packmind-create-standard
Guide for creating coding standards via the Packmind CLI. This skill should be used when users want to create a new coding standard (or add rules to an existing standard) that captures team conventions, best practices, or coding guidelines for distribution to Cursor.
SKILL.md
| Name | packmind-create-standard |
| Description | Guide for creating coding standards via the Packmind CLI. This skill should be used when users want to create a new coding standard (or add rules to an existing standard) that captures team conventions, best practices, or coding guidelines for distribution to Cursor. |
name: 'packmind-create-standard' description: 'Guide for creating coding standards via the Packmind CLI. This skill should be used when users want to create a new coding standard (or add rules to an existing standard) that captures team conventions, best practices, or coding guidelines for distribution to Cursor.' license: 'Complete terms in LICENSE.txt'
Standard Creator
This skill provides a complete walkthrough for creating coding standards via the Packmind CLI.
About Coding Standards
Coding standards are collections of rules that capture team conventions, best practices, and coding guidelines. They help maintain consistency across codebases and enable Cursor to follow your team's specific practices.
What Standards Provide
- Consistent code style - Rules that enforce naming conventions, formatting, and structure
- Best practices - Guidelines for error handling, testing, security, and performance
- Domain knowledge - Company-specific patterns, architectural decisions, and business logic
- Code examples - Positive/negative examples that demonstrate correct vs incorrect usage
Standard Structure
Every standard is drafted as a markdown file with this structure:
# Standard Name
## Description
What the standard covers and why.
## Scope
Where/when the standard applies (e.g., "TypeScript files", "React components").
## Rules
### Rule description starting with action verb
#### Positive Example
\`\`\`typescript
// Valid code example
\`\`\`
#### Negative Example
\`\`\`typescript
// Invalid code example
\`\`\`
### Another rule without examples
Naming Guidelines
The # Title heading is the display name shown in indexes and dashboards. The slug is auto-generated from it — never write the slug yourself.
Format: Use Title Case with spaces — natural language, not a slug.
- Capitalize each significant word
- Use spaces between words, never hyphens or underscores
- Be descriptive and specific (2–5 words) — indicate the domain/technology and the aspect covered
Examples:
- ✅
"TypeScript Testing Conventions","React Component File Organization","Backend Error Handling" - ❌
"typescript-testing-conventions"(slug format — use Title Case with spaces) - ❌
"testing"(too generic) - ❌
"good-practices"(slug format and too vague) - ❌
"Standards for Code"(describes meta-concept, not the actual domain)
Note: The Packmind CLI currently requires the scope field. The summary field is used in other workflows (like MCP) but not yet supported by the CLI.
Understanding scope vs summary
scope(required by CLI): WHERE the standard applies - file patterns, technologies, specific locations- Examples:
"TypeScript test files (*.spec.ts, *.test.ts)","React functional components"
- Examples:
summary(optional, not yet CLI-supported): WHEN/WHY to apply - high-level purpose and trigger condition- Examples:
"Apply when writing tests to ensure consistency","Use when handling user data for privacy compliance"
- Examples:
Prerequisites
Before creating a standard, verify that packmind-cli is available:
Check if packmind-cli is installed:
packmind-cli --version
If not available, install it:
npm install -g @packmind/cli
Then login to Packmind:
packmind-cli login
Standard Creation Process
To create a standard, follow this process in order, skipping steps only if there is a clear reason why they are not applicable.
Step 1: Clarify the Request
Gather essential information before drafting the standard.
Clarification Flow
Study the user's request and identify critical gaps. The number of questions should match the request clarity:
- 1-2 questions when the request is well-defined (clear scope, specific examples, detailed context)
- 3-5 questions when the context is unclear or the request is vague
Examples of focused questions:
- "Which service or file shows the expected pattern?"
- "Is there an existing doc or rule we must stay aligned with?"
- "What specific aspect matters most (mocking guidelines, naming conventions, assertion style)?"
Introduce questions with a simple phrase about needing clarification, then list as bullet points—no numbering, no category headers.
Repository Access Guardrail
Do not open or scan repository files unless the user explicitly points to them (provides file paths or requests project-wide review). If source references are needed, ask the user to supply them.
What to Capture
Take brief notes on:
- Title or slug (if mentioned)
- Scope guardrails
- Key references
- Expected outcomes
Keep notes concise—just enough to unlock drafting.
Step 2: Draft Standard in Markdown
Transform the understanding into a complete markdown draft with rules and examples.
Draft Creation
- Create a draft markdown file in
.packmind/standards/_drafts/(create the folder if missing) using filename<slug>.md(lowercase with hyphens) - Draft structure:
# <Standard Title>(Title Case, 2–5 words)## Description— what the standard covers and why it exists## Scope— where/when the standard applies (file patterns, technologies)## Rules— each rule as a### <rule text>subsection following the Rule Writing Guidelines below- For each rule that benefits from code examples, add:
#### Positive Examplewith a language-annotated code block showing the compliant approach#### Negative Examplewith a language-annotated code block showing the anti-pattern
- If a rule doesn't benefit from code examples (e.g., process or organizational rules), skip examples for that rule
This draft file is the only file created during drafting — no separate files are needed.
Rule Writing Guidelines
Each rule should follow these format requirements:
- Start with an action verb - Use imperative form (e.g., "Use", "Avoid", "Prefer", "Include")
- Be concise - Max ~25 words per rule
- Be specific and actionable - Avoid vague guidance
- Focus on one concept - One rule per convention
Avoid Rationale Phrases
Rules describe WHAT to do, not WHY. Strip justifications and benefits—let examples demonstrate value.
Common fluff patterns to remove:
- "to improve/provide/ensure..." (benefit phrases)
- "while maintaining/preserving..." (secondary concerns)
- "for better/enhanced..." (quality claims)
- "and enable/allow..." (future benefits)
Bad (includes rationale):
Document props with JSDoc comments to provide IDE intellisense and improve developer experience.
Good (action only):
Document component props with JSDoc comments (
/** ... */) describing purpose, expected values, and defaults.
Rule Splitting
If a rule addresses 2+ distinct concerns, proactively split it into separate rules:
Bad (too broad):
Create centralized color constants in dedicated files for consistent palettes, using semantic naming based on purpose rather than specific color values.
Good (split into focused rules):
- Define color constants in
theme/colors.tsusing semantic names (e.g.,primary,error) - Use semantic color tokens instead of literal hex values in components
Inline Examples in Rules
Inline examples (code, paths, patterns) within the rule content are optional. Only include them when they clarify something not obvious from the rule text.
Types of useful inline examples:
- Code syntax:
const,async/await,/** ... */ - File paths:
infra/repositories/,domain/entities/ - Naming patterns:
.spec.ts,I{Name}prefix
Good rules with inline examples:
- "Use const instead of let for variables that are never reassigned"
- "Prefix interface names with I (e.g.,
IUserService)" - "Place repository implementations in
infra/repositories/"
Good rules without inline examples:
- "Name root describe block after the class or function under test"
- "Run linting before committing changes"
- "Keep business logic out of controllers"
Bad rules:
- "Write good code" (too vague)
- "Use const and prefix interfaces with I" (multiple concepts)
- "Don't use var" (no positive guidance)
Examples Guidelines
- Examples should be realistic and directly relevant to this codebase
- Each example should clearly demonstrate why the rule matters
- Keep code snippets minimal—only include what's necessary to illustrate the point
- Annotate every code block with its language (e.g.,
typescript,sql,javascript)
Valid language values for code blocks:
- TYPESCRIPT, TYPESCRIPT_TSX
- JAVASCRIPT, JAVASCRIPT_JSX
- PYTHON, JAVA, GO, RUST, CSHARP
- PHP, RUBY, KOTLIN, SWIFT, SQL
- HTML, CSS, SCSS, YAML, JSON
- MARKDOWN, BASH, GENERIC
Draft Summary
After saving the draft file, write a concise summary that captures:
- One sentence summarizing the standard's purpose
- A bullet list of all rules (each rule ~22 words max, imperative form, with inline code if helpful)
Then proceed directly to Step 3.
Step 3: Review Before Submission
Before running the CLI command, you MUST get explicit user approval:
- Display a formatted recap of the standard content:
---
Name: <standard name>
Description: <description>
Scope: <scope>
Rules:
1. <rule content>
- ✅ <positive example>
- ❌ <negative example>
2. <rule content>
- ✅ <positive example>
- ❌ <negative example>
...
---
-
Provide the file path to the markdown file so users can open and edit it directly if needed.
-
Ask: "Here is the standard that will be created on Packmind. The draft file is at
<path>if you want to review or edit it. Do you approve?" -
Wait for explicit user confirmation before proceeding to Step 4.
-
If the user requests changes, go back to earlier steps to make adjustments.
Step 4: Confirm and Submit
-
Re-read the markdown file from disk to capture any user edits.
-
Compare with the original content you created in Step 2.
-
If changes were detected:
- Display the formatted recap again (same format as Step 3)
- Ask: "The file was modified. Here is the updated content that will be sent. Do you confirm?"
- Wait for explicit confirmation before proceeding.
-
If no changes: Proceed directly to submission.
-
Convert the markdown to JSON using these conversion rules:
# heading→name## Descriptioncontent →description## Scopecontent →scope- Each
### ...under## Rules→ rulecontent #### Positive Examplecode block →examples.positive#### Negative Examplecode block →examples.negative- Code fence language identifier →
examples.language(UPPERCASED)
Important:
examplesis a single object (not an array) — one positive/negative pair per rule. It is optional — omit entirely for rules without code examples. When present, all three fields (positive,negative,language) are required.Expected JSON format:
{ "name": "Standard Name", "description": "What the standard covers and why.", "scope": "Where/when the standard applies.", "rules": [ { "content": "Rule description starting with action verb", "examples": { "positive": "// valid code", "negative": "// invalid code", "language": "TYPESCRIPT" } }, { "content": "Rule without examples" } ] } -
Pipe the JSON directly to the CLI via stdin using a heredoc (no intermediate file needed):
packmind-cli standards create --origin-skill packmind-create-standard <<'EOF'
{"name":"...","description":"...","scope":"...","rules":[...]}
EOF
Expected output on success:
packmind-cli Standard "Your Standard Name" created successfully (ID: <uuid>)
Troubleshooting
"Not logged in" error:
packmind-cli login
"Failed to resolve global space" error:
- Verify your API key is valid
- Check network connectivity to Packmind server
Validation errors:
- Ensure all required sections are present in the markdown file
- Check that the
## Rulessection has at least one###rule subsection - Verify code blocks have language annotations
"expected object, received array" error on examples:
- The
examplesfield must be a single object{positive, negative, language}, not an array - Each rule supports at most one example pair
Step 5: Cleanup
After the standard is successfully created, delete the draft markdown file in .packmind/standards/_drafts/.
Only clean up on success - if the CLI command fails, keep the files so the user can retry.
Step 6: Offer to Add to Package
After successful creation, check if the standard fits an existing package:
- Run
packmind-cli install --listto get available packages - If no packages exist, skip this step silently and end the workflow
- Analyze the created standard's name, description, and scope against each package's name and description
- If a package is a clear semantic fit (the standard's domain/technology aligns with the package's purpose):
- Present to user: "This standard seems to fit the
<package-slug>package." - Offer three options:
- Add to
<package-slug> - Choose a different package
- Skip
- Add to
- Present to user: "This standard seems to fit the
- If no clear fit is found, skip silently (do not mention packages)
- If user chooses to add:
- Run:
packmind-cli packages add --to <package-slug> --standard <standard-slug> - Ask: "Would you like me to run
packmind-cli installto sync the changes?" - If yes, run:
packmind-cli install
- Run:
Complete Example
Here's a complete example creating a TypeScript testing standard:
File: .packmind/standards/_drafts/testing-conventions.md
# TypeScript Testing Conventions
## Description
Enforce consistent testing patterns in TypeScript test files to improve readability, maintainability, and reliability of the test suite.
## Scope
TypeScript test files (*.spec.ts, *.test.ts)
## Rules
### Use descriptive test names that explain the expected behavior
#### Positive Example
\`\`\`typescript
it('returns empty array when no items match filter')
\`\`\`
#### Negative Example
\`\`\`typescript
it('test filter')
\`\`\`
### Follow Arrange-Act-Assert pattern in test structure
#### Positive Example
\`\`\`typescript
const input = createInput();
const result = processInput(input);
expect(result).toEqual(expected);
\`\`\`
#### Negative Example
\`\`\`typescript
expect(processInput(createInput())).toEqual(expected);
\`\`\`
### Use one assertion per test for better error isolation
#### Positive Example
\`\`\`typescript
it('validates name', () => { expect(result.name).toBe('test'); });
it('validates age', () => { expect(result.age).toBe(25); });
\`\`\`
#### Negative Example
\`\`\`typescript
it('validates user', () => { expect(result.name).toBe('test'); expect(result.age).toBe(25); });
\`\`\`
### Avoid using 'should' at the start of test names - use assertive verb-first naming
Creating the standard (piped via stdin):
packmind-cli standards create --origin-skill packmind-create-standard <<'EOF'
{"name":"TypeScript Testing Conventions","description":"Enforce consistent testing patterns...","scope":"TypeScript test files (*.spec.ts, *.test.ts)","rules":[...]}
EOF
Quick Reference
| Section | Required | Description |
|---|---|---|
# Title | Yes | Title Case, descriptive, 2–5 words |
## Description | Yes | What and why |
## Scope | Yes (CLI) | Where it applies |
## Rules | Yes | Contains rule subsections |
### Rule text | Yes (≥1) | Rule text (verb-first, max ~25 words) |
#### Positive Example | No | Valid code in fenced block |
#### Negative Example | No | Invalid code in fenced block |