Add a new rule, convention, or instruction to the project's agent configuration. Analyzes the rule and helps decide placement: root CLAUDE.md (universal rules), docs/agents/ files (topic-specific guidance), or a new skill (complex workflows). Use when users say: '/agent-add-rule', 'add a rule', 'add convention', 'new coding standard', 'add instruction for claude', 'update claude.md with'.
98
Quality
100%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
98%
1.12xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Add a new rule or convention to the right location in the progressive disclosure structure.
Static (root CLAUDE.md) — loaded every conversation. Token cost always paid.
Semi-dynamic (docs/agents/) — linked from root. Loaded when Claude follows a link.
Fully dynamic (skills) — metadata only in context. Body loaded on trigger.Ask the user: "What rule or convention do you want to add?"
Accept free text. If the user already provided it (e.g., /agent-add-rule always use snake_case for database columns), skip this step.
Read:
Understand what already exists so you don't duplicate or contradict.
Apply this decision tree:
Does the agent consistently get this wrong WITHOUT being told?
├── NO → Challenge: "Does this justify its token cost?"
│ If user still wants it → treat as semi-dynamic
│
├── YES → Does it apply to EVERY task?
│ ├── YES → Root CLAUDE.md (static)
│ │ Examples: package manager, multi-tenancy, project scripts
│ │
│ └── NO → docs/agents/ file (semi-dynamic)
│ Examples: lint rules, test thresholds, API conventions
│
└── Is it a repeatable workflow or procedural knowledge?
├── YES → Skill (fully dynamic)
│ Examples: deployment process, PR review checklist, migration procedure
│
└── NO → Probably not needed. Ask: "Does this justify its token cost?"Key questions to ask the user:
Present the recommended placement with reasoning:
Recommendation: Add to docs/agents/guardrails.md
Reasoning:
- This is a data handling rule, not a universal workflow rule
- It applies only when working with the database
- guardrails.md already covers data isolation patterns
- Adding to root would cost tokens on every conversation unnecessarilyAsk the user to confirm or override. If they override, respect their choice but note the trade-off:
Based on confirmed placement:
If root CLAUDE.md:
If existing docs/agents/ file:
If new docs/agents/ file:
- API Conventions (docs/agents/api-conventions.md) — REST patterns, error response format, paginationIf skill:
/agent-skill-creator to scaffold itUser: "Always use pnpm, never npm"
Classification: Agent gets this wrong without being told + applies to every task → Root
Action: Add to Key Rules section in CLAUDE.md
User: "API responses must always include a requestId field"
Classification: Agent might get wrong + only applies to API work → Semi-dynamic
Action: Add to docs/agents/guardrails.md or create docs/agents/api-conventions.md
User: "When deploying, always run migrations first, then build, then deploy to staging, verify, then production"
Classification: Repeatable multi-step procedure → Fully dynamic (skill)
Action: Suggest /agent-skill-creator to create a deployment skill
User: "Always use const instead of let"
Classification: ESLint already enforces this → Not needed
Response: "ESLint already enforces this via the prefer-const rule. Adding it to agent instructions would cost tokens without benefit. Skip?"
User: "Add a new convention that API responses must include a request ID and put it in the right agent config location."
Expected behavior: Use agent-add-rule guidance to classify placement, confirm with the user, and apply the rule in the appropriate location.
User: "Implement a feature flag system for staged rollouts in our backend service."
Expected behavior: Do not prioritize agent-add-rule; use an implementation-focused skill/workflow instead.
0a59ae9
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.