[ianzepp]

Pull Request Checklist

• I have read and followed the CONTRIBUTING.md guidelines.
• I have read and followed the Guidance for submissions involving paid services. (No paid services involved.)
• My contribution adds a new instruction, prompt, agent, skill, workflow, or canvas extension file in the correct directory.
• The file follows the required naming convention.
• The content is clearly structured and follows the example format.
• I have tested my instructions, prompt, agent, skill, workflow, or canvas extension with GitHub Copilot. (Not tested in Copilot itself; see notes.)
• I have run npm start and verified that README.md is up to date.
• I am targeting the main branch for this pull request.

---

Description

Adds skills/faber-language, a skill for writing, checking and running Faber programs (.fab). Faber is an experimental, statically typed language for coding agents and human authors; it compiles to Rust, TypeScript, Go and more.

Why a skill helps here: Faber is new and changes between minor releases, so models have little or no current Faber in their training data. The skill tells Copilot to load the live agent docs (https://faberlang.dev/llms.txt and https://faberlang.dev/agents/index.md) before writing code, then to loop on faber check / faber run, instead of guessing from other languages. It also asks before installing anything and states the platform limits (macOS arm64 and Linux x64 binaries only).

---

Type of Contribution

• New instruction file.
• New prompt file.
• New agent file.
• New plugin.
• New skill file.
• New agentic workflow.
• New canvas extension.
• Update to existing instruction, prompt, agent, plugin, skill, workflow, or canvas extension.
• Other (please specify):

---

Additional Notes

• npm run skill:validate passes (456 skills) and npm run build regenerated docs/README.skills.md (one added row).
• Both examples pass faber check and faber run on Faber 1.18.1 (Linux x64) with the stated output, and emit cleanly with faber emit -t rust, -t ts and -t go.
• I'm Faber's author (Ian Zepp), so this is a first-party listing. The skill was drafted with AI assistance and reviewed against the current release.

---

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution abides by the Code of Conduct and will be licensed under the MIT License.

[github-actions]

🚦 Submission status: 👀 Ready for review

Risk tier: merge-risk:high — Privileged execution, automation, or review-policy change
Required to merge: passing submission-gate checks plus 1 approval from reviewers with write access, including a maintainer with admin or maintain permission.

Why this tier

• Label needs-review:HIGH flags a high contributor-risk signal

Automated checks

Check	Status	Details
Line endings	✅ Passed	Passed · logs
Spelling	✅ Passed	Passed · logs
Generated README consistency	✅ Passed	Passed · logs
Skill validation	✅ Passed	Passed · logs
Skill lint (vally)	✅ Passed	Passed · logs
Risk scan	✅ Passed	Passed · logs
Contributor reputation	✅ Passed	Passed · logs
Duplicate resource scan	✅ Passed	Passed · logs
PR quality signal	⏭️ Skipped	Skipped by its workflow · logs

Review

• Approvals: 0/1
• Assigned reviewer: not assigned yet — comment /request-review to ask for one
• Review target date: not set
• Still needed: 1 more approval(s); an approval from a maintainer with admin or maintain permission
• The core-maintainers pool is not staffed yet; an approver with admin or maintain permission is required instead.

Commands

Command	Who	What it does
/rerun-checks	PR author, maintainers	Re-runs failed or incomplete checks and re-evaluates this gate
/request-review	PR author, maintainers	Asks the review rotation to assign a reviewer (adds needs-reviewer)

_{Updated for e5175d4 · gate run · This comment is maintained automatically — see submission gate docs.}

[github-actions]

🔴 Contributor Reputation Check: HIGH risk

Check	Risk
Profile	HIGH
Credential audit	NONE

Maintainers: please review this contributor before merging.
See the workflow run for full details.
Automated check powered by AGT.

[github-actions]

🔒 PR Risk Scan Results

Scanned 1 changed file(s).

Severity	Count
🔴 High	0
🟠 Medium	0
ℹ️ Info	0

✅ No matching risk patterns were detected in changed files.

This is an automated soft-gate report. Findings indicate review targets and do not block merge by themselves.

[github-actions]

🔍 Vally Lint Results

✅ All checks passed

Scope	Checked
Skills	1
Agents	0
Total	1

Severity	Count
❌ Errors	0
⚠️ Warnings	0
ℹ️ Advisories	0

Summary

Level	Finding
ℹ️	✅ faber-language (2/2 checks passed)
ℹ️	✓ [spec-compliance] All 1 skill(s) are spec-compliant.
ℹ️	✓ spec-compliance: All spec checks passed.
ℹ️	✓ [valid-refs] All file references across 1 skill(s) are valid.
ℹ️	✓ valid-refs: All file references resolve to existing files within the skill directory.
ℹ️	1 skill(s) linted, 1 passed

Full linter output

### Linting skills/faber-language
✅ faber-language (2/2 checks passed)
    ✓ [spec-compliance] All 1 skill(s) are spec-compliant.
        ✓ spec-compliance: All spec checks passed.
    ✓ [valid-refs] All file references across 1 skill(s) are valid.
        ✓ valid-refs: All file references resolve to existing files within the skill directory.

1 skill(s) linted, 1 passed

[aaronpowell]

This is a niche experimental language and the submission isn't ideal for this repo.