file-todos
Manage file-based todos stored alongside a dossier. Create, triage, and track dependencies. Use when work is tracked in docs/*/todos.
Best use case
file-todos is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Manage file-based todos stored alongside a dossier. Create, triage, and track dependencies. Use when work is tracked in docs/*/todos.
Teams using file-todos should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/file-todos/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How file-todos Compares
| Feature / Agent | file-todos | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Manage file-based todos stored alongside a dossier. Create, triage, and track dependencies. Use when work is tracked in docs/*/todos.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# File-Based Todo Tracking Skill
## Overview
The dossier `todos` folder contains a file-based tracking system for managing code review feedback, technical debt, feature requests, and work items. Each todo is a markdown file with YAML frontmatter and structured sections.
This skill should be used when:
- Creating new todos from findings or feedback
- Managing todo lifecycle (pending → ready → complete)
- Triaging pending items for approval
- Checking or managing dependencies
- Converting PR comments or code findings into tracked work
- Updating work logs during todo execution
## Location
- Set `REVIEW_TODOS_DIR` to the active dossier’s `todos` folder (see `docs/AGENTS.md`).
## File Naming Convention
Todo files follow this naming pattern:
```
{issue_id}-{status}-{priority}-{description}.md
```
**Components:**
- **issue_id**: Sequential number (001, 002, 003...) - never reused
- **status**: `pending` (needs triage), `ready` (approved), `complete` (done)
- **priority**: `p1` (critical), `p2` (important), `p3` (nice-to-have)
- **description**: kebab-case, brief description
**Examples:**
```
001-pending-p1-mailer-test.md
002-ready-p1-fix-n-plus-1.md
005-complete-p2-refactor-csv.md
```
## File Structure
Each todo is a markdown file with YAML frontmatter and structured sections. Use the template at [todo-template.md](./assets/todo-template.md) as a starting point when creating new todos.
**Required sections:**
- **Problem Statement** - What is broken, missing, or needs improvement?
- **Findings** - Investigation results, root cause, key discoveries
- **Proposed Solutions** - Multiple options with pros/cons, effort, risk
- **Recommended Action** - Clear plan (filled during triage)
- **Acceptance Criteria** - Testable checklist items
- **Work Log** - Chronological record with date, actions, learnings
**Optional sections:**
- **Technical Details** - Affected files, related components, DB changes
- **Resources** - Links to errors, tests, PRs, documentation
- **Notes** - Additional context or decisions
**YAML frontmatter fields:**
```yaml
---
status: ready # pending | ready | complete
priority: p1 # p1 | p2 | p3
issue_id: "002"
tags: [rails, performance, database]
dependencies: ["001"] # Issue IDs this is blocked by
---
```
## Common Workflows
### Creating a New Todo
**To create a new todo from findings or feedback:**
1. Determine next issue ID: `ls $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/ | grep -o '^[0-9]\+' | sort -n | tail -1`
2. Copy template: `cp assets/todo-template.md $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/{NEXT_ID}-pending-{priority}-{description}.md`
3. Edit and fill required sections:
- Problem Statement
- Findings (if from investigation)
- Proposed Solutions (multiple options)
- Acceptance Criteria
- Add initial Work Log entry
4. Determine status: `pending` (needs triage) or `ready` (pre-approved)
5. Add relevant tags for filtering
**When to create a todo:**
- Requires more than 15-20 minutes of work
- Needs research, planning, or multiple approaches considered
- Has dependencies on other work
- Requires manager approval or prioritization
- Part of larger feature or refactor
- Technical debt needing documentation
**When to act immediately instead:**
- Issue is trivial (< 15 minutes)
- Complete context available now
- No planning needed
- User explicitly requests immediate action
- Simple bug fix with obvious solution
### Triaging Pending Items
**To triage pending todos:**
1. List pending items: `ls $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*-pending-*.md`
2. For each todo:
- Read Problem Statement and Findings
- Review Proposed Solutions
- Make decision: approve, defer, or modify priority
3. Update approved todos:
- Rename file: `mv {file}-pending-{pri}-{desc}.md {file}-ready-{pri}-{desc}.md`
- Update frontmatter: `status: pending` → `status: ready`
- Fill "Recommended Action" section with clear plan
- Adjust priority if different from initial assessment
4. Deferred todos stay in `pending` status
**Use `triage` skill** for interactive approval workflow
### Managing Dependencies
**To track dependencies:**
```yaml
dependencies: ["002", "005"] # This todo blocked by issues 002 and 005
dependencies: [] # No blockers - can work immediately
```
**To check what blocks a todo:**
```bash
grep "^dependencies:" $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/003-*.md
```
**To find what a todo blocks:**
```bash
grep -l 'dependencies:.*"002"' $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*.md
```
**To verify blockers are complete before starting:**
```bash
for dep in 001 002 003; do
[ -f "$REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/${dep}-complete-*.md" ] || echo "Issue $dep not complete"
done
```
### Updating Work Logs
**When working on a todo, always add a work log entry:**
```markdown
### YYYY-MM-DD - Session Title
**By:** Claude Code / Developer Name
**Actions:**
- Specific changes made (include file:line references)
- Commands executed
- Tests run
- Results of investigation
**Learnings:**
- What worked / what didn't
- Patterns discovered
- Key insights for future work
```
Work logs serve as:
- Historical record of investigation
- Documentation of approaches attempted
- Knowledge sharing for team
- Context for future similar work
### Completing a Todo
**To mark a todo as complete:**
1. Verify all acceptance criteria checked off
2. Update Work Log with final session and results
3. Rename file: `mv {file}-ready-{pri}-{desc}.md {file}-complete-{pri}-{desc}.md`
4. Update frontmatter: `status: ready` → `status: complete`
5. Check for unblocked work: `grep -l 'dependencies:.*"002"' $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*-ready-*.md`
6. Commit with issue reference: `feat: resolve issue 002`
## Integration with Development Workflows
| Trigger | Flow | Tool |
|---------|------|------|
| Code review | `wf-review` → Findings → `triage` → Todos | wf-review + file-todos |
| PR comments | `pr-comment-resolver` → Fixes → Todos | pr-comment-resolver + file-todos |
| Code TODOs | `wf-develop` → Fixes → Todos | wf-develop + file-todos |
| Planning | Brainstorm → Create todo → Work → Complete | file-todos |
| Feedback | Discussion → Create todo → Triage → Work | file-todos + triage |
## Quick Reference Commands
**Finding work:**
```bash
# List highest priority unblocked work
grep -l 'dependencies: \[\]' $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*-ready-p1-*.md
# List all pending items needing triage
ls $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*-pending-*.md
# Find next issue ID
ls $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/ | grep -o '^[0-9]\+' | sort -n | tail -1 | awk '{printf "%03d", $1+1}'
# Count by status
for status in pending ready complete; do
echo "$status: $(ls -1 $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*-$status-*.md 2>/dev/null | wc -l)"
done
```
**Dependency management:**
```bash
# What blocks this todo?
grep "^dependencies:" $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/003-*.md
# What does this todo block?
grep -l 'dependencies:.*"002"' $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*.md
```
**Searching:**
```bash
# Search by tag
grep -l "tags:.*rails" $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*.md
# Search by priority
ls $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/*-p1-*.md
# Full-text search
grep -r "payment" $REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/
```
## Key Distinctions
**File-todos system (this skill):**
- Markdown files in `$REVIEW_TODOS_DIR/` directory
- Development/project tracking
- Standalone markdown files with YAML frontmatter
- Used by humans and agents
**Rails Todo model:**
- Database model in `app/models/todo.rb`
- User-facing feature in the application
- Active Record CRUD operations
- Different from this file-based system
**TodoWrite tool:**
- In-memory task tracking during agent sessions
- Temporary tracking for single conversation
- Not persisted to disk
- Different from both systems aboveRelated Skills
skill-creator
Create new skills, modify and improve existing skills, and measure skill performance. Use when users want to create a skill from scratch, update or optimize an existing skill, run evals to test a skill, benchmark skill performance with variance analysis, or optimize a skill's description for better triggering accuracy.
modular-skills-architect
Map and refactor an agent context ecosystem: skills, commands/workflows, hooks, agent files, AGENTS.md templates, and docs. Output system map, module/dependency design, Register updates, and a concrete split/consolidate/rename/delete plan. Use when routing or ownership is messy.
heal-skill
This skill should be used when fixing incorrect SKILL.md files with outdated instructions or APIs.
create-agent-skills
Expert guidance for creating, writing, and refining Claude Code Skills. Use when working with SKILL.md files, authoring new skills, improving existing skills, or understanding skill structure and best practices.
agent-native-audit
Comprehensive agent-native architecture audit with scored principles and multi-slice review. Use for system-wide health checks or periodic audits.
write-judge-prompt
Design LLM-as-Judge evaluators for subjective criteria that code-based checks cannot handle. Use when a failure mode requires interpretation (tone, faithfulness, relevance, completeness). Do NOT use when the failure mode can be checked with code (regex, schema validation, execution tests). Do NOT use when you need to validate or calibrate the judge — use validate-evaluator instead.
validate-evaluator
Calibrate an LLM judge against human labels using data splits, TPR/TNR, and bias correction. Use after writing a judge prompt (write-judge-prompt) when you need to verify alignment before trusting its outputs. Do NOT use for code-based evaluators (those are deterministic; test with standard unit tests).
generate-synthetic-data
Create diverse synthetic test inputs for LLM pipeline evaluation using dimension-based tuple generation. Use when bootstrapping an eval dataset, when real user data is sparse, or when stress-testing specific failure hypotheses. Do NOT use when you already have 100+ representative real traces (use stratified sampling instead), or when the task is collecting production logs.
evaluate-rag
Guides evaluation of RAG pipeline retrieval and generation quality. Use when evaluating a retrieval-augmented generation system, measuring retrieval quality, assessing generation faithfulness or relevance, generating synthetic QA pairs for retrieval testing, or optimizing chunking strategies.
eval-audit
Audit an LLM eval pipeline and surface problems: missing error analysis, unvalidated judges, vanity metrics, etc. Use when inheriting an eval system, when unsure whether evals are trustworthy, or as a starting point when no eval infrastructure exists. Do NOT use when the goal is to build a new evaluator from scratch (use error-analysis, write-judge-prompt, or validate-evaluator instead).
error-analysis
Help the user systematically identify and categorize failure modes in an LLM pipeline by reading traces. Use when starting a new eval project, after significant pipeline changes (new features, model switches, prompt rewrites), when production metrics drop, or after incidents.
build-review-interface
Build a custom browser-based annotation interface tailored to your data for reviewing LLM traces and collecting structured feedback. Use when you need to build an annotation tool, review traces, or collect human labels.