Skip to content
Back to skills

Principle Encode Lessons In Structure

ASecurity

Turn recurring corrections into executable rules.

  • 2 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added October 1, 2026
ai-agentsapi

Works with

  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Pro scans all 2 files and shows the line behind each finding

Scanned October 1, 2026

npx -y skills add williamwue/oh-my-stack --skill principle-encode-lessons-in-structure --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Principle Encode Lessons In Structure?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Principle Encode Lessons In Structure
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/williamwue-principle-encode-lessons-in-structure/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/williamwue-principle-encode-lessons-in-structure)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: principle-encode-lessons-in-structure
description: "Turn recurring corrections into executable rules."
---

# Encode Lessons in Structure

Encode recurring fixes in mechanisms (tools, code, metadata, automation) instead of textual instructions. Every error, human correction, and unexpected outcome is a learning signal. Capture it, route it, and close the loop.

**Why:** Textual instructions are easy to miss. They require the reader to notice, remember, and comply. Structural mechanisms (lint rules, metadata flags, runtime checks, automation scripts) enforce the rule without cooperation.

**Pattern:**
When you catch yourself writing the same instruction a second time:
1. Ask: can this be a lint rule, a metadata flag, a runtime check, or a script?
2. If yes, encode it. Delete the instruction
3. If no (requires judgment), make the instruction more prominent and add an example of the failure mode

**Pick the strongest mechanism.** When more than one mechanism would work, choose the strongest the situation allows (an unrepresentable state that cannot compile, then a lint or banned API that fails CI, then a canonical helper, then a runtime check), because agents copy whatever the surrounding code already does and a weaker guard becomes the next template.

**Corollary:** If the fix is structural, only use the structural fix. The instruction is the symptom.

**Feedback loop:**
- **Capture every correction.** When the human intervenes or tests fail, decide if it's a one-off or a pattern.
- **Route to the right layer.** One-off -> brain note. Recurring fix -> skill or lint rule. Systemic issue -> principle.
- **Close the loop.** Don't just record. Apply now or create a concrete todo.

**Anti-patterns:**
- Acknowledging without recording ("I'll keep that in mind" does not persist)
- Recording without routing (a brain note about a lint rule that should exist is wasted unless the lint rule gets implemented)
- Fixing without generalizing (fixing one instance while leaving the recurring pattern intact)

Files in this skill

  • SKILL.md2 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml262 B

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…