Skip to content
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions docs/PROMPT_INDEX.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
# Atlas One — Prompt Index

Version: 1.3.0
Generated: 2026-06-07
Version: 1.4.0
Generated: 2026-07-02

This index is auto-generated by `scripts/generate-prompt-index.sh`.
Do not edit manually — run the script to regenerate.
Expand Down
25 changes: 22 additions & 3 deletions docs/prompts/packs/architecture-review.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -11,9 +11,9 @@ This pack is for active design review and critique, not retrieval.

## Recommended Modes

- Architect
- Review
- Analyze
* Architect
* Review
* Analyze

## Starter Prompt — Full Architecture Review

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -98,3 +98,22 @@ Architect
Output:
Architecture summary, risks, open questions, one structural recommendation.
```

## When to Use

* Before a design hardens — when you can still change structure cheaply
* When reviewing someone else's architecture, or your own with fresh eyes
* When a decision feels risky but the risk is not yet named

## Expected Output

* A 2–3 sentence architecture summary
* Risks ordered by severity, with the reasoning behind each
* Unstated assumptions made explicit
* One structural change that improves resilience, plus open questions

## Constraints

* Critique, do not just validate — surface what is missing or wrong
* Ground findings in the design provided; mark inferences as inferences
* Review only — implementation and risk gating belong to mq-agent / mq-mcp
25 changes: 22 additions & 3 deletions docs/prompts/packs/interview-prep.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,9 +8,9 @@ and system design interviews.

## Recommended Modes

- Plan
- Coach
- Teach
* Plan
* Coach
* Teach

## Starter Prompt — Interview Strategy

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -98,3 +98,22 @@ Plan
Output:
What they're testing, what I must communicate, prep steps in order.
```

## When to Use

* When preparing for a specific interview with limited time
* When you need structured answers, not just a topic list
* When practicing behavioral, technical or system-design rounds

## Expected Output

* What each stage is testing for
* The few things you must communicate clearly
* Ordered preparation steps and what to avoid
* For practice rounds: a structured answer and one follow-up question

## Constraints

* Keep spoken answers realistic in length (under ~2 minutes)
* Base answers on the candidate's real experience — no fabricated stories
* Coaching only; the pack prepares you, it does not sit the interview
40 changes: 37 additions & 3 deletions docs/prompts/packs/learning-coach.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,11 +5,17 @@ Tags: pack, learning, coaching, teaching, practice

Use this pack to learn a subject through structured explanation and practice.

## When to Use

* When picking up a new subject and you want a practical learning sequence
* When you understand a topic loosely but can't yet explain or apply it
* When you want practice tasks and a way to check your own understanding

## Recommended Modes

- Teach
- Explain
- Coach
* Teach
* Explain
* Coach

## Starter Prompt

Expand All @@ -25,3 +31,31 @@ Include:
- one practice task
- how I can tell if I understood it
```

## Expected Output

* A short prerequisite ("understand first") step
* A plain-language explanation, not jargon
* One concrete, worked example
* One practice task the learner can actually do
* A self-check to confirm understanding

## Constraints

* Explanations stay at the learner's stated level — no unexplained jargon
* Do not fabricate facts; flag uncertainty instead of guessing
* Coaching only — no execution, no external accounts or tools required

## Example Usage

```text
Goal:
Learn how TLS certificate chains work well enough to debug a broken one.

Mode:
Teach

Output:
What to understand first, a plain explanation, a worked example, a practice
task, and a self-check.
```
41 changes: 34 additions & 7 deletions docs/prompts/packs/macos-scripts-terminal.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,16 +8,16 @@ Covers mqlaunch command surface, automation scripts, and workflow structure.

## Recommended Modes

- Plan
- Debug
- Architect
* Plan
* Debug
* Architect

## When to Use

- When adding a new command to mqlaunch
- When a terminal workflow breaks or behaves unexpectedly
- When designing a new automation or login flow
- When deciding how a new feature fits the macos-scripts command surface
* When adding a new command to mqlaunch
* When a terminal workflow breaks or behaves unexpectedly
* When designing a new automation or login flow
* When deciding how a new feature fits the macos-scripts command surface

## Starter Prompt

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -81,3 +81,30 @@ Notes:
- See .claude/settings.local.example.json for recommended placeholders and instructions to create your own `.claude/settings.local.json`.
- Use `MQ_ROOT` or replace `<MQ_ROOT>` placeholders with your repository path.
```

## Expected Output

* A clear statement of what the workflow does and when it triggers
* The existing commands/scripts it touches, and its inputs and outputs
* Failure modes with graceful handling, and a definition of done
* For command-surface work: the command, flags, no-arg behavior and help text

## Constraints

* Match existing mqlaunch naming and command-surface conventions
* One command does one clear thing; fail gracefully with a clear message
* No secrets or machine-specific private paths; use `MQ_ROOT` placeholders

## Example Usage

```text
Goal:
Add an `mqlaunch flow` command that lists and launches saved workflows.

Mode:
Plan

Output:
What it does, scripts it touches, inputs/outputs, failure handling, and the
command-surface shape (command, flags, no-arg behavior, help text).
```
38 changes: 35 additions & 3 deletions docs/prompts/packs/mq-ecosystem-boundaries.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,9 +9,9 @@ another's begins.

## Recommended Modes

- Analyze
- Architect
- Decide
* Analyze
* Architect
* Decide

## Ecosystem Boundary Map

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -79,3 +79,35 @@ Compare the candidate tools on:

Recommend one owner and explain the boundary clearly.
```

## When to Use

* Before designing a workflow that spans more than one mq tool
* When it is unclear which tool should own a responsibility
* When a change risks blurring the line between two tools

## Expected Output

* For each tool: what it owns, what it does not, and its handoffs
* What breaks if a given tool is removed or fails
* The one critical boundary the design must respect

## Constraints

* Atlas One provides reasoning structure, not execution
* Do not re-implement mq-mcp review logic or bypass mq-agent's safety layer
* Respect each tool's stated authority; flag ambiguous ownership

## Example Usage

```text
Goal:
Design where repo-signal ends and mq-mcp begins for a release-readiness flow.

Mode:
Analyze

Output:
Per-tool responsibilities and handoffs, failure impact, and the critical
boundary to respect.
```
40 changes: 33 additions & 7 deletions docs/prompts/packs/mq-mcp-architecture-memory.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,16 +9,16 @@ structured memory records into actionable architectural insight.

## Recommended Modes

- Architect
- Analyze
- Decide
* Architect
* Analyze
* Decide

## When to Use

- When reading ADRs from mq-mcp architecture_memory/
- When a new change may conflict with an existing architecture decision
- When designing a new component and needing to check established boundaries
- When onboarding to the mq ecosystem and needing to understand system philosophy
* When reading ADRs from mq-mcp architecture_memory/
* When a new change may conflict with an existing architecture decision
* When designing a new component and needing to check established boundaries
* When onboarding to the mq ecosystem and needing to understand system philosophy

## Starter Prompt

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -74,3 +74,29 @@ Draft an ADR that includes:
- Consequences
- Constraints this creates for future work
```

## Expected Output

* What constraint or principle the ADR establishes, and why
* The boundary it defines and what breaks if it is ignored
* A verdict for the current change: compatible / conflicts / needs clarification

## Constraints

* Reason from the retrieved ADR text; do not invent decisions
* This pack interprets memory — it does not write to architecture_memory/ directly
* New ADR drafts are proposals for human review, not accepted records

## Example Usage

```text
Goal:
Check a new provider design against an existing "mq-mcp owns validation" ADR.

Mode:
Architect

Output:
The constraint the ADR sets, the boundary it defines, and a compatible /
conflicts / needs-clarification verdict for the change.
```
40 changes: 30 additions & 10 deletions docs/prompts/packs/mq-mcp-safety-review.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,15 +9,15 @@ thinking that makes mq-mcp review more effective.

## Recommended Modes

- Review
- Analyze
- Decide
* Review
* Analyze
* Decide

## When to Use

- Before running a mq-mcp security or risk review on a repo
- When deciding whether a change is safe to approve
- When assessing a new MCP tool or server for safety boundaries
* Before running a mq-mcp security or risk review on a repo
* When deciding whether a change is safe to approve
* When assessing a new MCP tool or server for safety boundaries

## Starter Prompt

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -74,7 +74,27 @@ State:
## Safety Constraints

Do not use this pack to:
- Bypass mq-mcp approval gates
- Approve changes that request hidden chain-of-thought
- Approve tool execution that circumvents user confirmation
- Substitute for a real mq-mcp security review where one is required
* Bypass mq-mcp approval gates
* Approve changes that request hidden chain-of-thought
* Approve tool execution that circumvents user confirmation
* Substitute for a real mq-mcp security review where one is required

## Expected Output

* Findings ordered by severity (critical / warn / info), each with evidence
* Recommended fixes or constraints per finding
* An explicit go / no-go recommendation with conditions

## Example Usage

```text
Goal:
Prepare a safety brief before running mq-mcp review on a new MCP server.

Mode:
Review

Output:
Severity-ordered findings with evidence, recommended constraints, and a
go / no-go recommendation.
```
Loading
Loading