done" criteria for each deliverable
- Establish communication and review cadence
- Create the project timeline with milestones
Domain adaptations:
- Software: Architecture decision records (ADRs), API contracts, data models, security threat model
- Physical-Creative: Material specifications, production timeline, supplier research, safety review
- Hybrid: Synchronization checkpoints where physical and digital streams must align; note that physical components cannot be patched after manufacturing — lock physical decisions earlier
- Scientific: Experimental design, statistical power analysis, IRB/ethics review if human subjects
- Business: Business model canvas, financial projections, go-to-market strategy, legal structure
- Events: Budget breakdown, vendor contracts, contingency plans, run-of-show document
Gate 2 criteria:
| Criterion |
Required for GO |
| Scope document |
Written and approved |
| Architecture/design direction |
Chosen with rationale |
| Resource plan |
In place with contingency |
| Risk register |
Populated with mitigations |
| "Done" definition |
Explicit for each deliverable |
| Timeline |
Created with milestones |
Phase 3 — Design & Prototyping
Purpose: Create tangible proof-of-concept before full resource commitment.
Universal principle: Never commit full resources to an unvalidated concept.
A prototype that fails is a success — it saved you from building the wrong thing.
Universal activities:
- Create the lowest-fidelity prototype that can answer your riskiest question
- Test the prototype against Gate 3 criteria
- Iterate until the concept is validated
- Document design decisions and rationale
- Obtain stakeholder approval before proceeding
Domain adaptations:
- Software: Wireframes → clickable prototype → technical spike → MVP; use Stitch for UI-to-code
- Physical-Creative: Sketches → mood boards → material samples → scale model → pilot piece
- Media: Outline → script → storyboard → pilot episode or sample chapter
- Scientific: Protocol draft → pilot study → statistical validation → peer pre-review
- Business: Business model canvas → landing page test → customer interviews → financial model
- Events: Venue walkthrough → vendor quotes → mock run-of-show
Recommended tools:
- Google Stitch: Text/image to high-fidelity UI in minutes
- Figma + Claude: Design system generation
- Claude Artifacts: Interactive HTML/React prototypes
- Manus: End-to-end prototype generation from description
Gate 3 criteria:
| Criterion |
Required for GO |
| Prototype exists |
Tangible, testable artifact created |
| Riskiest assumption tested |
Evidence gathered |
| Feasibility confirmed |
Within constraints |
| Stakeholder approval |
Obtained |
| Technical risks |
Retired or mitigated |
Phase 4 — Production & Development
Purpose: Full-scale creation with iterative cycles and quality checkpoints.
Universal principle: Work in manageable units with clear dependencies.
Follow the universal "prototype → test → iterate" loop at every scale.
Universal activities:
- Break work into units of ≤2 weeks (sprints, chapters, episodes, batches)
- Implement with continuous integration of feedback
- Conduct milestone reviews at each unit boundary
- Track progress against the plan; escalate deviations early
- Maintain a living artifact tracker (decisions, blockers, progress)
- Enforce mandatory human checkpoints after every 3–4 AI iterations
Domain adaptations:
- Software: Sprint-based development, TDD, code review, CI/CD pipeline; use Claude Code or Codex for implementation, Jules for async bug fixes
- Physical-Creative: Asset production with periodic review; separate AI-as-ideation from AI-as-production; note AI images lack individual layers (use masking workflows); upscale for print resolution
- Media: Asset production → rough cut/draft → review → polish; multi-format adaptation from single source
- Scientific: Data collection → analysis → interpretation → manuscript; enforce reproducibility documentation
- Business: Build → measure → learn cycles; CRM configuration, brand asset production
- Events: Vendor coordination, logistics execution, rehearsals
Context engineering for long production phases:
- Use compaction when context window approaches limit (summarize + reinitiate)
- Use structured note-taking (NOTES.md or artifact-tracker) for persistent state
- Use sub-agent delegation for deep exploration tasks (each sub-agent returns 1,000–2,000 token summary)
- Enforce just-in-time retrieval — maintain file paths and queries, not full content in context
Gate 4 criteria:
| Criterion |
Required for GO |
| Milestone reviews |
All passed |
| Quality checkpoints |
Met per domain QA standards |
| Scope adherence |
Within approved boundaries |
| Artifact tracker |
Up to date |
| Human review |
Completed at each 3–4 AI iteration threshold |
Phase 5 — Testing & Validation
Purpose: Domain-appropriate quality assurance before release.
Four-layer QA architecture:
Layer 1 — Deterministic validation (run first, no AI tokens consumed):
- Software: Compile, lint, type-check, unit tests, integration tests, security scan, accessibility audit
- Content: Plagiarism check, readability score, fact extraction, brand compliance
- Design: WCAG compliance, responsive layout verification, print resolution check
- Science: Statistical tests, data integrity checks, reproducibility verification
- Physical: Dimensional tolerance check, material compatibility, safety compliance
Layer 2 — AI-as-judge evaluation (semantic quality):
Score each output 1–5 on these seven dimensions:
- Accuracy/Faithfulness — Does it correctly represent facts and sources?
- Relevance — Does it address the actual need?
- Completeness — Are all required elements present?
- Coherence — Is it internally consistent and logically structured?
- Originality — Does it add genuine value beyond recombination?
- Bias/Fairness — Are perspectives balanced and assumptions examined?
- Actionability — Can the intended audience act on this?
Minimum acceptable score: 4/5 on Accuracy, 3/5 on all others.
Layer 3 — Human review at gates (ConSiDERS framework):
- Consistency: Same criteria applied across all outputs
- Scoring criteria: Explicit rubric shared with reviewers
- Differentiating: Rubric distinguishes good from excellent
- Ethical considerations: Bias, privacy, safety reviewed
- Reproducibility: Another reviewer would reach same conclusion
- Scalability: Review process can handle volume
Layer 4 — Continuous monitoring (post-launch):
- Track drift, performance degradation, and anomalies
- Mandatory human review after 3–4 AI iterations without intervention
- Domain-specific: A/B testing for software/media, citation provenance for science, brand compliance for business
Gate 5 criteria:
| Criterion |
Required for GO |
| Layer 1 validation |
All checks pass |
| Layer 2 AI scoring |
Meets minimum thresholds |
| Layer 3 human review |
Completed per ConSiDERS |
| User acceptance |
Validated with target users |
| Compliance |
All regulatory requirements met |
| Blocking defects |
Zero |
Phase 6 — Launch & Iteration
Purpose: Release, monitor, and feed learnings back into the system.
Universal activities:
- Execute the launch/release/publication/deployment plan
- Activate monitoring and feedback collection
- Conduct post-launch retrospective (within 2 weeks)
- Prioritize iteration backlog based on observed outcomes
- Update this SKILL.md based on observed failures — treat skills as living code
Domain adaptations:
- Software: Phased rollout, feature flags, error monitoring, performance dashboards
- Physical-Creative: Exhibition, publication, distribution; document production notes for future runs
- Media: Multi-platform distribution, SEO optimization, analytics tracking, audience feedback
- Scientific: Peer review submission, preprint posting, data/code release, replication invitation
- Business: Go-to-market execution, PR/communications, customer onboarding, KPI tracking
- Events: Day-of execution, post-event survey, vendor debrief, documentation for next edition
Skill improvement protocol (after every project):
- List every instruction in this SKILL.md that the AI followed correctly without being told
- Remove those instructions (the model no longer needs them)
- List every failure mode observed
- Add specific instructions to prevent those failures
- Test the updated skill with a fresh AI instance before deploying
Gate 6 criteria:
| Criterion |
Required for CLOSE |
| Launch checklist |
Complete |
| Monitoring |
Active |
| Stakeholder sign-off |
Obtained |
| Retrospective |
Completed |
| Iteration backlog |
Prioritized |
| Skill updated |
Based on retrospective findings |
3. Domain Skill Modules
3.1 SOFTWARE — Apps, APIs, Platforms, Operating Systems, Tools
When to use: Primary output is running code. Includes: mobile apps, web apps, APIs, CLIs, operating systems, compilers, databases, developer tools, AI agents, automation workflows.
Phase adaptations:
- Phase 1: User stories, technical landscape, security threat model
- Phase 2: Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), API contracts, data models, test strategy
- Phase 3: Wireframes → technical spike → MVP; validate with real users
- Phase 4: TDD, code review, CI/CD, sprint ceremonies
- Phase 5: Automated test suite, security scan, performance benchmarks, accessibility audit
- Phase 6: Phased rollout, feature flags, SLOs, runbook
Quality criteria:
- All tests passing (unit, integration, e2e)
- No critical/high security vulnerabilities (OWASP Top 10)
- Code review approval from qualified reviewer
- Performance benchmarks met (define specific thresholds)
- Accessibility: WCAG 2.1 AA minimum
- Documentation: README, API docs, architecture diagram
Recommended tools:
- Implementation: Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, Cursor, Windsurf
- Async tasks: Google Jules (up to 60 concurrent on Ultra tier)
- Research: Perplexity for technology decisions
- Design: Google Stitch for UI generation
- Backend: Firebase Studio, Google Cloud Run
- Testing: Claude Code for test generation, Jules for bug fixes
Anti-patterns:
- Starting implementation before architecture is documented
- Skipping the test strategy in Phase 2
- Using AI to generate tests without reviewing them
- Deploying without monitoring in place
- Treating AI-generated code as reviewed code
Common deliverables by phase:
- PRD, user stories, technical landscape doc
- Architecture diagram, ADRs, data model, API spec, test plan
- Wireframes, technical spike, MVP
- Working software with tests, CI/CD pipeline
- Test report, security audit, performance report
- Deployed application, runbook, monitoring dashboard
3.2 PHYSICAL-CREATIVE — Art, Architecture, Products, Fashion, Industrial Design
When to use: Primary output is a physical object or experience. Includes: paintings, sculptures, buildings, furniture, clothing, jewelry, vehicles, consumer products, packaging.
Critical asymmetry: Physical components cannot be "patched" after production. Lock physical design decisions earlier than digital ones. Material selection, structural decisions, and manufacturing tolerances must be finalized before production begins.
Phase adaptations:
- Phase 1: Reference research (historical, cultural, material), mood boards, constraint mapping
- Phase 2: Material specifications, production timeline, supplier research, safety/regulatory review
- Phase 3: Sketches → CAD/technical drawings → material samples → scale model → pilot piece
- Phase 4: Production with periodic quality checks; separate AI-as-ideation from AI-as-production
- Phase 5: Dimensional tolerance, material compatibility, safety compliance, user testing
- Phase 6: Exhibition/distribution, documentation, production notes for future runs
AI-specific notes:
- AI-generated images lack individual layers — use masking workflows for production
- Upscale to minimum 300 DPI for print production
- Use AI for ideation and reference generation, not final production files
- Physical safety standards vary by domain — always verify with domain expert
Quality criteria:
- Dimensional tolerances within specification
- Material compatibility verified
- Safety compliance documented
- Prototype user-tested
- Production documentation complete
3.3 HYBRID — Physical + Digital Products
When to use: Project requires both physical and digital deliverables that must work together. Includes: board games with apps, illustrated books with AR, smart home devices, wearables, interactive installations.
Critical principle: Establish explicit synchronization checkpoints where physical and digital streams must align. Physical decisions must be locked before digital work that depends on them can proceed.
Synchronization checkpoints:
- After Phase 2: Physical specs locked → digital team can begin dependent work
- After Phase 3: Physical prototype validated → digital prototype can reference real dimensions
- After Phase 4: Physical production complete → digital integration testing can begin
- After Phase 5: Both streams validated → combined user testing
Anti-patterns:
- Letting digital work proceed on assumptions about physical specs
- Discovering physical/digital incompatibility in Phase 5
- Not documenting which decisions are physical-locked vs. digital-flexible
3.4 MEDIA — Content, Video, Podcast, Books, Courses, Social
When to use: Primary output is content consumed by an audience. Includes: YouTube videos, podcasts, books, articles, courses, social media campaigns, newsletters, films, music.
Unique capability: Multi-format adaptation from single source content. One well-structured piece of content can become: long-form article, video script, social posts, newsletter, podcast outline, slide deck.
Platform-specific formatting rules:
- YouTube: SEO-optimized title/description, chapters at 10-min intervals, thumbnail A/B test
- TikTok/Reels: Hook within first 3 seconds, vertical format, captions mandatory
- Instagram: Carousel for depth, single image for emotion, hashtag strategy (5–10 relevant)
- Podcast: RSS-ready, transcription for SEO, show notes with timestamps
- Newsletter: Subject line A/B test, preview text optimization, plain-text fallback
- LinkedIn: Professional tone, data-backed claims, engagement question at end
Quality criteria:
- Readability score appropriate for target audience
- Fact claims verified with sources
- Brand voice consistency score ≥ 4/5
- Platform format requirements met
- Engagement metrics baseline established
3.5 SCIENTIFIC — Research, Engineering, Medicine, Technology Standards
When to use: Primary output is new knowledge, validated protocols, or technology standards. Includes: academic papers, clinical trials, engineering specifications, coding language design, protocol standards.
Epistemic rigor requirements:
- Distinguish AI prediction from AI understanding in all outputs
- Require provenance tracking for all factual claims
- Mandate reproducibility documentation
- Never present AI-generated hypotheses as validated findings
Phase adaptations:
- Phase 1: Literature review via Elicit (138M+ papers), hypothesis formulation, gap analysis
- Phase 2: Experimental design, statistical power analysis, IRB/ethics review, pre-registration
- Phase 3: Pilot study, protocol validation, instrument calibration
- Phase 4: Data collection, analysis, interpretation; enforce lab notebook discipline
- Phase 5: Statistical validation, peer pre-review, reproducibility check, citation audit
- Phase 6: Peer review submission, preprint, data/code release, replication invitation
Quality criteria:
- All claims traceable to primary sources
- Statistical methods appropriate and pre-specified
- Reproducibility package (data + code + environment) complete
- Peer pre-review completed
- Conflicts of interest disclosed
3.6 BUSINESS — Ventures, Brands, Services, Operations
When to use: Primary output is a business system, brand identity, or service design. Includes: startups, brand development, service design, marketing systems, operational workflows, SaaS platforms.
Phase adaptations:
- Phase 1: Market analysis, customer discovery, competitive intelligence, regulatory landscape
- Phase 2: Business model canvas, financial projections, legal structure, go-to-market strategy
- Phase 3: Landing page test, customer interviews, financial model validation, brand prototype
- Phase 4: Build → measure → learn cycles; CRM configuration, brand asset production
- Phase 5: Market validation, financial model stress test, brand compliance audit
- Phase 6: Go-to-market execution, PR/communications, customer onboarding, KPI tracking
Quality criteria:
- Business model validated with real customer conversations
- Financial model stress-tested with pessimistic scenarios
- Legal structure reviewed by qualified counsel
- Brand identity consistent across all touchpoints
- Data privacy compliance documented (GDPR, CCPA as applicable)
3.7 EVENTS — Events, Experiences, Personal Projects
When to use: Primary output is an event, experience, or personal project. Includes: conferences, weddings, exhibitions, travel, personal development projects.
Workflow mode: Express or Standard (rarely Rigorous). Use plain language, template-driven approaches, and simplified gates.
Phase adaptations:
- Phase 1: Vision definition, venue research, stakeholder alignment, budget envelope
- Phase 2: Budget breakdown, vendor shortlist, timeline, contingency plans
- Phase 3: Venue walkthrough, vendor quotes, mock run-of-show
- Phase 4: Vendor coordination, logistics execution, rehearsals
- Phase 5: Dress rehearsal, contingency review, day-of checklist
- Phase 6: Day-of execution, post-event survey, vendor debrief
Human judgment is irreplaceable for: taste, atmosphere, interpersonal dynamics, and crisis management.
4. Context Engineering Principles
These principles apply to ALL platforms and ALL domains. They determine how effectively
the AI uses its finite attention budget.
4.1 Minimal High-Signal Context
Never load instructions the AI already knows. Each skill encodes only domain-specific
procedural knowledge the model wouldn't know otherwise.
- Project facts → CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / project instructions (always loaded)
- Specialized workflows → skills (loaded on demand)
- Reference material → separate files (loaded only when explicitly needed)
4.2 Just-in-Time Retrieval
Maintain lightweight identifiers (file paths, search queries, URLs) and use tools to
dynamically load data at runtime. Never front-load all project context.
# Good: reference, don't embed
See: ./references/api-spec.yaml
Run: grep -r "authentication" ./src
# Bad: paste entire files into context
[3,000 lines of API spec pasted here]
4.3 Structured Note-Taking for Long-Horizon Tasks
Maintain a persistent NOTES.md or artifact-tracker outside the context window:
# Project State — [Project Name]
Last updated: [date]
## Current phase: [phase name]
## Completed: [list]
## In progress: [list]
## Blocked: [list with blockers]
## Key decisions: [ADRs or equivalent]
## Next actions: [prioritized list]
4.4 Sub-Agent Delegation
For deep exploration tasks, fork to sub-agents with clean context windows.
Each sub-agent may use tens of thousands of tokens internally but returns
a condensed summary of 1,000–2,000 tokens to the main agent.
4.5 Compaction for Long Sessions
When context window approaches limit:
- Pass message history to model for summarization
- Preserve: architectural decisions, unresolved issues, implementation details
- Discard: redundant tool outputs, superseded drafts, raw search results
- Reinitiate with compressed context + 5 most recently accessed files
4.6 The 3–4 Iteration Rule
Research shows diminishing returns and compounding error risk after 3–4 AI iterations
without human intervention. Enforce mandatory human checkpoints at this threshold.
4.7 Start Minimal, Add Based on Failures
"Start by testing a minimal prompt with the best model available to see how it performs
on your task, and then add clear instructions and examples to improve performance based
on failure modes found during initial testing." — Anthropic Engineering
Never add instructions preemptively. Add them only when you observe a specific failure.
5. Platform-Specific Guidance
5.1 Claude / Claude Code
Skill location: .claude/skills/universal-creation-framework/SKILL.md
Always-loaded context: CLAUDE.md (project conventions)
Context budget: First 5,000 tokens per skill within 25,000-token combined budget after compaction
Unique strengths: Extended thinking, XML-structured instructions, richest MCP ecosystem, Artifacts for interactive outputs
Invocation: Skills auto-activate based on description match; explicit invocation via /skill-name
Best for: Complex reasoning, nuanced writing, multi-step research, interactive prototypes
# CLAUDE.md template for this framework
project: [name]
domain: [SOFTWARE|PHYSICAL|HYBRID|MEDIA|SCIENTIFIC|BUSINESS|EVENTS]
phase: [1-6]
scale: [PERSONAL|TEAM|ENTERPRISE]
risk: [EXPERIMENTAL|LOW|MEDIUM|HIGH|SAFETY-CRITICAL]
complexity: [LIGHT|STANDARD|DEEP]
artifact_tracker: ./NOTES.md
5.2 OpenAI Codex
Skill location: .agents/skills/universal-creation-framework/SKILL.md
Invocation: Explicit via $universal-creation-framework syntax
Unique strengths: Cloud-based parallel execution, two-phase sandbox (network during setup, offline during execution), Automations for scheduled work
Parallel tasks: Up to 60 concurrent on appropriate tier
Best for: Autonomous coding tasks, parallel test generation, scheduled background work
# .agents/skills/universal-creation-framework/agents/openai.yaml
name: universal-creation-framework
description: Universal project lifecycle framework for all domains
invocation: explicit
parallel: true
sandbox: isolated
5.3 Google Ecosystem
Chain: Stitch (design) → Firebase Studio / Antigravity (development) → Firebase (backend) → Cloud Run (production)
Jules: Async coding tasks via GitHub integration, up to 60 concurrent tasks
Gemini: 1M+ token context window enables loading entire codebases
Stitch adapter: .stitch/DESIGN.md stores design system tokens
Firebase adapter: airules.md configures Firebase Studio behavior
Best for: Full-stack Google Cloud projects, large codebase analysis, parallel async development
5.4 ChatGPT / Custom GPTs
Mapping: Core instructions → GPT system prompt; domain skills → uploadable knowledge files
Canvas: Use for visual code/writing collaboration
Best for: Consumer-facing applications, broad accessibility, GPT Store distribution
5.5 Manus
Mapping: Natural-language task descriptions (no file-based skill system)
Unique strengths: Highest-autonomy tier — plans, executes, and delivers end-to-end without intervention
Best for: Complete project execution from description, multi-agent orchestration
Manus task template:
Project: [name]
Domain: [domain]
Phase: [current phase]
Context: [brief project state]
Task: [specific deliverable needed]
Quality criteria: [from Phase N gate]
Constraints: [time, budget, technical]
5.6 Perplexity
Role in framework: Primary research engine for Phase 1 (Discovery)
Deep Research: Synthesizes 138M+ papers via Elicit integration
Best for: Literature review, competitive analysis, technology research, fact verification
5.7 Apple Xcode + Claude Agent SDK
Integration: Xcode 26.3+ exposes capabilities via MCP
Agent SDK phases: Gather Context → Plan → Execute → Verify (mirrors framework phases)
Best for: Native iOS/macOS development with AI assistance
6. The Interoperability Stack
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ SKILLS LAYER │
│ What to do — domain workflows, phase gates, QA │
│ (This document + domain sub-skills) │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ MCP LAYER │
│ Tool access — GitHub, Figma, Jira, databases, │
│ cloud services, any API (10,000+ MCP servers) │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ A2A LAYER │
│ Agent collaboration — multi-agent orchestration │
│ Agent Cards at /.well-known/agent.json │
│ (150+ organizations including Adobe, SAP, SF) │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
Skills + MCP + A2A = Complete stack:
- Skills define WHAT to do
- MCP provides TOOL ACCESS
- A2A enables AGENT COLLABORATION
7. Quality Assurance Checklists
Universal Pre-Launch Checklist
Skill Improvement Checklist (post-project)
8. Prompt Templates
Project Kickoff Template
I'm starting a new project. Please activate the Universal Creation Framework.
Project name: [name]
One-sentence description: [description]
Primary output type: [software/physical/media/scientific/business/events/hybrid]
Scale: [personal/team/enterprise]
Risk level: [experimental/low/medium/high/safety-critical]
Timeline: [duration]
Key constraints: [list]
Please:
1. Confirm the domain classification
2. Identify the appropriate workflow depth (Express/Standard/Rigorous/Safety)
3. Run Phase 1 — Discovery & Research
4. Present Gate 1 criteria and ask for confirmation before proceeding
Phase Transition Template
We are completing Phase [N] of the Universal Creation Framework.
Project: [name]
Domain: [domain]
Current phase output: [brief summary]
Please:
1. Evaluate Gate [N] criteria (list each criterion and status)
2. Identify any criteria not yet met
3. Recommend: GO / HOLD / KILL with rationale
4. If GO: outline Phase [N+1] plan
QA Evaluation Template
Please evaluate the following output using the Universal Creation Framework QA system.
Output type: [type]
Domain: [domain]
Output: [paste output or reference file]
Evaluate:
1. Layer 1: List all deterministic checks applicable to this output type
2. Layer 2: Score 1-5 on each of the 7 dimensions with specific evidence
3. Layer 3: Identify what human review is needed per ConSiDERS
4. Overall recommendation: PASS / REVISE / REJECT with specific improvements
Skill Update Template
Post-project retrospective for Universal Creation Framework skill update.
Project completed: [name]
Domain: [domain]
Duration: [duration]
Please analyze:
1. Which framework instructions did the AI follow correctly without being told? (candidates for removal)
2. What failure modes were observed? (candidates for new instructions)
3. Which gate criteria were most/least useful?
4. What domain-specific patterns should be added?
5. Draft the specific SKILL.md edits needed
9. Anti-Patterns (Universal)
These failure modes appear across all domains and all platforms:
| Anti-Pattern |
Consequence |
Prevention |
| Premature execution (skipping Phase 2) |
Building the wrong thing |
Enforce 60-75% planning effort rule |
| Context bloat |
Degraded AI performance |
Progressive disclosure; just-in-time retrieval |
| No human checkpoints |
Compounding errors |
Mandatory review after 3-4 AI iterations |
| Vague "done" criteria |
Endless scope creep |
Define explicit Gate criteria before starting |
| Treating AI output as reviewed output |
Quality failures |
Layer 1+2+3 QA before any gate transition |
| Single-agent for deep exploration |
Context pollution |
Sub-agent delegation with summary returns |
| Static skills |
Skill obsolescence |
Post-project retrospective + skill update |
| Physical/digital sync failure (Hybrid) |
Manufacturing defects |
Lock physical specs before digital work proceeds |
| Front-loading all context |
Attention budget waste |
Maintain references, not content, in context |
| Adding instructions preemptively |
Brittle prompts |
Add only based on observed failures |
10. Future-Proofing Mechanisms
This framework is designed to evolve. Three mechanisms ensure longevity:
New domains: Create a new SKILL.md in domains/ and update the project classifier.
No existing skills need modification. New skills add only ~100 tokens of metadata overhead.
Platform changes: Absorbed by the adapter layer (Section 5). When a new AI platform
emerges, add a thin adapter. Core skills remain unchanged.
Model improvements: Following Anthropic's guidance — "harnesses should be frequently
questioned as models improve." Run the Skill Improvement Checklist after every project.
Remove instructions the model follows correctly without being told. The framework gets
leaner and more powerful over time.
References
- Anthropic Engineering. "Effective Context Engineering for AI Agents." Sep 29, 2025. https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/effective-context-engineering-for-ai-agents
- Anthropic. "Claude Skills." https://claude.com/skills
- Anthropic. "Configuration and Multi-File Skills." https://claude.com/resources/tutorials/configuration-and-multi-file-skills
- OpenAI. "Codex Best Practices." https://developers.openai.com/codex/learn/best-practices
- OpenAI. "Codex Skills." https://developers.openai.com/codex/skills
- Google Labs. "Stitch Skills." https://github.com/google-labs-code/stitch-skills
- travisvn. "Awesome Claude Skills." https://github.com/travisvn/awesome-claude-skills (11.3k stars)
- Anthropic. "The Complete Guide to Building Skills for Claude." https://resources.anthropic.com/hubfs/The-Complete-Guide-to-Building-Skill-for-Claude.pdf
- Cooper, R.G. "Stage-Gate® New Product Development Process." Product Development Institute.
- Osmani, A. "AI-Assisted Development Research." (Planning = 60-75% of effort finding)
- ACL 2024. "ConSiDERS-The-Human Framework for Human Evaluation."
- Linux Foundation. "Agentic AI Foundation — MCP and A2A Standards."
- Google. "Agent-to-Agent (A2A) Protocol v0.3." April 2025.
- McKinsey. "Rule-based workflow engines outperform letting AI decide 'what comes next'."
1---2name: universal-creation-framework3description: Activates for ANY project involving research, design, development, or creation across all domains and all AI platforms. Routes to the appropriate domain workflow (software, physical-creative, hybrid, media, business, events, or scientific) and manages the full lifecycle from discovery through deployment and iteration. Use this skill when starting any new project, when unclear which workflow to follow, or when a project spans multiple domains. Compatible with: Manus, Claude, Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, ChatGPT, Gemini, Gemini Code Assist, Google Stitch, Google Jules, Google Firebase Studio, Google Vertex AI, Google AI Edge, Google Antigravity, Perplexity, Cursor, Windsurf, VS Code Copilot, JetBrains AI, and any MCP-compatible agent.4license: MIT5---6
7# Universal Creation Framework — Mega-Skill
8
9> **The meta-pattern beneath all creation:** Diverge then converge. Commit resources
10> progressively as uncertainty decreases. Validate through prototyping before full
11> commitment. Separate the act of creation from the act of evaluation. This framework
12> codifies that meta-pattern into a machine-readable format any AI platform can execute.
13
14---
15
16## 0. How to Use This Skill
17
18This skill operates as a **universal entry point** for any creative or technical project.
19It does not replace domain expertise — it orchestrates it. The framework:
20
211. **Classifies** your project type using the decision tree in Section 1.
222. **Routes** to the appropriate domain workflow (Section 3).
233. **Enforces** six universal phases with explicit quality gates (Section 2).
244. **Adapts** depth and formality based on scale, risk, and complexity (Section 1.2).
255. **Leverages** platform-specific capabilities through thin adapter guidance (Section 5).
26
27**Platform invocation:**
28- Claude / Claude Code: Place this file in `.claude/skills/universal-creation-framework/SKILL.md`
29- OpenAI Codex: Place in `.agents/skills/universal-creation-framework/SKILL.md`
30- Manus: Paste the relevant section as a natural-language task description
31- ChatGPT: Use as a Custom GPT system prompt or upload as a knowledge file
32- Gemini / Firebase Studio: Reference as `airules.md` or project instructions
33- Any platform: Copy the relevant phase and domain section into your system prompt
34
35---
36
37## 1. Project Classifier — Entry Point
38
39### 1.1 Primary Classification (What is the primary output?)
40
41Answer the first applicable question to determine your domain:
42
43| Question | If YES → Domain |
44|---|---|
45| Is the primary output **running software** (app, API, OS, platform, tool)? | `SOFTWARE` |
46| Is the primary output a **physical object** (product, building, garment, artwork)? | `PHYSICAL-CREATIVE` |
47| Does the project require **both physical AND digital** outputs? | `HYBRID` |
48| Is the primary output **content or media** (video, podcast, book, article, course)? | `MEDIA` |
49| Is the primary output a **business system, brand, or service**? | `BUSINESS` |
50| Is the primary output **scientific knowledge** (research, study, protocol, paper)? | `SCIENTIFIC` |
51| Is the primary output an **event, experience, or personal project**? | `EVENTS` |
52
53### 1.2 Secondary Classification (How deep should we go?)
54
55Evaluate three dimensions to determine workflow depth:
56
57**Scale:**
58- `PERSONAL` — Solo creator, no formal governance needed
59- `TEAM` — 2–20 people, lightweight coordination required
60- `ENTERPRISE` — 20+ people or external stakeholders, full governance required
61
62**Risk:**
63- `EXPERIMENTAL` — Failure is acceptable and informative
64- `LOW` — Failure has minor consequences
65- `MEDIUM` — Failure has significant but recoverable consequences
66- `HIGH` — Failure has major financial, reputational, or safety consequences
67- `SAFETY-CRITICAL` — Failure could harm people (medical, aerospace, infrastructure)
68
69**Complexity:**
70- `LIGHT` — Single-phase or single-deliverable work (birthday party, simple blog post)
71- `STANDARD` — Multi-phase work with clear dependencies (mobile app, marketing campaign)
72- `DEEP` — Multi-team, multi-year, or multi-domain work (operating system, new medicine)
73
74**Depth matrix:**
75
76| Scale + Risk + Complexity | Workflow Mode |
77|---|---|
78| Personal + Experimental/Low + Light | **Express** — abbreviated phases, plain language, minimal gates |
79| Team + Low/Medium + Standard | **Standard** — full phases, structured gates, moderate documentation |
80| Enterprise + Medium/High + Deep | **Rigorous** — formal reviews, comprehensive QA, full documentation |
81| Any + Safety-Critical + Any | **Safety** — mandatory external review, FMEA, regulatory compliance |
82
83---
84
85## 2. The Six Universal Phases
86
87Every project — from a birthday party to an operating system — follows this structure.
88Depth and formality adapt; the structure does not.
89
90---
91
92### Phase 1 — Discovery & Research
93
94**Purpose:** Understand the problem space before committing to a solution.
95
96**Universal activities:**
97- Define the problem statement in one sentence
98- Identify the primary stakeholders and their needs
99- Survey the existing landscape (competitors, precedents, prior art)
100- Surface key constraints (time, budget, technology, regulation, physics)
101- Assess initial feasibility
102- Document what success looks like
103
104**Domain adaptations:**
105- Software: Requirements gathering, user research, technical landscape survey
106- Physical-Creative: Reference research, cultural/historical context, material feasibility
107- Media: Audience analysis, competitive content audit, platform research
108- Scientific: Literature review (use Elicit, Semantic Scholar, PubMed), hypothesis formulation
109- Business: Market analysis, customer discovery, competitive intelligence
110- Events: Vision definition, venue research, stakeholder alignment
111
112**Recommended tools by platform:**
113- Perplexity Deep Research (138M+ papers via Elicit integration)
114- Claude with web search for competitive analysis
115- Google Scholar, PubMed, ChEMBL for scientific domains
116- SimilarWeb, SEMrush for market/content research
117
118**Gate 1 — Go/Hold/Kill decision:**
119
120| Criterion | Required for GO |
121|---|---|
122| Problem statement | Defined in ≤2 sentences |
123| Evidence of viability | At least 3 supporting data points |
124| Initial feasibility | No blocking constraints identified |
125| Key constraints | Documented |
126| Stakeholder alignment | Primary stakeholder has reviewed |
127
128---
129
130### Phase 2 — Scoping & Planning
131
132**Purpose:** Define exactly what will be built, how, by whom, and when.
133
134> **Critical principle:** Planning should consume approximately **60–75% of total effort**
135> for optimal outcomes. Premature execution is the single most common cause of project
136> failure in AI-assisted work. (Source: Addy Osmani's AI-assisted development research)
137
138**Universal activities:**
139- Define scope boundaries (what is IN and explicitly what is OUT)
140- Create a work breakdown structure (WBS) with dependencies
141- Estimate resources: time, compute, cost, people
142- Select the technology/methodology stack
143- Identify and document risks with mitigations
144- Define "done" criteria for each deliverable
145- Establish communication and review cadence
146- Create the project timeline with milestones
147
148**Domain adaptations:**
149- Software: Architecture decision records (ADRs), API contracts, data models, security threat model
150- Physical-Creative: Material specifications, production timeline, supplier research, safety review
151- Hybrid: Synchronization checkpoints where physical and digital streams must align; note that **physical components cannot be patched after manufacturing** — lock physical decisions earlier
152- Scientific: Experimental design, statistical power analysis, IRB/ethics review if human subjects
153- Business: Business model canvas, financial projections, go-to-market strategy, legal structure
154- Events: Budget breakdown, vendor contracts, contingency plans, run-of-show document
155
156**Gate 2 criteria:**
157
158| Criterion | Required for GO |
159|---|---|
160| Scope document | Written and approved |
161| Architecture/design direction | Chosen with rationale |
162| Resource plan | In place with contingency |
163| Risk register | Populated with mitigations |
164| "Done" definition | Explicit for each deliverable |
165| Timeline | Created with milestones |
166
167---
168
169### Phase 3 — Design & Prototyping
170
171**Purpose:** Create tangible proof-of-concept before full resource commitment.
172
173**Universal principle:** Never commit full resources to an unvalidated concept.
174A prototype that fails is a success — it saved you from building the wrong thing.
175
176**Universal activities:**
177- Create the lowest-fidelity prototype that can answer your riskiest question
178- Test the prototype against Gate 3 criteria
179- Iterate until the concept is validated
180- Document design decisions and rationale
181- Obtain stakeholder approval before proceeding
182
183**Domain adaptations:**
184- Software: Wireframes → clickable prototype → technical spike → MVP; use Stitch for UI-to-code
185- Physical-Creative: Sketches → mood boards → material samples → scale model → pilot piece
186- Media: Outline → script → storyboard → pilot episode or sample chapter
187- Scientific: Protocol draft → pilot study → statistical validation → peer pre-review
188- Business: Business model canvas → landing page test → customer interviews → financial model
189- Events: Venue walkthrough → vendor quotes → mock run-of-show
190
191**Recommended tools:**
192- Google Stitch: Text/image to high-fidelity UI in minutes
193- Figma + Claude: Design system generation
194- Claude Artifacts: Interactive HTML/React prototypes
195- Manus: End-to-end prototype generation from description
196
197**Gate 3 criteria:**
198
199| Criterion | Required for GO |
200|---|---|
201| Prototype exists | Tangible, testable artifact created |
202| Riskiest assumption tested | Evidence gathered |
203| Feasibility confirmed | Within constraints |
204| Stakeholder approval | Obtained |
205| Technical risks | Retired or mitigated |
206
207---
208
209### Phase 4 — Production & Development
210
211**Purpose:** Full-scale creation with iterative cycles and quality checkpoints.
212
213**Universal principle:** Work in manageable units with clear dependencies.
214Follow the universal "prototype → test → iterate" loop at every scale.
215
216**Universal activities:**
217- Break work into units of ≤2 weeks (sprints, chapters, episodes, batches)
218- Implement with continuous integration of feedback
219- Conduct milestone reviews at each unit boundary
220- Track progress against the plan; escalate deviations early
221- Maintain a living artifact tracker (decisions, blockers, progress)
222- Enforce mandatory human checkpoints after every 3–4 AI iterations
223
224**Domain adaptations:**
225- Software: Sprint-based development, TDD, code review, CI/CD pipeline; use Claude Code or Codex for implementation, Jules for async bug fixes
226- Physical-Creative: Asset production with periodic review; separate AI-as-ideation from AI-as-production; note AI images lack individual layers (use masking workflows); upscale for print resolution
227- Media: Asset production → rough cut/draft → review → polish; multi-format adaptation from single source
228- Scientific: Data collection → analysis → interpretation → manuscript; enforce reproducibility documentation
229- Business: Build → measure → learn cycles; CRM configuration, brand asset production
230- Events: Vendor coordination, logistics execution, rehearsals
231
232**Context engineering for long production phases:**
233- Use **compaction** when context window approaches limit (summarize + reinitiate)
234- Use **structured note-taking** (NOTES.md or artifact-tracker) for persistent state
235- Use **sub-agent delegation** for deep exploration tasks (each sub-agent returns 1,000–2,000 token summary)
236- Enforce **just-in-time retrieval** — maintain file paths and queries, not full content in context
237
238**Gate 4 criteria:**
239
240| Criterion | Required for GO |
241|---|---|
242| Milestone reviews | All passed |
243| Quality checkpoints | Met per domain QA standards |
244| Scope adherence | Within approved boundaries |
245| Artifact tracker | Up to date |
246| Human review | Completed at each 3–4 AI iteration threshold |
247
248---
249
250### Phase 5 — Testing & Validation
251
252**Purpose:** Domain-appropriate quality assurance before release.
253
254**Four-layer QA architecture:**
255
256**Layer 1 — Deterministic validation (run first, no AI tokens consumed):**
257- Software: Compile, lint, type-check, unit tests, integration tests, security scan, accessibility audit
258- Content: Plagiarism check, readability score, fact extraction, brand compliance
259- Design: WCAG compliance, responsive layout verification, print resolution check
260- Science: Statistical tests, data integrity checks, reproducibility verification
261- Physical: Dimensional tolerance check, material compatibility, safety compliance
262
263**Layer 2 — AI-as-judge evaluation (semantic quality):**
264Score each output 1–5 on these seven dimensions:
2651. **Accuracy/Faithfulness** — Does it correctly represent facts and sources?
2662. **Relevance** — Does it address the actual need?
2673. **Completeness** — Are all required elements present?
2684. **Coherence** — Is it internally consistent and logically structured?
2695. **Originality** — Does it add genuine value beyond recombination?
2706. **Bias/Fairness** — Are perspectives balanced and assumptions examined?
2717. **Actionability** — Can the intended audience act on this?
272
273Minimum acceptable score: 4/5 on Accuracy, 3/5 on all others.
274
275**Layer 3 — Human review at gates (ConSiDERS framework):**
276- **C**onsistency: Same criteria applied across all outputs
277- **S**coring criteria: Explicit rubric shared with reviewers
278- **D**ifferentiating: Rubric distinguishes good from excellent
279- **E**thical considerations: Bias, privacy, safety reviewed
280- **R**eproducibility: Another reviewer would reach same conclusion
281- **S**calability: Review process can handle volume
282
283**Layer 4 — Continuous monitoring (post-launch):**
284- Track drift, performance degradation, and anomalies
285- Mandatory human review after 3–4 AI iterations without intervention
286- Domain-specific: A/B testing for software/media, citation provenance for science, brand compliance for business
287
288**Gate 5 criteria:**
289
290| Criterion | Required for GO |
291|---|---|
292| Layer 1 validation | All checks pass |
293| Layer 2 AI scoring | Meets minimum thresholds |
294| Layer 3 human review | Completed per ConSiDERS |
295| User acceptance | Validated with target users |
296| Compliance | All regulatory requirements met |
297| Blocking defects | Zero |
298
299---
300
301### Phase 6 — Launch & Iteration
302
303**Purpose:** Release, monitor, and feed learnings back into the system.
304
305**Universal activities:**
306- Execute the launch/release/publication/deployment plan
307- Activate monitoring and feedback collection
308- Conduct post-launch retrospective (within 2 weeks)
309- Prioritize iteration backlog based on observed outcomes
310- **Update this SKILL.md based on observed failures** — treat skills as living code
311
312**Domain adaptations:**
313- Software: Phased rollout, feature flags, error monitoring, performance dashboards
314- Physical-Creative: Exhibition, publication, distribution; document production notes for future runs
315- Media: Multi-platform distribution, SEO optimization, analytics tracking, audience feedback
316- Scientific: Peer review submission, preprint posting, data/code release, replication invitation
317- Business: Go-to-market execution, PR/communications, customer onboarding, KPI tracking
318- Events: Day-of execution, post-event survey, vendor debrief, documentation for next edition
319
320**Skill improvement protocol (after every project):**
3211. List every instruction in this SKILL.md that the AI followed correctly without being told
3222. Remove those instructions (the model no longer needs them)
3233. List every failure mode observed
3244. Add specific instructions to prevent those failures
3255. Test the updated skill with a fresh AI instance before deploying
326
327**Gate 6 criteria:**
328
329| Criterion | Required for CLOSE |
330|---|---|
331| Launch checklist | Complete |
332| Monitoring | Active |
333| Stakeholder sign-off | Obtained |
334| Retrospective | Completed |
335| Iteration backlog | Prioritized |
336| Skill updated | Based on retrospective findings |
337
338---
339
340## 3. Domain Skill Modules
341
342### 3.1 SOFTWARE — Apps, APIs, Platforms, Operating Systems, Tools
343
344**When to use:** Primary output is running code. Includes: mobile apps, web apps, APIs, CLIs, operating systems, compilers, databases, developer tools, AI agents, automation workflows.
345
346**Phase adaptations:**
347- Phase 1: User stories, technical landscape, security threat model
348- Phase 2: Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), API contracts, data models, test strategy
349- Phase 3: Wireframes → technical spike → MVP; validate with real users
350- Phase 4: TDD, code review, CI/CD, sprint ceremonies
351- Phase 5: Automated test suite, security scan, performance benchmarks, accessibility audit
352- Phase 6: Phased rollout, feature flags, SLOs, runbook
353
354**Quality criteria:**
355- All tests passing (unit, integration, e2e)
356- No critical/high security vulnerabilities (OWASP Top 10)
357- Code review approval from qualified reviewer
358- Performance benchmarks met (define specific thresholds)
359- Accessibility: WCAG 2.1 AA minimum
360- Documentation: README, API docs, architecture diagram
361
362**Recommended tools:**
363- Implementation: Claude Code, OpenAI Codex, Cursor, Windsurf
364- Async tasks: Google Jules (up to 60 concurrent on Ultra tier)
365- Research: Perplexity for technology decisions
366- Design: Google Stitch for UI generation
367- Backend: Firebase Studio, Google Cloud Run
368- Testing: Claude Code for test generation, Jules for bug fixes
369
370**Anti-patterns:**
371- Starting implementation before architecture is documented
372- Skipping the test strategy in Phase 2
373- Using AI to generate tests without reviewing them
374- Deploying without monitoring in place
375- Treating AI-generated code as reviewed code
376
377**Common deliverables by phase:**
3781. PRD, user stories, technical landscape doc
3792. Architecture diagram, ADRs, data model, API spec, test plan
3803. Wireframes, technical spike, MVP
3814. Working software with tests, CI/CD pipeline
3825. Test report, security audit, performance report
3836. Deployed application, runbook, monitoring dashboard
384
385---
386
387### 3.2 PHYSICAL-CREATIVE — Art, Architecture, Products, Fashion, Industrial Design
388
389**When to use:** Primary output is a physical object or experience. Includes: paintings, sculptures, buildings, furniture, clothing, jewelry, vehicles, consumer products, packaging.
390
391**Critical asymmetry:** Physical components cannot be "patched" after production. Lock physical design decisions earlier than digital ones. Material selection, structural decisions, and manufacturing tolerances must be finalized before production begins.
392
393**Phase adaptations:**
394- Phase 1: Reference research (historical, cultural, material), mood boards, constraint mapping
395- Phase 2: Material specifications, production timeline, supplier research, safety/regulatory review
396- Phase 3: Sketches → CAD/technical drawings → material samples → scale model → pilot piece
397- Phase 4: Production with periodic quality checks; separate AI-as-ideation from AI-as-production
398- Phase 5: Dimensional tolerance, material compatibility, safety compliance, user testing
399- Phase 6: Exhibition/distribution, documentation, production notes for future runs
400
401**AI-specific notes:**
402- AI-generated images lack individual layers — use masking workflows for production
403- Upscale to minimum 300 DPI for print production
404- Use AI for ideation and reference generation, not final production files
405- Physical safety standards vary by domain — always verify with domain expert
406
407**Quality criteria:**
408- Dimensional tolerances within specification
409- Material compatibility verified
410- Safety compliance documented
411- Prototype user-tested
412- Production documentation complete
413
414---
415
416### 3.3 HYBRID — Physical + Digital Products
417
418**When to use:** Project requires both physical and digital deliverables that must work together. Includes: board games with apps, illustrated books with AR, smart home devices, wearables, interactive installations.
419
420**Critical principle:** Establish explicit synchronization checkpoints where physical and digital streams must align. Physical decisions must be locked before digital work that depends on them can proceed.
421
422**Synchronization checkpoints:**
423- After Phase 2: Physical specs locked → digital team can begin dependent work
424- After Phase 3: Physical prototype validated → digital prototype can reference real dimensions
425- After Phase 4: Physical production complete → digital integration testing can begin
426- After Phase 5: Both streams validated → combined user testing
427
428**Anti-patterns:**
429- Letting digital work proceed on assumptions about physical specs
430- Discovering physical/digital incompatibility in Phase 5
431- Not documenting which decisions are physical-locked vs. digital-flexible
432
433---
434
435### 3.4 MEDIA — Content, Video, Podcast, Books, Courses, Social
436
437**When to use:** Primary output is content consumed by an audience. Includes: YouTube videos, podcasts, books, articles, courses, social media campaigns, newsletters, films, music.
438
439**Unique capability:** Multi-format adaptation from single source content. One well-structured piece of content can become: long-form article, video script, social posts, newsletter, podcast outline, slide deck.
440
441**Platform-specific formatting rules:**
442- YouTube: SEO-optimized title/description, chapters at 10-min intervals, thumbnail A/B test
443- TikTok/Reels: Hook within first 3 seconds, vertical format, captions mandatory
444- Instagram: Carousel for depth, single image for emotion, hashtag strategy (5–10 relevant)
445- Podcast: RSS-ready, transcription for SEO, show notes with timestamps
446- Newsletter: Subject line A/B test, preview text optimization, plain-text fallback
447- LinkedIn: Professional tone, data-backed claims, engagement question at end
448
449**Quality criteria:**
450- Readability score appropriate for target audience
451- Fact claims verified with sources
452- Brand voice consistency score ≥ 4/5
453- Platform format requirements met
454- Engagement metrics baseline established
455
456---
457
458### 3.5 SCIENTIFIC — Research, Engineering, Medicine, Technology Standards
459
460**When to use:** Primary output is new knowledge, validated protocols, or technology standards. Includes: academic papers, clinical trials, engineering specifications, coding language design, protocol standards.
461
462**Epistemic rigor requirements:**
463- Distinguish AI prediction from AI understanding in all outputs
464- Require provenance tracking for all factual claims
465- Mandate reproducibility documentation
466- Never present AI-generated hypotheses as validated findings
467
468**Phase adaptations:**
469- Phase 1: Literature review via Elicit (138M+ papers), hypothesis formulation, gap analysis
470- Phase 2: Experimental design, statistical power analysis, IRB/ethics review, pre-registration
471- Phase 3: Pilot study, protocol validation, instrument calibration
472- Phase 4: Data collection, analysis, interpretation; enforce lab notebook discipline
473- Phase 5: Statistical validation, peer pre-review, reproducibility check, citation audit
474- Phase 6: Peer review submission, preprint, data/code release, replication invitation
475
476**Quality criteria:**
477- All claims traceable to primary sources
478- Statistical methods appropriate and pre-specified
479- Reproducibility package (data + code + environment) complete
480- Peer pre-review completed
481- Conflicts of interest disclosed
482
483---
484
485### 3.6 BUSINESS — Ventures, Brands, Services, Operations
486
487**When to use:** Primary output is a business system, brand identity, or service design. Includes: startups, brand development, service design, marketing systems, operational workflows, SaaS platforms.
488
489**Phase adaptations:**
490- Phase 1: Market analysis, customer discovery, competitive intelligence, regulatory landscape
491- Phase 2: Business model canvas, financial projections, legal structure, go-to-market strategy
492- Phase 3: Landing page test, customer interviews, financial model validation, brand prototype
493- Phase 4: Build → measure → learn cycles; CRM configuration, brand asset production
494- Phase 5: Market validation, financial model stress test, brand compliance audit
495- Phase 6: Go-to-market execution, PR/communications, customer onboarding, KPI tracking
496
497**Quality criteria:**
498- Business model validated with real customer conversations
499- Financial model stress-tested with pessimistic scenarios
500- Legal structure reviewed by qualified counsel
501- Brand identity consistent across all touchpoints
502- Data privacy compliance documented (GDPR, CCPA as applicable)
503
504---
505
506### 3.7 EVENTS — Events, Experiences, Personal Projects
507
508**When to use:** Primary output is an event, experience, or personal project. Includes: conferences, weddings, exhibitions, travel, personal development projects.
509
510**Workflow mode:** Express or Standard (rarely Rigorous). Use plain language, template-driven approaches, and simplified gates.
511
512**Phase adaptations:**
513- Phase 1: Vision definition, venue research, stakeholder alignment, budget envelope
514- Phase 2: Budget breakdown, vendor shortlist, timeline, contingency plans
515- Phase 3: Venue walkthrough, vendor quotes, mock run-of-show
516- Phase 4: Vendor coordination, logistics execution, rehearsals
517- Phase 5: Dress rehearsal, contingency review, day-of checklist
518- Phase 6: Day-of execution, post-event survey, vendor debrief
519
520**Human judgment is irreplaceable for:** taste, atmosphere, interpersonal dynamics, and crisis management.
521
522---
523
524## 4. Context Engineering Principles
525
526These principles apply to ALL platforms and ALL domains. They determine how effectively
527the AI uses its finite attention budget.
528
529### 4.1 Minimal High-Signal Context
530
531Never load instructions the AI already knows. Each skill encodes only domain-specific
532procedural knowledge the model wouldn't know otherwise.
533
534- Project facts → CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / project instructions (always loaded)
535- Specialized workflows → skills (loaded on demand)
536- Reference material → separate files (loaded only when explicitly needed)
537
538### 4.2 Just-in-Time Retrieval
539
540Maintain lightweight identifiers (file paths, search queries, URLs) and use tools to
541dynamically load data at runtime. Never front-load all project context.
542
543```
544# Good: reference, don't embed
545See: ./references/api-spec.yaml
546Run: grep -r "authentication" ./src
547
548# Bad: paste entire files into context
549[3,000 lines of API spec pasted here]
550```
551
552### 4.3 Structured Note-Taking for Long-Horizon Tasks
553
554Maintain a persistent NOTES.md or artifact-tracker outside the context window:
555
556```markdown
557# Project State — [Project Name]
558Last updated: [date]
559
560## Current phase: [phase name]
561## Completed: [list]
562## In progress: [list]
563## Blocked: [list with blockers]
564## Key decisions: [ADRs or equivalent]
565## Next actions: [prioritized list]
566```
567
568### 4.4 Sub-Agent Delegation
569
570For deep exploration tasks, fork to sub-agents with clean context windows.
571Each sub-agent may use tens of thousands of tokens internally but returns
572a condensed summary of 1,000–2,000 tokens to the main agent.
573
574### 4.5 Compaction for Long Sessions
575
576When context window approaches limit:
5771. Pass message history to model for summarization
5782. Preserve: architectural decisions, unresolved issues, implementation details
5793. Discard: redundant tool outputs, superseded drafts, raw search results
5804. Reinitiate with compressed context + 5 most recently accessed files
581
582### 4.6 The 3–4 Iteration Rule
583
584Research shows diminishing returns and compounding error risk after 3–4 AI iterations
585without human intervention. Enforce mandatory human checkpoints at this threshold.
586
587### 4.7 Start Minimal, Add Based on Failures
588
589> "Start by testing a minimal prompt with the best model available to see how it performs
590> on your task, and then add clear instructions and examples to improve performance based
591> on failure modes found during initial testing." — Anthropic Engineering
592
593Never add instructions preemptively. Add them only when you observe a specific failure.
594
595---
596
597## 5. Platform-Specific Guidance
598
599### 5.1 Claude / Claude Code
600
601**Skill location:** `.claude/skills/universal-creation-framework/SKILL.md`
602**Always-loaded context:** `CLAUDE.md` (project conventions)
603**Context budget:** First 5,000 tokens per skill within 25,000-token combined budget after compaction
604**Unique strengths:** Extended thinking, XML-structured instructions, richest MCP ecosystem, Artifacts for interactive outputs
605**Invocation:** Skills auto-activate based on description match; explicit invocation via `/skill-name`
606**Best for:** Complex reasoning, nuanced writing, multi-step research, interactive prototypes
607
608```yaml
609# CLAUDE.md template for this framework
610project: [name]
611domain: [SOFTWARE|PHYSICAL|HYBRID|MEDIA|SCIENTIFIC|BUSINESS|EVENTS]
612phase: [1-6]
613scale: [PERSONAL|TEAM|ENTERPRISE]
614risk: [EXPERIMENTAL|LOW|MEDIUM|HIGH|SAFETY-CRITICAL]
615complexity: [LIGHT|STANDARD|DEEP]
616artifact_tracker: ./NOTES.md
617```
618
619### 5.2 OpenAI Codex
620
621**Skill location:** `.agents/skills/universal-creation-framework/SKILL.md`
622**Invocation:** Explicit via `$universal-creation-framework` syntax
623**Unique strengths:** Cloud-based parallel execution, two-phase sandbox (network during setup, offline during execution), Automations for scheduled work
624**Parallel tasks:** Up to 60 concurrent on appropriate tier
625**Best for:** Autonomous coding tasks, parallel test generation, scheduled background work
626
627```yaml
628# .agents/skills/universal-creation-framework/agents/openai.yaml
629name: universal-creation-framework
630description: Universal project lifecycle framework for all domains
631invocation: explicit
632parallel: true
633sandbox: isolated
634```
635
636### 5.3 Google Ecosystem
637
638**Chain:** Stitch (design) → Firebase Studio / Antigravity (development) → Firebase (backend) → Cloud Run (production)
639**Jules:** Async coding tasks via GitHub integration, up to 60 concurrent tasks
640**Gemini:** 1M+ token context window enables loading entire codebases
641**Stitch adapter:** `.stitch/DESIGN.md` stores design system tokens
642**Firebase adapter:** `airules.md` configures Firebase Studio behavior
643**Best for:** Full-stack Google Cloud projects, large codebase analysis, parallel async development
644
645### 5.4 ChatGPT / Custom GPTs
646
647**Mapping:** Core instructions → GPT system prompt; domain skills → uploadable knowledge files
648**Canvas:** Use for visual code/writing collaboration
649**Best for:** Consumer-facing applications, broad accessibility, GPT Store distribution
650
651### 5.5 Manus
652
653**Mapping:** Natural-language task descriptions (no file-based skill system)
654**Unique strengths:** Highest-autonomy tier — plans, executes, and delivers end-to-end without intervention
655**Best for:** Complete project execution from description, multi-agent orchestration
656
657**Manus task template:**
658```
659Project: [name]
660Domain: [domain]
661Phase: [current phase]
662Context: [brief project state]
663Task: [specific deliverable needed]
664Quality criteria: [from Phase N gate]
665Constraints: [time, budget, technical]
666```
667
668### 5.6 Perplexity
669
670**Role in framework:** Primary research engine for Phase 1 (Discovery)
671**Deep Research:** Synthesizes 138M+ papers via Elicit integration
672**Best for:** Literature review, competitive analysis, technology research, fact verification
673
674### 5.7 Apple Xcode + Claude Agent SDK
675
676**Integration:** Xcode 26.3+ exposes capabilities via MCP
677**Agent SDK phases:** Gather Context → Plan → Execute → Verify (mirrors framework phases)
678**Best for:** Native iOS/macOS development with AI assistance
679
680---
681
682## 6. The Interoperability Stack
683
684```
685┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
686│ SKILLS LAYER │
687│ What to do — domain workflows, phase gates, QA │
688│ (This document + domain sub-skills) │
689├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
690│ MCP LAYER │
691│ Tool access — GitHub, Figma, Jira, databases, │
692│ cloud services, any API (10,000+ MCP servers) │
693├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
694│ A2A LAYER │
695│ Agent collaboration — multi-agent orchestration │
696│ Agent Cards at /.well-known/agent.json │
697│ (150+ organizations including Adobe, SAP, SF) │
698└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
699```
700
701**Skills + MCP + A2A = Complete stack:**
702- Skills define WHAT to do
703- MCP provides TOOL ACCESS
704- A2A enables AGENT COLLABORATION
705
706---
707
708## 7. Quality Assurance Checklists
709
710### Universal Pre-Launch Checklist
711
712- [ ] All Phase 1–5 gate criteria documented and signed off
713- [ ] Layer 1 deterministic validation: all checks pass
714- [ ] Layer 2 AI scoring: all dimensions ≥ minimum threshold
715- [ ] Layer 3 human review: ConSiDERS framework applied
716- [ ] Monitoring/feedback system: active
717- [ ] Rollback plan: documented and tested
718- [ ] Stakeholder sign-off: obtained
719- [ ] Artifact tracker: complete and archived
720- [ ] Retrospective: scheduled
721
722### Skill Improvement Checklist (post-project)
723
724- [ ] List instructions followed correctly without being told → remove them
725- [ ] List observed failure modes → add specific instructions
726- [ ] Test updated skill with fresh AI instance
727- [ ] Version the updated skill (git tag)
728- [ ] Share improvements with team
729
730---
731
732## 8. Prompt Templates
733
734### Project Kickoff Template
735
736```
737I'm starting a new project. Please activate the Universal Creation Framework.
738
739Project name: [name]
740One-sentence description: [description]
741Primary output type: [software/physical/media/scientific/business/events/hybrid]
742Scale: [personal/team/enterprise]
743Risk level: [experimental/low/medium/high/safety-critical]
744Timeline: [duration]
745Key constraints: [list]
746
747Please:
7481. Confirm the domain classification
7492. Identify the appropriate workflow depth (Express/Standard/Rigorous/Safety)
7503. Run Phase 1 — Discovery & Research
7514. Present Gate 1 criteria and ask for confirmation before proceeding
752```
753
754### Phase Transition Template
755
756```
757We are completing Phase [N] of the Universal Creation Framework.
758
759Project: [name]
760Domain: [domain]
761Current phase output: [brief summary]
762
763Please:
7641. Evaluate Gate [N] criteria (list each criterion and status)
7652. Identify any criteria not yet met
7663. Recommend: GO / HOLD / KILL with rationale
7674. If GO: outline Phase [N+1] plan
768```
769
770### QA Evaluation Template
771
772```
773Please evaluate the following output using the Universal Creation Framework QA system.
774
775Output type: [type]
776Domain: [domain]
777Output: [paste output or reference file]
778
779Evaluate:
7801. Layer 1: List all deterministic checks applicable to this output type
7812. Layer 2: Score 1-5 on each of the 7 dimensions with specific evidence
7823. Layer 3: Identify what human review is needed per ConSiDERS
7834. Overall recommendation: PASS / REVISE / REJECT with specific improvements
784```
785
786### Skill Update Template
787
788```
789Post-project retrospective for Universal Creation Framework skill update.
790
791Project completed: [name]
792Domain: [domain]
793Duration: [duration]
794
795Please analyze:
7961. Which framework instructions did the AI follow correctly without being told? (candidates for removal)
7972. What failure modes were observed? (candidates for new instructions)
7983. Which gate criteria were most/least useful?
7994. What domain-specific patterns should be added?
8005. Draft the specific SKILL.md edits needed
801```
802
803---
804
805## 9. Anti-Patterns (Universal)
806
807These failure modes appear across all domains and all platforms:
808
809| Anti-Pattern | Consequence | Prevention |
810|---|---|---|
811| Premature execution (skipping Phase 2) | Building the wrong thing | Enforce 60-75% planning effort rule |
812| Context bloat | Degraded AI performance | Progressive disclosure; just-in-time retrieval |
813| No human checkpoints | Compounding errors | Mandatory review after 3-4 AI iterations |
814| Vague "done" criteria | Endless scope creep | Define explicit Gate criteria before starting |
815| Treating AI output as reviewed output | Quality failures | Layer 1+2+3 QA before any gate transition |
816| Single-agent for deep exploration | Context pollution | Sub-agent delegation with summary returns |
817| Static skills | Skill obsolescence | Post-project retrospective + skill update |
818| Physical/digital sync failure (Hybrid) | Manufacturing defects | Lock physical specs before digital work proceeds |
819| Front-loading all context | Attention budget waste | Maintain references, not content, in context |
820| Adding instructions preemptively | Brittle prompts | Add only based on observed failures |
821
822---
823
824## 10. Future-Proofing Mechanisms
825
826This framework is designed to evolve. Three mechanisms ensure longevity:
827
828**New domains:** Create a new `SKILL.md` in `domains/` and update the project classifier.
829No existing skills need modification. New skills add only ~100 tokens of metadata overhead.
830
831**Platform changes:** Absorbed by the adapter layer (Section 5). When a new AI platform
832emerges, add a thin adapter. Core skills remain unchanged.
833
834**Model improvements:** Following Anthropic's guidance — "harnesses should be frequently
835questioned as models improve." Run the Skill Improvement Checklist after every project.
836Remove instructions the model follows correctly without being told. The framework gets
837leaner and more powerful over time.
838
839---
840
841## References
842
8431. Anthropic Engineering. "Effective Context Engineering for AI Agents." Sep 29, 2025. https://www.anthropic.com/engineering/effective-context-engineering-for-ai-agents
8442. Anthropic. "Claude Skills." https://claude.com/skills
8453. Anthropic. "Configuration and Multi-File Skills." https://claude.com/resources/tutorials/configuration-and-multi-file-skills
8464. OpenAI. "Codex Best Practices." https://developers.openai.com/codex/learn/best-practices
8475. OpenAI. "Codex Skills." https://developers.openai.com/codex/skills
8486. Google Labs. "Stitch Skills." https://github.com/google-labs-code/stitch-skills
8497. travisvn. "Awesome Claude Skills." https://github.com/travisvn/awesome-claude-skills (11.3k stars)
8508. Anthropic. "The Complete Guide to Building Skills for Claude." https://resources.anthropic.com/hubfs/The-Complete-Guide-to-Building-Skill-for-Claude.pdf
8519. Cooper, R.G. "Stage-Gate® New Product Development Process." Product Development Institute.
85210. Osmani, A. "AI-Assisted Development Research." (Planning = 60-75% of effort finding)
85311. ACL 2024. "ConSiDERS-The-Human Framework for Human Evaluation."
85412. Linux Foundation. "Agentic AI Foundation — MCP and A2A Standards."
85513. Google. "Agent-to-Agent (A2A) Protocol v0.3." April 2025.
85614. McKinsey. "Rule-based workflow engines outperform letting AI decide 'what comes next'."