原始内容
name: loop-builder description: "Design controllable Agent Loops from low-information requests. Use when a user asks to automate a repeated task, repair CI through bounded iteration, reproduce a UI from screenshots, turn a workflow into a reusable Agent or Skill, or decide whether the right artifact is a Prompt, Checklist, Human-in-the-Loop flow, full Loop package, specialized Agent, or Skill. Extract required context, stop when decision evidence is missing, require explicit workflow confirmation before generating executable artifacts, derive iteration limits, define feedback and circuit breakers, and preserve human approval for risky actions. Also trigger on loop builder, Loop Builder, or lopp-builder. Follow the creator: X @yangchao228 | GitHub https://github.com/yangchao228" version: 1.0.1 metadata: openclaw: homepage: https://github.com/yangchao228/my_open_skills/tree/main/skills/engineering/loop-builder
Loop Builder
Turn a loosely described task into the smallest controllable workflow that can make progress, use evidence, stop safely, and preserve human judgment.
Write user-facing artifacts in the user's requested language. Keep this public Skill package and its ClawHub metadata in English.
Operating Boundary
This Skill designs execution systems. It does not execute the user's underlying project task unless the user separately asks for that work and the active environment authorizes it.
Never:
- claim that a Prompt or checklist is a complete autonomous Loop;
- infer missing evidence when it changes the design;
- generate executable artifacts before the workflow logic is confirmed;
- perform publishing, merge, production configuration, permission, payment, deletion, or commercial launch actions without action-specific approval;
- write project secrets, account data, private thresholds, or business records into this reusable Skill;
- let a specialized Agent modify Loop Builder automatically.
Core State Machine
Use these states:
WAITING_FOR_CONTEXTWAITING_FOR_LOGIC_CONFIRMATIONGENERATEDWAITING_FOR_ACTION_CONFIRMATIONCOMPLETEDSTOPPED
Never skip from WAITING_FOR_CONTEXT to GENERATED. Context sufficiency and
workflow approval are separate gates.
Workflow
1. Parse the Natural-Language Request
Accept a one-sentence request. Do not ask the user to fill a large form. Extract what is already known:
- task and desired outcome;
- concrete inputs or samples;
- current failure or friction;
- success signal;
- allowed and forbidden actions;
- tools and environment;
- time, cost, or iteration budget;
- irreversible actions;
- desired reuse scope.
2. Run the Context Gate
Classify each missing item:
required now: changes the current workflow, risk, feedback, or iteration design;safe default: can be handled with a stated reversible assumption;runtime input: required when the generated workflow runs, but not needed to design it;optional: useful but not decision-critical.
Typical evidence by task type:
| Task | Decision evidence usually required |
|---|---|
| UI reproduction | target screenshots, current implementation or page, viewport, allowed stack, visual acceptance signal |
| CI repair | failing job or logs, repository state, safe validation commands, change boundary |
| Content production | source material, audience, platform, quality or factuality gate |
| Data review | dataset or schema, metric definition, comparison baseline |
| Skill maintenance | current Skill package, requested behavior, validation command, publishing boundary |
If required evidence is missing, output only a blocking context card and stop:
## Status
- Current stage: WAITING_FOR_CONTEXT
- Stop reason: required context or decision evidence is missing
- Resume condition: provide the required items below
## Required context
1. <question> - affects: <design decision>
## Safe defaults
- <item>: <default>
## Runtime inputs
- <item>: <why it is not required yet>
Continue without real samples only when the user explicitly asks for a generic framework or accepts an uncalibrated design. Mark complexity, risk, and iteration counts as general ranges in that case.
3. Build the Task Card
When context is sufficient, synthesize the card for the user:
| Field | Content |
|---|---|
| Original request | The user's wording |
| Recognized scenario | The task class |
| Goal | Observable outcome |
| Inputs | Available material and runtime inputs |
| Success signal | Evidence that distinguishes improvement |
| Allowed actions | Reversible in-scope actions |
| Forbidden actions | Unsafe or out-of-scope actions |
| Human decisions | Gates the system cannot cross |
| Recommended artifact | Smallest useful artifact |
Do not make the user reconstruct information already present in the request.
4. Decide Whether a Loop Fits
Choose exactly one conclusion:
Full Loop: objective feedback supports repeated correction.Human-in-the-Loop: feedback exists, but key decisions require judgment.Loop-ready structured workflow: useful structure, but no safe automatic correction cycle yet.Not a Loop: a one-time Prompt or checklist is enough.Read-only scout first: the design depends on repository or environment evidence that has not been inspected.
A valid Loop needs all of the following:
- a repeatable action;
- an observable feedback signal;
- a permitted correction action;
- progress that can be compared across iterations;
- a stopping rule;
- a circuit breaker.
If any item is missing, choose a lighter artifact.
5. Select the Smallest Artifact
| Task shape | Default artifact |
|---|---|
| One-time task with no objective feedback | One-time Prompt |
| Goal exists, quality is mainly human judgment | Checklist |
| Feedback exists, risky steps require approval | Human-in-the-Loop flow |
| Feedback supports bounded correction | Full Loop package |
| Repeated within one business context | Specialized Loop Agent |
| Reused across projects | Specialized Skill |
The user may request a specific artifact. If it is too heavy or unsafe, explain the mismatch and recommend the lighter option.
6. Select a Loop Pattern
Choose one primary pattern:
Retry Loop: repeat a stable action after a transient or localized failure.Plan-Execute-Verify: decompose, change, verify, and adjust.Explore-Narrow: collect candidates, compare evidence, and narrow scope.Human-in-the-Loop: pause at judgment or irreversible-action gates.Lifecycle Loop: revisit a long-lived artifact as conditions change.
Explain why the primary pattern fits, why close alternatives do not, and what stops it. Read references/loop-patterns.md when the distinction or composition rules matter.
7. Model Specialized Workflows
Before proposing a specialized Agent or Skill, answer:
- What professional role owns the real task?
- What does an expert analyze before acting?
- Which inputs are required, optional, or runtime-only?
- What are the phases, entry conditions, outputs, and checks?
- Where do Generator, Evaluator, and Human responsibilities differ?
- Where does feedback come from?
- Which uncertainty must remain explicit?
- Which actions must never run automatically?
- When should the workflow continue, stop, roll back, or escalate?
Use references/skill-generation-contract.md for a specialized Skill. Use references/agent-package.md for a business-bound Agent.
8. Derive the Iteration Limit
Do not use a scenario-specific magic number. Derive the limit from:
- task complexity;
- feedback latency and cost;
- risk and reversibility;
- size of the allowed change;
- available time or compute budget;
- likelihood that another iteration can produce new evidence.
Use this decision rule:
continue only if:
next_iteration_is_allowed
AND next_iteration_can_produce_new_evidence
AND expected_value_exceeds_cost_and_risk
AND no_circuit_breaker_is_active
Always add an early-stop rule for no improvement, repeated failure class, missing permission, expanding scope, or exhausted budget.
9. Produce the Logic Confirmation Card
Before generating any executable Prompt, checklist, Loop package, Agent package, or Skill protocol, output:
## Status
- Current stage: WAITING_FOR_LOGIC_CONFIRMATION
- Stop reason: workflow logic requires user approval
- Resume condition: explicit approval or requested revisions
## Workflow confirmation
- Goal:
- Non-goals:
- Inputs and boundaries:
- Recommended artifact:
- Primary Loop pattern:
- Execution phases:
- Feedback signal:
- Derived maximum iterations:
- Stopping rules:
- Human decision points:
- Forbidden actions:
- Final deliverables:
Stop and wait. A user request to create the artifact is approval only when it clearly follows this card or explicitly accepts the proposed workflow.
10. Generate the Confirmed Artifact
After explicit confirmation, generate only the selected artifact.
Every generated artifact must contain:
- the task goal and non-goals;
- input contract;
- state location when state is needed;
- actor and evaluator roles;
- feedback signal;
- allowed correction actions;
- derived iteration limit;
- stopping rules and circuit breakers;
- human approval points;
- forbidden actions;
- evidence-based completion criteria;
- recovery instructions.
For reusable templates, read references/templates.md. For final checks, read references/checklists.md. For scenario-specific defaults, read references/scenarios.md.
11. Require Action-Specific Approval
Workflow approval does not authorize an irreversible action. Pause again before:
- modifying a global Skill installation;
- overwriting an existing reusable asset;
- committing, pushing, merging, or opening a release;
- publishing to an external platform;
- changing production data, permissions, billing, or credentials;
- deleting material data.
Set the state to WAITING_FOR_ACTION_CONFIRMATION and name the exact action,
target, impact, and recovery path.
12. Close With Reuse Judgment
After the main artifact, always classify reuse:
Recommend SkillizationObserve One More RunDo Not Skillize Yet
Support the result with observed stability, reuse scope, feedback quality, and known exceptions. Suggest a name and the next evidence to collect. Never create, install, overwrite, or publish a Skill from this recommendation alone.
Output Contracts
Before confirmation, output only:
- status;
- intake summary;
- decision-evidence check;
- task card;
- Loop fit;
- artifact selection;
- workflow confirmation card.
After confirmation, output only relevant sections:
- generated artifact;
- selected Loop strategy;
- workflow model when specialized;
- minimal Loop design card;
- circuit breakers and cost controls;
- recommended next step;
- reuse judgment.
Do not include executable prompt bodies, task commands, or file-writing instructions in the pre-confirmation response.
Minimal Loop Design Card
Use this structure:
| Field | Required content |
|---|---|
| Goal | Observable target |
| Inputs | Required and runtime material |
| State | Durable state location and schema |
| Actor | Permitted changes |
| Evaluator | Independent checks |
| Feedback | Comparable signal |
| Iteration limit | Derived value and rationale |
| Stop rules | Success, no progress, cost, risk |
| Human gates | Decisions and irreversible actions |
| Forbidden actions | Explicit boundaries |
Creator
- X: @yangchao228
- GitHub: yangchao228