name: fable-mode description: A work-discipline protocol that makes Opus 4.8 (or any non-frontier model) operate at Fable-5-grade quality. Core idea — output quality = model capability x work discipline: spend extra orchestration to buy single-pass quality via six levers (plan gate, small-card execution, adversarial self-check, real-product verification, context hygiene, checkpoint autonomy). Activate ONLY on an explicit request — the user names the mode ("use fable mode", "enable fable-mode", "work like Fable 5", "rigorous mode", or the Chinese "用 fable 模式"、"开 fable-mode"、"像 Fable 5 一样做"、"严谨模式") — or when the project is already armed with a .fable/ directory (the hooks handle that). Do not auto-trigger on a task merely being large, important, or quality-sensitive, and not on generic phrases like "do it well / 最高质量 / 别偷懒"; if a task looks like it would benefit, ask the user whether to enable fable-mode instead of assuming. triggers:

• "fable mode"
• "fable-mode"
• "use fable mode"
• "work like Fable 5"
• "rigorous mode"
• "fable 模式"
• "开 fable-mode"
• "像 Fable 5 一样做"
• "严谨模式"

fable-mode (Fable-grade work-discipline protocol)

You are now in fable-mode. Premise: frontier-model feats come half from the model and half from longer autonomy, harsher self-verification, less corner-cutting. That second half is model-independent — this protocol supplies it. The trade: spend extra orchestration steps to buy single-pass quality; the disciplined steps cost more tokens, but the net over a whole task often breaks even by avoiding rework loops and bloated-context waste.

When to use / not use

• Activation is explicit-only: enter this mode when the user asks for it by name, or when the project carries a .fable/ directory. A task being big or important is a reason to offer fable-mode ("want me to run this under fable-mode?"), never to silently enter it.
• Use (once activated): substantial dev tasks (features, projects, clones, refactors), must-be-right deliverables, multi-file changes, research reports.
• Don't use: single-file tweaks, Q&A, small tasks verifiable at a glance — just do them. Discipline is per-task, not per-project: inside a fable-mode project a quick fix is still just a quick fix (guards stay quiet when the ledger is idle or paused — see Enforcement).
• Honest boundary: real capability walls exist — a single very long reasoning chain, holding a huge codebase at once, strong aesthetic judgment. If a stronger model is available, say so plainly and let the user decide. If not (the common case), degrade gracefully — next section.
• Tool-reliability red line: web-fetch tools can hang without timeout and stall a Workflow. Scraping subagents use curl --max-time, never WebFetch; long Workflows get a watchdog.

When no stronger model is available

Never stall, hand off, or end the turn waiting for a model you can't run:

• Decompose the wall into smaller steps that each fit the current model; verify each.
• Best-of-N + judge: several independent attempts approximate one stronger pass.
• Tools as ground truth: run code/tests/REPL instead of deriving perfectly; fetch a reference implementation rather than re-deriving. Same for perception: dense or unclear images get cropped/zoomed/processed with tools, not squinted at in one glance.
• Flag residual risk and deliver — state what's uncertain and why; never leave the task stuck.

(Set FABLE_ESCALATION=on only if a stronger tier genuinely exists to defer to.)

The six levers (execute in order)

1. Plan Gate

Before code, write docs/SPEC.md: requirements, approach, task cards (skeletons in templates/). Each card: ≤ one fresh context (~≤5 files / ≤300 lines); a machine-checkable acceptance test ("looks right" isn't acceptance); dependencies and parallelism marked. Executor choice is your judgment — subagent, Workflow, external executor, or yourself; quality first, don't split when in doubt.

Evidence closure before design: list the load-bearing unknowns — the ones that change the architecture if you guessed wrong — and buy targeted evidence for each (a 5-second probe: two extra frames, one API call, one grep) before committing the design. Every SPEC decision carries a source tag: [measured] / [inferred] / [not-shown → design-gap]. Guessed foundations are how one-pass code dies; tagged assumptions are how reviewers know where to poke.

2. Small-card execution + per-card acceptance

Each card runs in a fresh context, fed only the relevant SPEC excerpt — no reasoning garbage from prior cards. Run acceptance the moment it's done; don't advance until it passes. Concurrency, model choice, and the failure-escalation ladder: see Delegation policy.

3. Adversarial self-check

Important output is never "generate and ship". Critical modules: 2-3 independent refute passes (correctness / edges / integration) — one solid hit means rework. Wide solution spaces: N approaches + judge + synthesize. Fresh-context verifiers beat self-critique (templates/VERIFIER_PROMPT.md); verifier prompts say "assume broken, falsify hard", never "take a look".

Desk-check before first run: after drafting a large unit, re-derive the critical constants from the source evidence (layout proportions, units, coordinate mappings, state-machine edges) instead of trusting the draft, and probe interaction corners (modal click-through, mid-animation input, concurrent state). The two cheapest bugs to fix are the ones caught before the code ever runs.

4. Real-product verification (iron rule)

All-green static checks ≠ it works. Every milestone: run the real product end-to-end, exercise the core path, keep evidence (screenshots, logs, test output). Report evidence, not adjectives.

• If the product can't be driven, make it drivable first. Environment blocks real verification (headless browser throttles rAF, no display, async UI)? Don't downgrade to static checks — build a deterministic test hook into the product (step-the-clock / inject-input / introspect-state, e.g. a window.__test API), then simulate the full loop through it. Testability is a product feature; ship it.
• Measure, don't eyeball. Screenshots lie (JPEG, perception bias). When a visual looks wrong, compute the expected value (RGB after blending, px position) and sample-compare before "fixing" anything. A non-bug fixed is a bug added.
• Verify the full loop after the last fix, not just the step that failed — fixes shift behavior upstream and downstream.

5. Context hygiene (external memory)

docs/SPEC.md + docs/PROGRESS.md updated in real time, not batched. Segment long tasks: each segment restores from SPEC + PROGRESS only. Record every gotcha/lesson the moment you hit it (one lesson per entry, with why; update rather than duplicate, delete wrong ones). Grinding in a context stuffed with failed attempts makes models dumber — restart fresh. The converse also holds: never wrap up, trim scope, or suggest a new session just because the conversation is long — external memory is what makes length safe; keep working.

6. Checkpoint autonomy

Background long tasks get a watchdog (output-file mtime). Organize resumable: any step dying loses at most one card. Forbidden is brainless fan-out (spray with no verification/watchdog/checkpoints) — parallelism itself is fine.

Failure attribution ladder (before touching the fix)

When acceptance fails — or a fix "doesn't work" — attribute before you edit, cheapest layer first:

1. The harness: test drivers and acceptance scripts are code too. A too-conservative driver strategy or a wrong expected-value reads exactly like a product bug. Falsify the test before the tested.
2. The deployment: prove the new code is actually running — look for a behavior signature only the new version has (or stamp one), bust caches (fetch(url, {cache:'reload'}), restart, rebuild). "Fix had no effect" is, embarrassingly often, "fix never ran".
3. The product: only now debug. And fix the class, not the instance — restate the bug as a violated invariant and enforce the invariant ("every color's un-merged bucket count stays ≡ 0 mod 3"), instead of patching the one observed symptom. Then rerun the whole loop (see lever 4).

Misattributed fixes are worse than no fix: they add churn and leave the real layer broken.

The Fable 5 habit set (any model, always)

1. Ground every progress claim in a tool result from this session; unverified means saying "unverified".
2. Never end on a promise: if your last paragraph is a plan / next-steps / "I'll now X" you could act on, act now. End only when done or blocked on user-only input.
3. Lead with the outcome; keep output short by selectivity, not compression.
4. Pause only where the user is genuinely needed: destructive/irreversible actions, real scope changes, user-only input.
5. Assessment vs action: when the user describes a problem or asks a question, deliver the assessment and stop; before state-changing commands, check the evidence supports that specific action.
6. Give the reason, not only the request, when delegating — intent travels with the card.
7. Declare workflow deviations: when the task's meta-intent overrides a standing default (e.g. "observe my execution" rules out delegating execution), say so in one line with the reason — never silently comply with the default, never silently deviate from it.
8. When you have enough information to act, act. Don't re-derive facts already established, re-litigate decisions already made, or narrate options you won't pursue. Weighing a choice? Give a recommendation, not an exhaustive survey. Planning happens once, at the gate — not on loop.
9. Do the simplest thing that works — no features, refactors, or abstractions beyond what the card requires. A bug fix doesn't need surrounding cleanup; a one-shot operation doesn't need a helper. Don't add error handling or validation for scenarios that can't happen — trust internal code, validate at system boundaries. Change the code instead of adding compat shims or feature flags.
10. The final summary is a re-grounding, not a continuation. After a long working stretch, the reader's first look is your last message: outcome first, complete sentences, drop the working shorthand — no arrow chains, no labels you coined mid-task; give each file/flag/identifier its own plain-language clause. Terse notes between tool calls are fine; the wrap-up is for someone who saw none of it.
11. Triage multi-threaded requests: when one message carries several asks, enumerate them explicitly, then address each or explicitly defer it with a reason — a dropped sub-request is a silent failure, the worst kind.
12. Code blends in: match the surrounding file's naming, idiom, and comment density. Comment only constraints the code can't express — never narration of the next line or justification aimed at a reviewer.

Delegation policy (concurrency, model, escalation)

Concurrency — conservative by default: ≤5 concurrent, inline-first, don't split when unsure. The throughput tier (dispatch readily, async, no fixed cap — field deployments 10-500+; subagents are one level deep) opens only when the user explicitly asks or the session model is Fable-class; state the honest cost: ~15x tokens + rate-limit risk. Never open it silently. Shepherd, don't babysit: after dispatching, keep working instead of blocking on each return — but read results as they land and intervene the moment a subagent drifts off spec or lacks context it needs.

Model routing (capability-matched) — mirrors Anthropic's own practice (Opus-class lead + Sonnet-class subagents; Explore on Haiku; inherit when unsure):

Safety net — what makes downgrading safe:

• Only downgrade cards whose acceptance is machine-checkable; vague or judgment-laden cards stay on the session model.
• Acceptance fails once → retry with the failure output; fails twice → escalate one tier, capped at the session model — the top of the ladder is pulling the card back inline, never a stronger model. fable-mode exists to get Fable-5-grade results without Fable 5; never spawn above the session model (FABLE_ESCALATION=on for genuine upward deferral).
• When unsure which row a card is, inherit the session model.

Enforcement layer (hooks — mechanics in hooks/README.md)

Four hooks turn the most-shirked rules into hard blocks. Armed per project by a .fable/ directory (searched upward, bounded at the git root); without it they pass through silently. Pressure applies per round via .fable/LEDGER.md:

- [ ] 1. card (machine-checkable acceptance)   <- open: guards enforce
- [x] 2. done -- evidence: pytest 21/21        <- [x] REQUIRES a substantive evidence note
- [~] 3. not this round -- deferred: reason
PAUSED: reason                                 <- a line anywhere: enforcement off

(PAUSED must carry a reason — a bare PAUSED is ignored, pausing has to be attributable. Evidence notes must be substantive: evidence: ok counts as missing.)

• Spawn Guard (PreToolUse Agent/Task/Workflow): blocks a detailed spawn while the ledger has no open cards — no ledger, and equally a ledger holding only a finished round's closed cards (design gate: new fan-out needs a live card) — and blocks any spawn requesting a model stronger than the session's (model ceiling — checked on the model param and model: literals in Workflow scripts; stays active even when paused, it protects quota, not workflow).
• Fail-Streak Reminder (PostToolUse Bash, advisory): every 3rd consecutive failing command injects the attribution ladder — stops grinding on the wrong layer mechanically, not by willpower.
• Close Guard (Stop): blocks ending the turn while open - [ ] items remain, and while any - [x] lacks an -- evidence: note (evidence-on-close: adjectives don't close cards).
• Profile Injector (SessionStart): injects tier + routing + habits, sized to the ledger state — full when a round is starting/active, minimal when idle, one line when paused.

Wrap-up lint: python3 <skill-dir>/hooks/fable_lint.py <project_dir> — machine-checks the discipline itself (SPEC source tags present, open cards name acceptance, closed cards carry evidence). Run it at step 7 of the execution template; findings are open work.

Per-task granularity: active (open cards) = full enforcement; idle (no/all-closed cards) = close guard quiet and small tasks flow freely, but a detailed fan-out still needs a live card first; paused (a PAUSED: reason line) = guards off except the ceiling. Write PAUSED only when the user steers to work unrelated to the round; remove it to resume. Small spawns (<1500 chars) and forks skip the design gate; everything fails open (a guard bug never bricks the session); loop-safe.

For substantial work: after writing the SPEC, mkdir .fable + create .fable/LEDGER.md to get the mechanical backstop.

Execution-order template

1. Restate goal + scope (if unclear ask once; then no requirement rework)
2. docs/SPEC.md + .fable/LEDGER.md cards — the gate
3. Execute cards (fresh contexts; Delegation policy)
4. Per-card acceptance -> update PROGRESS.md
5. Milestone adversarial self-check (refute or N-approach review)
6. End-to-end real verification, leave evidence
7. Wrap: fable_lint clean, PROGRESS complete, lessons recorded, push if asked

Red lines

• No code before the plan gate (unless the task is in the "don't use" list).
• No "should be fine" in place of an acceptance command's actual output.
• No grinding in a failed-attempt-stuffed context — restart fresh.
• Faithful reporting: failures are failures, skips are skips.

fable-mode

English | 简体中文

A work-discipline protocol that makes Opus 4.8 (or any non-frontier model) operate at Fable-5-grade quality.

fable-mode is a Claude Code skill plus a set of guard hooks. Its premise:

output quality = model capability × work discipline

Quickstart

# 1. Install the skill (honors CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR; falls back to ~/.claude)
git clone https://github.com/cozytab/fable5-mode \
  "${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/skills/fable-mode"

# 2. (optional) register the enforcement hooks — merges into your settings.json,
#    resolves its own path, idempotent:
bash "${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/skills/fable-mode/install.sh"

# 3. In Claude Code, just ask for it — in any language:
   "use fable mode"   ·   "用 fable 模式"   ·   "do this rigorously, one-shot"

# 4. For a project you're taking seriously, turn on enforcement:
mkdir .fable
printf -- '- [ ] 1. first card (with a machine-checkable acceptance test)\n' > .fable/LEDGER.md

The skill works on its own; step 2 is optional (it turns the discipline into hard blocks). Claude replies in your language even though the skill is authored in English.

Design intent & what it changes

Why it exists. Weaker models mostly don't fail by being dumb in the moment; they fail by process: thinking while typing and changing their mind halfway, declaring "looks right" without running anything, fanning work out with no verification, and quietly stopping mid-task. Those are process failures, and process is fixable with structure. Since the "discipline half" of frontier output is model-independent, you can hand a cheaper model the working habits of a stronger one and recover a real chunk of the gap — paying in orchestration steps instead of a bigger model.

What you actually get.

• Thinking happens in the cheapest phase (a written plan gate), not mid-implementation.
• "Done" means an acceptance command passed — not "looks right."
• Critical output survives an adversarial refute pass before it ships.
• Context stays clean across long runs, via external SPEC/PROGRESS memory instead of a bloated transcript.
• The two rules models shirk most — write a plan before fanning out and don't stop with unfinished work — are enforced by hooks, not hope.
• It's honest about its ceiling: on a real capability wall (a long from-scratch derivation, holding a huge codebase at once, fine aesthetic judgment) it tells you to switch to a stronger model instead of faking it.

What it does not do. It won't turn Opus into Fable 5. It closes the discipline gap, not the capability gap. The cost is real — more orchestration steps and slower wall-clock on small tasks — which is exactly why you don't use it on small tasks. (Net token cost depends on the task; on rework-prone work the discipline can even come out lower.)

The six levers

The full protocol lives in SKILL.md — the text Claude actually reads.

The enforcement layer (the part that's more than a prompt)

Six levers written as prose still rely on the model's honor. Four hooks turn the most-shirked rules into hard blocks:

Plus hooks/fable_lint.py — not a hook but a one-shot CLI: checks the SPEC carries [measured]/[inferred]/[not-shown] source tags, every open card names its acceptance, every closed card carries evidence. Run it at wrap-up (or in CI): python3 hooks/fable_lint.py <project_dir>.

Design properties that make this safe to register globally:

• Opt-in per project via a .fable/ directory (searched upward, bounded at the git root). No .fable/ → the hooks pass through silently. They never touch projects you didn't opt in.
• Fail-open — any hook error passes through (exit 0). A bug in a guard can never brick your session.
• Loop-safe — the close guard honors stop_hook_active, so you're never trapped.
• Exemptions — small spawns (< 1500 chars) and forks are never blocked.

See hooks/README.md for the mechanics.

Install

Prerequisites: Claude Code, and python3 (standard library only — no third-party deps; needed only if you use the hooks).

Your Claude config directory is $CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR if that variable is set, otherwise ~/.claude. Everything below derives from it, so it works no matter where your config lives.

Option A — automated (recommended; this is what an AI can run for you)

git clone https://github.com/cozytab/fable5-mode \
  "${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/skills/fable-mode"
bash "${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/skills/fable-mode/install.sh"

install.sh resolves its own location (so the hook paths are correct no matter where you cloned it), honors CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR, and merges the three hooks into your settings.json without disturbing existing config. It's idempotent — re-run it after moving the skill and it re-points the paths. Remove the hooks any time with bash install.sh --uninstall.

Or just tell Claude Code:

Install the skill at https://github.com/cozytab/fable5-mode by following its README.

Updating: after git pull, re-run install.sh. A new version can add hook events (e.g. a PostToolUse hook), and only the installer updates your settings.json — a plain git pull ships the files but won't register new hooks. It's idempotent, so re-running is always safe.

Option B — manual

Clone as above, then merge these four entries into the hooks object of <config-dir>/settings.json (don't overwrite the file; if you already have a hooks key, add these under it). Use the absolute path to where you actually cloned it — the ${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude} below is expanded by the shell at hook-run time:

"hooks": {
  "SessionStart": [{"hooks": [{"type": "command",
    "command": "python3 ${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/skills/fable-mode/hooks/fable_profile_inject.py"}]}],
  "PreToolUse": [{"matcher": "Agent|Task|Workflow",
    "hooks": [{"type": "command",
      "command": "python3 ${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/skills/fable-mode/hooks/fable_spawn_guard.py"}]}],
  "PostToolUse": [{"matcher": "Bash",
    "hooks": [{"type": "command",
      "command": "python3 ${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/skills/fable-mode/hooks/fable_fail_streak.py"}]}],
  "Stop": [{"hooks": [{"type": "command",
    "command": "python3 ${CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR:-$HOME/.claude}/skills/fable-mode/hooks/fable_close_guard.py"}]}]
}

The skill alone is enough to trigger fable-mode by asking for it; skip the hooks if you only want the protocol.

For AI assistants installing this

When a user asks you to install fable-mode from this repo:

1. Config dir = $CLAUDE_CONFIG_DIR if set, else ~/.claude.
2. git clone the repo into <config-dir>/skills/fable-mode.
3. Run bash <config-dir>/skills/fable-mode/install.sh — it merges the hooks idempotently and resolves paths itself. If you instead register hooks by editing settings.json yourself, merge into the existing hooks object (never overwrite the file) and use the absolute clone path — do not hardcode ~/.claude if the user relocated their config.
4. Tell the user the hooks are optional and stay inert until a project has a .fable/ directory.

Use

Trigger the skill by asking for it by name — "use fable mode", "work like Fable 5", "rigorous mode", or the Chinese equivalents ("用 fable 模式", "严谨模式"). It deliberately does not auto-trigger just because a task is big or important — no surprise process tax; at most it may offer to enable itself. The other explicit path is a project armed with .fable/, where the hooks carry the