Tlc Implement
Implements work already planned - a plan.md from tlc-plan, or a small ticket - by...
Install
npx skills add tech-leads-club/agent-skills --skill tlc-implement -g -a claude-code -y- Repository
- tech-leads-club/agent-skills7.1k
- Category
- Writing
- Updated
- 3d ago
- License
- CC-BY-4.0
- Context cost
- Mediumabout 2,368 tokens
- Runs scripts
- Yes, review before use
What it does
Implements work already planned - a plan.md from tlc-plan, or a small ticket - by freezing it into checks with proofs, building, and proving every check with a script and an independent Verifier before declaring done. Use when the user says "implement this plan", "build this ticket", "implement this spec", "write the checks", "verify work", or "tlc-implement". Do NOT use when nobody has decided what to build, or to plan a feature that needs one (that is tlc-plan).
TLC Implement
Freeze the obligations. Free the build. Prove it with someone who did not build it.
┌────────┐ ┌───────┐ ┌────────┐
│ CHECKS │ → │ BUILD │ → │ VERIFY │
└────────┘ └───────┘ └────────┘
obligations yours always
The common failure of a coding agent is a requirement that never became an active obligation, followed by a completion claim. What works against it is a small, frozen, external obligation set and a verifier that is not the author, so the budget goes there and not into choreographing the model. How you build is yours.
The input is an approved .specs/features/<feature>/plan.md from tlc-plan - approved means
its **Approved**: <date> - user: "<their words>" line, which validate_checks.py requires - and
it is the whole brief: you may have none of the conversation that produced it. A change under roughly three
files with no one-way door needs no plan: write checks.md with an ## Intent paragraph instead.
Anything larger with no plan, or a plan with an open blocks question, goes back to tlc-plan.
Rules
These hold even if no reference file is read. Each one lives here; the references point back.
