# Lexforge Propose > Use when the proposal of a LexForge change is asked for or has to be rewritten - the user describes a feature, a fix or a rewrite they want planned, or `lexforge status` shows the `proposal` artifact ready. - Skill: `shepaland/lexforge-propose` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add shepaland/lexforge-propose` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/shepaland/lexforge-propose/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - Author: shepaland (https://skillmd.com/u/shepaland) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/shepaland/lexforge-propose --- ## Model When your project names no model for your runtime, run this work on the model your own provider is given here. What the project names replaces this table. | Provider | Model | |---|---| | anthropic | claude-opus-5 | | openai | gpt-5.6-sol | | google | gemini-3.1-pro-preview | | deepseek | deepseek-v4-pro | | z.ai | glm-4.7 | A provider outside the table names nothing, so work on the model at work. ## Queue rule Run `lexforge status --change --tool --json` first; parse stdout as JSON. Before it: no template, no questions, no files. No change named? Run `lexforge status --json` and ask which. Find your `id` in `artifacts`. Its `status` decides: - `ready` — work. The only status that lets you continue. - `blocked` — name every `blockedBy` id and `lexforge instructions --change --tool `. Stop. - `done` — show `resolvedOutputPath`, ask before rewriting. - `skipped` — say `.lexforge.yaml` skips it, name `nextStep`. Stop. A closed gate stops the work; no branch warns and writes the file anyway. Deadlines, demos, small diffs, dictated material and a request to skip leave it closed. Asked to skip an artifact, name the two lawful ways — write it, or set `skip_: true` in `.lexforge.yaml` — then stop. Exit `2` means refused; read `error.code`. `workspace-not-found`: offer `lexforge init`, wait, stop — never build `lexforge/` or `.lexforge.yaml` by hand. `change-not-found`: list active changes. `artifact-unknown`: name the schema's artifacts. Otherwise show `error.message`, then stop. Judge state by exit codes and JSON fields, never human lines. Write inside the change directory and `lexforge/config.yaml`, nowhere else: no product code, no project config or test. A request to build allows planning, not implementation. `lexforge instructions --change --tool --json` carries `language`; write the artifact in it. With `languageExplicit: false` ask one question — what language this project writes artifacts in — and save it to `language:` in `lexforge/config.yaml`. With `true`, ask nothing. ## Model gate `provider` and `model` name the model this work runs on. Read them from `lexforge instructions --change --tool --json` when you write an artifact, and from your own entry in `stages` of `lexforge status --change --tool --json` when you do not: your entry is the one whose `stage` is your own name without the `lexforge-` prefix, which is to say `apply`, `debug`, `verify` or `archive`. The runtime is yours to name — `lexforge init --tools` lists the names — and the flag is left out only when none of them is you. An empty `model` sends you to the model block above: the line of your own provider names the model to run on, and a provider it does not name demands nothing. The same holds where there is no workspace, no change and no entry of your own: the block decides in each. Running on that model: work, and say nothing about models. Running on another one: start a subagent on the assigned model, hand it the work, do none of it yourself. Naming the model and letting the user switch is a request, not a handover; so is doing the work after naming it. Unable to start a subagent on that model: name it, say it cannot be reached, and do no part of the work. A deadline, a small diff and a user who asks anyway leave both ways out — make the model reachable, or change the assignment in `lexforge/config.yaml`. | Excuse | Reality | |---|---| | "the content is settled; the model that types it changes nothing", "just typing up what we already settled" | The assignment names who writes it, not who decided it. | | "I'm not going to bury that mismatch - I say it plainly to the user" | Saying it is not handing it over. The work is done either way. | | "worth a quick opus pass later if that assignment was there for a reason" | A pass over finished work is review; the gate asks who did it. | | "say so explicitly and I'll make the config change and then do the work" | The edit is theirs to make; a sign-off is not reachability. | | "no model is named, so nothing binds me" | The model block decides then; read your provider's line there. | | "I'm not sure which runtime name is mine, so I left the flag out" | Leaving it out is choosing the answer. Name the runtime you are, or say you cannot. | ## The rule **NO FILE UNTIL THE USER HAS ANSWERED AND CHOSEN.** Violating the letter of this rule is violating its spirit. An assumption written down is still an assumption; a `Why` taken from the request is your reading of it. Both travel on into the specs and the plan. ## Work Name the class first: **spike** - a question answered, not built; **bounded** - a flow already here; **architectural** - a new subsystem or shared interface. In doubt take the heavier; nothing downgrades. 1. **Ask one question and wait.** One per message, never a list. Purpose, constraints, success. However clear the request reads, one question is always left: how would anyone check this worked? 2. **Offer two or three approaches to the user.** Name what each one costs, the recommended one included, and say which you recommend and why. A weak alternative is named in a line, not dropped. 3. **Take their choice.** They pick, not you. Told to pick for them, send it anyway; one word back is their choice. A file listing the approaches has skipped them. 4. **Write the file** from `template` in `lexforge instructions proposal --change --tool --json`, out of their answers only. ## Rationalizations | Excuse | Reality | |---|---| | "decidable defaults, so I wrote them into the proposal as stated assumptions he can strike out while reading", "Assumptions I made rather than asking" | You decided them. Reading is not deciding. | | "the same information transfer without costing him a round trip he doesn't have time for", "faster to correct than to answer" | Faster for you. They proofread your guess. | | "an explicit instruction not to be sent questions" | They refused a list of seven; one question is not a list. | | "he is the decider, and he decided to delegate the approach choice", "the decision is mine to defend, not yours to proofread" | They delegated the work, never the cost they pay for it. | | "No menu - the two alternatives are one line each inside the file, already decided", "Recorded for the file, one line each", "not for you to weigh" | A rejection you wrote is not a choice they made. | | "One question of the set never got asked, and I did not close it for you", "Open question - to confirm before specs", "Nothing is left open that I'd have to guess at" | You wrote the file around the answer you lack. | ## Red flags - stop - A choice you call delegated. - "assumption" or "open question" in the proposal. - Two questions in a message. - A `Why` you could write from the first message alone. - Approaches inside the file instead of in a message. - An approach whose cost you did not name. Stop and send the question you skipped. Once the file is written, run `lexforge status --change --tool --json`, name its `nextStep` and stop there.