Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

15 Commits

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

Smallest Complete — Stop one task from becoming ten.

A lightweight Skill for Codex and ChatGPT agents: once a complex job is clear enough to act, finish exactly what was asked, prove it works, and stop before the side quests. For non-trivial coding and architecture work, it conditionally applies an elegant-architecture lens—clear control, explicit ownership, stable handoffs, and only the state the real job requires. When the choice of tests or other validation evidence materially affects completion, it applies evidence-calibrated-testing to derive evidence from the real claim rather than from test volume. It works backward from the receiver's next action, then delivers one value path within the minimum hard boundaries that must hold now. Handoffs are complete relative to the receiver's current state, and reader-facing results are accepted in their actual medium and surrounding context rather than from producer checks alone.

Installer: Codex Skill scope: Codex and ChatGPT Work Runtime: none License: MIT

Four-panel comic: a developer asks an agent to fix one button; the agent builds a state machine, sync layer, recovery system, and version history; Smallest Complete brings it back to a fixed and tested button

Install with one prompt

Paste → send → start a new task.

Install Smallest Complete from https://github.com/JetXu-LLM/smallest-complete.
Follow INSTALL.md exactly.

Codex reads the installation contract, protects your existing setup, installs the Skill, and verifies the result. When it finishes, start a new task.

Review every install, update, and uninstall step →

Installs Preserves Never adds
One Skill directory + one global activation block Existing Skills and AGENTS.md instructions Runtime, hooks, dependencies, accounts, or telemetry

One Skill, three disciplines

Smallest Complete keeps scope, architecture, and validation tied to the same real job.

Scope discipline Architecture discipline Testing discipline
Applies to Complex Codex and ChatGPT Work tasks Non-trivial coding, debugging, refactoring, migration, system design, or architecture work Material test/evidence design, escaped failures, receiver/operational/real-run claims, or focused-versus-full selection
Question Is this inside what was actually authorized? Is this the clearest structure the evidence requires? What failure must the evidence distinguish, at which real boundary?
Stops Scope creep and adjacent “helpful” work Extra decision owners, brittle handoffs, speculative defenses, and tangled coordination Self-certified fixtures, proxy-green completion, and low-information reruns
Source Core SKILL.md Conditional elegant-architecture.md reference Conditional evidence-calibrated-testing.md reference

The runtime references load only when their decisions are material. A simple task stays simple. The package also includes a casebook and a self-contained evaluation rubric for learning, revising, and testing the method; ordinary execution does not load them.

When the task really needs architecture

Scope discipline decides whether something belongs in the job. Architecture discipline decides whether the necessary software structure has earned its ongoing cost.

For architecture design, non-trivial coding, refactoring, migration, or debugging that may change ownership, control flow, state, interfaces, or operations, the Skill reads elegant-architecture.md before planning or editing.

Architecture comparison: accidental complexity with overlapping decision owners and shared state versus elegant architecture with one control path, independent capability modules, honest state, and bounded agent judgment

Read the complete architecture guidance →

When validation evidence materially affects completion

For non-trivial test strategy, escaped defects, receiver, operational, or real-run claims, or a consequential choice among focused, broad, full, and other completion evidence, the Skill reads evidence-calibrated-testing.md. It derives failure scenarios from real losses, receivers, operation, and semantic impact; chooses the matching oracle and boundary; and limits every green claim to the path actually exercised. Routine local checks do not load the reference.

Read the complete testing guidance →

The core contract

Principle Meaning
Smallest No adjacent deliverables, speculative systems, or permanent machinery.
Complete The requested result works for its next receiver in the real medium, with required behavior preserved.
Coherent Long work keeps one route; local fixes fit it or replace part of it, and declared handoffs stay stable.
Proven Completion claims match observable evidence.
Stop Useful discoveries do not silently become new work.

In practice

You ask Smallest Complete response
“Fix CSV export when descriptions contain commas.” Fix escaping at the owning boundary, test it, stop. No export platform.
“Refactor this ingestion workflow.” Exercise representative real input through the receiver's next action, keep one control path, and add hardening only when a current boundary or evidence requires it.
“Turn these notes into five slides.” Research what the deck needs, deliver five strong slides, stop. No brand system.

For research, writing, analysis, and other ChatGPT Work tasks, inquiry stays as broad as the requested result needs. The boundary applies to deliverables and actions—not to useful thinking.

Deliberately small

Runtime None
Background process None
Skill network calls None
Telemetry None
Guarantee None—it is guidance for capable agents, not an enforcement layer

The complete runtime mechanism is one Skill, two conditional references, and one activation paragraph. Two non-runtime evaluation references ship beside it so the method can be tested without making evaluation ceremony part of every task.

Go deeper

Bring us the case we missed

The most useful contribution is not agreement. It is a concrete task where the Skill helped, failed, made no difference, activated at the wrong time, or gave architecture advice that was wrong for the real system.

Comparative runs and counterexamples are especially welcome. You do not need to propose a fix—a sanitized prompt, expected result, observed behavior, and the available evidence are enough to start.

Open a behavior report → · See what makes a useful contribution →

Star it if it earned it

If Smallest Complete stopped one bounded task from becoming an architecture project—or helped you build the architecture the task actually needed—click Star at the top of this page. It helps the next developer find it before their next five-line fix becomes a framework.

License

MIT. Independent project; not affiliated with or endorsed by OpenAI or Anthropic.

About

A Codex and ChatGPT Skill that helps agents avoid scope creep and overengineering—finish the ask, prove it works, and keep software architecture clear.

Topics

Resources

Contributing

Stars

9 stars

Watchers

0 watching

Forks

Releases

Packages

Contributors