# Instruction > Write, edit, or review durable agent instructions in CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, skills, agent prompts, or context-injecting hooks. Also use to analyze agent mistakes and propose prevention. - Skill: `unsafe9/instruction` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 3 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add unsafe9/instruction` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/unsafe9/instruction/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: AI & ML - Author: unsafe9 (https://skillmd.com/u/unsafe9) - Updated: 2026-09-22 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/unsafe9/instruction --- # Instruction You are writing or revising text an agent reads as context before it acts. The reader is a capable model that has no memory of why the text exists and pays tokens for every line — a fresh colleague, not a novice. Optimize for what that reader needs in order to act correctly, not for a human reading the diff. Use `{{SKILL_DIR}}` to mean the directory containing this `SKILL.md`. ## Reference routing - When creating, editing, or reviewing a skill, read `{{SKILL_DIR}}/references/skill-writing.md` for descriptions, invocation policy, and shared references. - For incident-driven work where an agent made a mistake and the user wants a cause analysis, prevention strategy, or new instruction, read `{{SKILL_DIR}}/references/incident-response.md`. ## Start with the irreducible instruction Instructions supply what another capable agent cannot infer: explicit intent and taste, local tradeoffs, scope and permission boundaries, exceptions to the sensible default, and the required standard of evidence. Treat the user's request as evidence of what matters to them, not as an invitation to invent every sensible companion rule. If a line is only an immediate common-sense elaboration or would not change the reader's next action, omit it. For a new instruction or skill, start with the smallest useful draft: normally one or two sentences, and no more than one short paragraph unless the user has already given several independent constraints. Do not pre-create sections, checklists, examples, references, or exhaustive workflows. Add structure only when the accumulated content can no longer be read clearly as one paragraph. Grow the instruction only from evidence: the user adds intent or a preference, real usage exposes ambiguity or failure, a non-obvious invariant must survive, or risk requires an explicit guardrail. Expand an existing principle before adding another rule; extract a reference or script only after conditional detail or repeated mechanics has genuinely accumulated. When revising an existing file, suspect bloat or contradiction before assuming it is incomplete. Remove rules that no longer change behavior, repeat each other, or conflict with a newer one. A revision that only adds is usually the wrong revision. For recurring failures or consequential rule changes, resolve uncertainty about a rule's value by comparing representative runs with and without it. Judge the resulting behavior; clearer wording alone does not establish improvement. Write the surviving lines tight: say it once, in the fewest words that stay unambiguous, and cut throat-clearing, hedging, and restated context. Shorten by dropping what wouldn't change the reader's next action, never by compressing prose into fragments, abbreviations, or arrow chains — an unreadable instruction is not a short one. Default to English even when the surrounding conversation is in another language; it is the model's strongest and most token-efficient language. ## State the principle, not the enumeration One sentence naming the behavior you want covers the whole family of cases. A list naming each case covers only the ones you thought of, and reads as a checklist to satisfy rather than a standard to meet. Write at the level of the concept, not the incident that prompted it. Give the reason where it isn't obvious. A clause of intent lets the reader generalize to the case you didn't foresee, and usually replaces several rules. Prefer goal and constraints over procedure. Spell out an ordered sequence only where the order is load-bearing: an external system demands it, a step is destructive, or skipping it corrupts the result silently. Step-by-step scripts for work the model can plan itself burn context and lower the quality of what comes back. Where completion is ambiguous, define an observable result and the scope it must cover. Reach for an example only when the wanted behavior resists description. Examples bias hard toward their specifics, so keep it to one neutral, representative case. ## Don't script the model's thinking Instruct on outcome and constraints, not on how the reader should think. Never ask an agent to transcribe, echo, or narrate its internal reasoning as output — it spends the answer on restatement and can trip refusal handling. Mandated deliberation rituals (rate every option, always list three alternatives, restate the request before answering) fail the same way: they cost tokens and lock a capable reader into a worse process than it would have chosen. Ask for the conclusion, the evidence behind it, and the uncertainty that remains. When structure genuinely matters, specify the shape of the deliverable, not the thinking that produces it. ## Final state, not history Document the final state an agent needs at startup. Do not record one-off edit history, migration notes, or rationale that only explains why the current change was made. The reader was not present for the change and gains nothing from it; that context belongs in the commit message or PR, not the living instruction. ## Lead with what code can't tell you Code is the source of truth, and the agent can read it: directory layout, implementations, signatures, and call sites it discovers on its own, fast. Don't restate them — a catalog of facts the agent could find itself goes stale and burns context. Spend the words on what a code read can't recover: the overview, design intent, goals, operating assumptions, and the tradeoffs behind a choice — for example the architecture and deployment shape, how components communicate, and the design principles the code must honor but never states (statelessness, a stack-neutral interface chosen for extensibility). When you must point at code, point — don't paste. Name a stable file, ownership boundary, or command; avoid volatile snippets that go stale and mislead. The same holds for commands: if an authoritative source exists, say to read the `Makefile`, the `scripts/` directory, or `package.json` scripts instead of copying lists that drift. Spell a command out inline only when nothing else records it. ## Organize references by use Keep guidance needed across the document's uses in the main file. Move substantial detail needed only in particular situations behind a reference that names those situations. Split by use, not by length alone; a short document may need no split. Keep a concept's definitions, rules, and caveats together so reading one brings the others into view. Each reference should identify what it contains and when to read it. If required material is being missed, clarify that trigger before moving the material inline. Keep each rule in one authoritative place so a change does not require synchronized edits to the entrypoint and its references. ## Stay host-neutral Keep shared instructions host-neutral unless a section is explicitly documenting a host-specific adapter. Name the capability, not one host's tool for it, so the instruction survives a host swap: - "available web search/fetch tool" instead of `WebFetch` - "available file-editing tool" instead of `Write` - "available subagent/delegation facility" instead of `Agent` - `{{SKILL_DIR}}` instead of `${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}` or an absolute path Don't prescribe meta-discovery steps like "use a tool-search tool to find the right tool, then use that tool". State the needed capability, the source preference, and the selection criteria; let the current host discover and choose its own tools. Stay out of the tool call itself, too. Search flags, glob patterns, which directory to sweep first, how many results to read back — the reader picks better mechanics than your recipe, and a recipe written against one toolset rots when the tools change. Say what has to be found and what makes a hit relevant, then stop. Naming a location is not the same as scripting a search: point at where something lives when that is a local fact worth carrying, and leave the traversal alone. ## Choose the surface Match content to surface so each stays in scope: - **CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md** — durable always-on background and operating assumptions every agent needs at startup. - **Nested CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md** — rules scoped to one subtree that should not load globally. - **A skill (`SKILL.md`)** — reusable workflow, evidence standards, source preferences, and output shape, loaded only when its trigger fires. - **An agent/subagent prompt** — role, scope, and constraints for one delegated job. - **A hook** — the narrow instruction or guard injected at a specific event. Before any of these: if a linter, formatter, type system, test, or structural change can enforce the rule deterministically, it belongs in that tooling, not in prose the model must remember every time. Check the target directory and relevant ancestors for existing `CLAUDE.md` and `AGENTS.md` before editing or proposing text. If one is a symlink to the other, treat them as one source; if both are real files, preserve both intents instead of silently collapsing them. New files default to `CLAUDE.md`, with `AGENTS.md` created only on request and as a symlink where the filesystem supports it. ## Write nested files for the arriving reader A nested file loads only once an agent is already inside its directory, and then stays in context for the rest of the session. It is an instruction that fires on arrival, not a README: no tour of what the directory holds, and none of the pointers that would send someone here. Write what the arriving reader needs before touching these files — the delta from the parent, with a local exception stated as one — and scope each rule to the subtree in its own wording, or it keeps steering work that has moved on. Place the file at the highest directory where its rules hold.