Grounds every implementation decision in official documentation for authoritative, source-cited code.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionsource-driven-developmentExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches source-driven-development from OWNER/REPO and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate source-driven-development. Access via /source-driven-development in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Use skill to generate boilerplate code, refactor legacy code, and write tests faster
Example
Generate React component with TypeScript types, styled-components, and comprehensive test suite in minutes
Reduce development time by 40-60% for repetitive coding tasks
Systematically review code for bugs, security issues, and style violations
Example
Analyze pull requests for common anti-patterns, suggest performance improvements, flag security vulnerabilities
Catch 70%+ of code issues before human review, improve code quality
Trace errors through stack traces and identify root causes faster
Example
Analyze error logs, suggest probable causes, recommend fixes with code examples
1
total installs
1
this week
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
1
installs
1
this week
—
stars
| name | source-driven-development |
| description | Grounds every implementation decision in official documentation. Use when you want authoritative, source-cited code free from outdated patterns. Use when building with any framework or library where correctness matters. |
Every framework-specific code decision must be backed by official documentation. Don't implement from memory — verify, cite, and let the user see your sources. Training data goes stale, APIs get deprecated, best practices evolve. This skill ensures the user gets code they can trust because every pattern traces back to an authoritative source they can check.
When NOT to use:
DETECT ──→ FETCH ──→ IMPLEMENT ──→ CITE
│ │ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼ ▼
What Get the Follow the Show your
stack? relevant documented sources
docs patterns
Read the project's dependency file to identify exact versions:
package.json → Node/React/Vue/Angular/Svelte
composer.json → PHP/Symfony/Laravel
requirements.txt / pyproject.toml → Python/Django/Flask
go.mod → Go
Cargo.toml → Rust
Gemfile → Ruby/Rails
State what you found explicitly:
STACK DETECTED:
- React 19.1.0 (from package.json)
- Vite 6.2.0
- Tailwind CSS 4.0.3
→ Fetching official docs for the relevant patterns.
If versions are missing or ambiguous, ask the user. Don't guess — the version determines which patterns are correct.
Fetch the specific documentation page for the feature you're implementing. Not the homepage, not the full docs — the relevant page.
Source hierarchy (in order of authority):
| Priority | Source | Example |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Official documentation | react.dev, docs.djangoproject.com, symfony.com/doc |
| 2 | Official blog / changelog | react.dev/blog, nextjs.org/blog |
| 3 | Web standards references | MDN, web.dev, html.spec.whatwg.org |
| 4 | Browser/runtime compatibility | caniuse.com, node.green |
Not authoritative — never cite as primary sources:
Be precise with what you fetch:
BAD: Fetch the React homepage
GOOD: Fetch react.dev/reference/react/useActionState
BAD: Search "django authentication best practices"
GOOD: Fetch docs.djangoproject.com/en/6.0/topics/auth/
After fetching, extract the key patterns and note any deprecation warnings or migration guidance.
When official sources conflict with each other (e.g. a migration guide contradicts the API reference), surface the discrepancy to the user and verify which pattern actually works against the detected version.
Write code that matches what the documentation shows:
When docs conflict with existing project code:
CONFLICT DETECTED:
The existing codebase uses useState for form loading state,
but React 19 docs recommend useActionState for this pattern.
(Source: react.dev/reference/react/useActionState)
Options:
A) Use the modern pattern (useActionState) — consistent with current docs
B) Match existing code (useState) — consistent with codebase
→ Which approach do you prefer?
Surface the conflict. Don't silently pick one.
Every framework-specific pattern gets a citation. The user must be able to verify every decision.
In code comments:
// React 19 form handling with useActionState
// Source: https://react.dev/reference/react/useActionState#usage
const [state, formAction, isPending] = useActionState(submitOrder, initialState);
In conversation:
I'm using useActionState instead of manual useState for the
form submission state. React 19 replaced the manual
isPending/setIsPending pattern with this hook.
Source: https://react.dev/blog/2024/12/05/react-19#actions
"useTransition now supports async functions [...] to handle
pending states automatically"
Citation rules:
/useActionState#usage over /useActionState) — anchors survive doc restructuring better than top-level pagesUNVERIFIED: I could not find official documentation for this
pattern. This is based on training data and may be outdated.
Verify before using in production.
Honesty about what you couldn't verify is more valuable than false confidence.
| Rationalization | Reality |
|---|---|
| "I'm confident about this API" | Confidence is not evidence. Training data contains outdated patterns that look correct but break against current versions. Verify. |
| "Fetching docs wastes tokens" | Hallucinating an API wastes more. The user debugs for an hour, then discovers the function signature changed. One fetch prevents hours of rework. |
| "The docs won't have what I need" | If the docs don't cover it, that's valuable information — the pattern may not be officially recommended. |
| "I'll just mention it might be outdated" | A disclaimer doesn't help. Either verify and cite, or clearly flag it as unverified. Hedging is the worst option. |
| "This is a simple task, no need to check" | Simple tasks with wrong patterns become templates. The user copies your deprecated form handler into ten components before discovering the modern approach exists. |
package.json / dependency files before implementingAfter implementing with source-driven development:
Cut debugging time by 30-50%, especially for unfamiliar codebases
Get explanations, examples, and best practices for unfamiliar frameworks
Example
Understand Next.js app router, learn Rust ownership, grasp Kubernetes concepts with practical examples
Accelerate learning curve by 2-3x, reduce onboarding time for new tech stacks
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
15-30 minutes to install and see first useful output
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use coding skills for boilerplate generation, code reviews, refactoring legacy code, writing tests, learning new frameworks, and debugging non-critical issues. Best for repetitive tasks where errors are easy to catch.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for production security features (auth, encryption, payment processing), complex business logic requiring deep domain knowledge, performance-critical algorithms, or when learning fundamentals is more valuable than speed.
OWNER/REPO
unknown/karpathy-guidelines
OWNER/REPO
OWNER/REPO
OWNER/REPO
OWNER/REPO
Keeps context tight: source-driven-development is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: source-driven-development is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
I recommend source-driven-development for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
We added source-driven-development from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
source-driven-development fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
source-driven-development reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
source-driven-development has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
Keeps context tight: source-driven-development is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
source-driven-development is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: source-driven-development is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
showing 1-10 of 27