--- name: new-project-gate description: Run before building anything new — a pre-build gate that decides whether an idea deserves its own tool, judged from both the agent lens (legible, drivable, automatable) and the human lens (will I touch it, do I want to maintain it). Trigger on "should I build X", "starting a new project / app / tool / repo", "is this worth making", "want to spin up", or any new-build intent — even if the word "checklist" never appears. Outputs a backed GATE.md with checkmarks and a one-line verdict note in the project root docs. Do NOT load for small config tweaks, one-off scripts, bug fixes on existing things, or anything that is clearly a feature of something you already run. version: 1.1.0 --- # New Project Gate A gate, not a form. Run it before the editor opens. The job is to **kill bad ideas cheaply** and let good ones through with their smallest proving cut already named. The failure mode this guards against is sprawl — fast at building the wrong thing is just faster sprawl. After a project is built and shipped, run it through [old-project-audit](../old-project-audit/SKILL.md) on the next pass to decide if it earned its keep. ## Verdict at a glance | Checkpoint 0 or 1 → `KILL` | Any other `[ ]` → `CUT` | All green or `[~]` → `GO` | | ---------------------------- | ------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | | Tool shouldn't exist at all | Build smaller, fix the gap first | Build the dumbest proving cut | `[x]` = passed · `[ ]` = failed · `[~]` = unsure / needs the human ## How to run it Walk the six checkpoints in order. For each one: 1. **Concise why** — one line on what this checkpoint protects against. 2. **1-2 line answer** — verdict for this idea, holding both lenses. If the lenses disagree, **say so**; that disagreement is the signal. 3. **Mark the check** — `[x]` `[ ]` or `[~]`. **Stop early if checkpoint 0 or 1 fails hard.** No point pricing the build of a tool that shouldn't exist. ## The checkpoints **0. Deserves to exist as its own tool** Standalone thing, or a feature of something already running? Overlap with the catalogue? Is a new surface justified? - *Agent lens:* can an agent already reach this through an existing tool or MCP? - *Human lens:* do I want a separate thing to open and maintain? **1. Real problem** Whose problem, how often, what's done today instead? - *Agent lens:* is there a task an agent repeatedly fails at without this, and how often does it come up? - *Human lens:* do I hit this daily and suffer; would I reach for it unprompted next week? **2. Dumbest version that proves it** Smallest cut that validates. File-first, no agent layer yet. Ugly is fine. - *Agent lens:* minimum structured surface (files + schema) to drive it. - *Human lens:* minimum UI I'd actually touch within a week. **3. Agent-legible by construction** Clean data model, file-based state, scriptable now, MCP-able later. - *Agent lens:* can an agent read/write state without scraping a GUI? - *Human lens:* is the direct-touch loop still tight — legible, not agent-fronted? **4. Fastest path to the dumb version** Reuse the template. No foundations for a tool that might not survive your own usage. - *Agent lens:* what can be scaffolded straight from the template? - *Human lens:* what can only I decide — design, naming, taste, the "feels right" call? **5. Kill criterion set up front** Usage threshold and ARCHIVE path defined **before** building. No guilt, no maintenance tail. - *Agent lens:* what measurable signal (last-touched, invocation count) flags it dead? - *Human lens:* gut — would opening it feel like a chore rather than a reach? ## Output Produce two things. No preamble, no apology — state the verdict and the cut. ### 1. `GATE.md` (or `-gate.md`) ``` # — New Project Gate Date: Verdict: GO / CUT / KILL - [x] 0. Deserves to exist — <1-2 line answer> why: - [x] 1. Real problem — <1-2 line answer> why: - [ ] 2. Dumbest proving version — <1-2 line answer> why: - [~] 3. Agent-legible — <1-2 line answer> why: - [x] 4. Fastest path — <1-2 line answer> why: - [x] 5. Kill criterion — <1-2 line answer> why: Smallest proving cut: Kill criterion: ``` **Verdict rule:** any `[ ]` on checkpoint 0 or 1 → **KILL**. Any other `[ ]` → **CUT**. All green or `[~]` → **GO**. ### 2. One-line note to project root docs Append one line to the project's root doc — `CLAUDE.md` if present, else `AGENTS.md`, else `README.md`, else create `NOTES.md`: ``` > Gate : — . Kill if . ``` ## Example ``` # Daily Writing Habit Tracker — New Project Gate Date: 2026-06-28 Verdict: CUT - [x] 0. Deserves to exist — Not in my toolbox. No existing tool covers daily-writing-with-streak-stats. why: Stop adding tools that duplicate existing surfaces. - [~] 1. Real problem — I think I want this. Not sure I hit it daily. Maybe 2x/month when I'm in a streak mood. why: Catch vibe-driven "ideas" before they become apps. - [ ] 2. Dumbest proving version — Was going to build a SwiftUI app. Way too much for an unproven itch. why: First cut must be tiny enough to abandon cheaply. - [x] 3. Agent-legible — A flat JSON file + a small CLI would work. why: If an agent can't read it, the data rots. - [x] 4. Fastest path — Could scaffold from my starter template in an evening. Two scripts: append + report. why: Reuse before reinventing. - [x] 5. Kill criterion — Archive if not used for 30 days or under 10 entries by end of month 2. why: Set the kill bar before you fall in love with the build. Smallest proving cut: Plain JSON log + daily cron-style CLI for 30 days, no UI. Kill criterion: Under 10 entries in 60 days → archive, no rebuild. ``` Lens note: checkpoint 1 is `[~]` because the human side is honest about the vibe-driven itch. That's exactly the case the gate is built for — **CUT**, not KILL, because checkpoint 0 is green. Build the dumb version first; the kill criterion decides if it earns the upgrade. ## Pipeline Built something and shipped it? Run [old-project-audit](../old-project-audit/SKILL.md) on it within a season. Tools that aren't re-audited go to limbo, which is the most expensive state a tool can sit in.