LoopyLuci Skill Development Workflow
End-to-end process for authoring, testing, iterating, and deprecating skills.
Authoring Flow
IDEA → SKETCH → DRAFT → VALIDATE → PUBLISH → ITERATE → (DEPRECATE | ARCHIVE)
1. IDEA — Identify the Gap
- Task took 5+ tool calls? → Skill candidate
- User corrected your approach? → Skill candidate
- Recurring configuration pattern? → Skill candidate
2. SKETCH — Outline
# Title
<!-- 1-2 line description -->
## When to Use
<!-- 3-5 bullet conditions -->
## Steps
<!-- numbered steps with code -->
## Pitfalls
<!-- 3-8 failure modes -->
3. DRAFT — Write SKILL.md
Place under %LOCALAPPDATA%\hermes\skills\<category>\<name>\SKILL.md.
Category determines skills_list(category=X) grouping.
4. VALIDATE — Checklist
- Description starts with "Use when..." and is ≤60 chars
- Description ends with a period
- YAML frontmatter has name, description, category, tags
- Body has code examples (not just descriptions)
- Has pitfalls section
- Cross-references related skills
5. PUBLISH
skill_manage(action='create', name='my-skill',
content='...', category='my-category')
6. ITERATE — Patch on Error
skill_manage(action='patch', name='my-skill',
old_string='wrong info',
new_string='correct info')
7. DEPRECATE / ARCHIVE
skill_manage(action='delete', name='old-skill',
absorbed_into='new-skill') # forward users
# or
skill_manage(action='delete', name='stale-skill',
absorbed_into='') # prune
Pitfalls
- Don't publish without testing each code block
- Old skills silently degrade when tools/APIs change — audit quarterly
- Deleting a skill breaks cron jobs that reference it — deprecate first
- Descriptions truncated at 57 chars — lead with the trigger
- Category choice affects discovery — keep it consistent