workflow-patterns
Skill2 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use this skill when implementing tasks according to Conductor's TDD workflow, handling phase checkpoints, managing git commits for tasks, or understanding the verification protocol.
7 other projects use a version of this, 3 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- xfstudio/skillsedited, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- Samueladewole/claude-skillsword for word, first seen Oct 13, 2026
- caobingsheng/skillsword for word, first seen Oct 11, 2026
- QuintinShaw/pi-dynamic-workflowstheir own version, first seen Oct 5, 2026
- terrene-foundation/pacttheir own version, first seen Apr 6, 2026
- ai4brands-design/claude-skillsedited, first seen Mar 22, 2026
Other versions7 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 2
- caobingsheng/skills★ 1100% same
- Samueladewole/claude-skills★ 0100% same
Edited · 3
- wpank/ai★ 1142% same
- xfstudio/skills★ 953% same
- ai4brands-design/claude-skills★ 253% same
Wrote their own version · 2
- QuintinShaw/pi-dynamic-workflows★ 586same name
- terrene-foundation/pact★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository239 other files it gives its agents.
- claude-code-docs/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- claude-code-docs/llms.txtllms.txt
- agent-native-architectureSkill
- claude-apiSkill
- embedding-strategiesSkill
- fal-ai-mediaSkill
- gemini-imagegenSkill
- hybrid-search-implementationSkill
- langchain-architectureSkill
- llm-evaluationSkill
- ml-pipeline-workflowSkill
- prompt-engineering-patternsSkill
- rag-implementationSkill
- similarity-search-patternsSkill
- vector-index-tuningSkill
- api-design-principlesSkill
- api-designSkill
- architecture-patternsSkill
- cqrs-implementationSkill
- event-store-designSkill
- fastapi-templatesSkill
- microservices-patternsSkill
- openapi-spec-generationSkill
- projection-patternsSkill
- saga-orchestrationSkill
- api-conventionsSkill
- andrew-kane-gem-writerSkill
- angular-migrationSkill
- auth-implementation-patternsSkill
- backend-patternsSkill
- bazel-build-optimizationSkill
- coding-standardsSkill
- database-migrationSkill
- debugging-strategiesSkill
- dependency-upgradeSkill
- dhh-rails-styleSkill
- dotnet-backend-patternsSkill
- dspy-rubySkill
- error-handling-patternsSkill
- monorepo-managementSkill
- nodejs-backend-patternsSkill
- nx-workspace-patternsSkill
- react-modernizationSkill
- temporal-python-testingSkill
- turborepo-cachingSkill
- workflow-orchestration-patternsSkill
- defi-protocol-templatesSkill
- nft-standardsSkill
- solidity-securitySkill
- web3-testingSkill
- backtesting-frameworksSkill
- billing-automationSkill
- competitive-landscapeSkill
- data-storytellingSkill
- employment-contract-templatesSkill
- investor-materialsSkill
- investor-outreachSkill
- kpi-dashboard-designSkill
- market-sizing-analysisSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
75 rules. 0 are common, 73 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 4 edited versions we read keep these.
73
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 23
Follow these 11 steps for each task:
- Very specific: line 27
Read plan.md and identify the next pending [ ] task.
- Very specific: line 31
Update plan.md to mark the task as [~]:
- Distinctive: line 37
Commit this status change separately from implementation.
- Distinctive: line 41
Write tests that define the expected behavior before writing implementation:
- Distinctive: line 43
Create test file if needed
- Distinctive: line 44
Write test cases covering happy path
- Distinctive: line 45
Write test cases covering edge cases
- Distinctive: line 46
Write test cases covering error conditions
- Distinctive: line 47
Run tests - they should FAIL
- Distinctive: line 63
Write the minimum code necessary to make tests pass:
- Distinctive: line 68
Run tests - they should PASS
- Distinctive: line 78
Run tests after each change - they should remain GREEN
- Distinctive: line 82
Check test coverage meets the 80% target:
- Distinctive: line 88
If coverage is below 80%:
- Distinctive: line 91
Add tests for missing paths
- Distinctive: line 96
If implementation deviated from plan or introduced new dependencies:
- Distinctive: line 98
Update tech-stack.md with new dependencies
- Distinctive: line 100
Update spec.md if requirements changed
- Distinctive: line 104
Create a focused commit for the task:
- Distinctive: line 128
Add rich task summary as git note:
- Distinctive: line 149
Update plan.md to mark task complete with commit SHA:
- Distinctive: line 157
Commit the plan status update:
- Distinctive: line 168
When all tasks in a phase are complete, execute the verification protocol:
- Distinctive: line 183
Verify tests exist for new/changed code
- Distinctive: line 184
Run coverage for modified modules
- Distinctive: line 185
Add tests if coverage < 80%
- Distinctive: line 195
All tests must pass before proceeding.
- Distinctive: line 199
Create checklist of manual verifications:
- Distinctive: line 223
Do NOT proceed without explicit approval.
- Distinctive: line 227
After approval, create checkpoint commit:
- Distinctive: line 246
Update plan.md checkpoints table:
- Distinctive: line 259
Before marking any task complete, verify these gates:
- Distinctive: line 263
All existing tests pass
- Distinctive: line 289
No type: ignore without reason
- Distinctive: line 307
No secrets in code
- Distinctive: line 355
Always record the commit SHA when completing tasks:
- Distinctive: line 382
All phase tasks complete
- Distinctive: line 383
All phase verifications pass
- Distinctive: line 421
Document in spec.md as new requirement
- Distinctive: line 422
Add tasks to plan.md
- Distinctive: line 429
Update spec.md scope section
- Distinctive: line 436
Update tech-stack.md if dependencies changed
- Distinctive: line 437
Document why original approach was unsuitable
- Distinctive: line 442
Update spec.md with corrected requirement
- Distinctive: line 448
When completing a task with deviation:
- Distinctive: line 461
If tests fail after reaching GREEN:
- Distinctive: line 463
Do NOT proceed to REFACTOR
- Distinctive: line 465
Check if refactoring broke something
- Distinctive: line 471
If user rejects a checkpoint:
- Distinctive: line 474
Create tasks to address issues
- Distinctive: line 480
If task cannot proceed:
- Distinctive: line 483
Check if other tasks can proceed
- Distinctive: line 484
Document expected resolution timeline
- Distinctive: line 485
Consider creating dependency resolution track
- Distinctive: line 523
When modifying code with existing tests:
- Distinctive: line 527
Keep existing tests passing
- Distinctive: line 528
Add new tests for new behavior
- Distinctive: line 529
Update tests only when requirements change
- Distinctive: line 533
When refactoring changes test structure:
- Distinctive: line 535
Run existing tests (should pass)
- Distinctive: line 536
Add new tests for refactored code
- Distinctive: line 538
Remove old tests only after new tests pass
- Distinctive: line 544
Run full test suite
- Distinctive: line 545
Check for unexpected failures
- Distinctive: line 553
Run before requesting approval:
- Distinctive: line 596
Keep test suite fast:
- Distinctive: line 598
Use fixtures to avoid redundant setup
- Distinctive: line 600
Run subset during development, full suite at checkpoints
- Distinctive: line 612
Never skip RED: Always write failing tests first
- Distinctive: line 614
Immediate updates: Update plan.md right after task completion
- Distinctive: line 615
Wait for approval: Never skip checkpoint verification
- Distinctive: line 617
Coverage discipline: Don't accept coverage below target
- Distinctive: line 618
Quality gates: Check all gates before marking complete
- Distinctive: line 622
Fast feedback: Run relevant tests frequently during development
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 4 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Workflow Patterns
Guide for implementing tasks using Conductor's TDD workflow, managing phase checkpoints, handling git commits, and executing the verification protocol that ensures quality throughout implementation.
When to Use This Skill
- Implementing tasks from a track's plan.md
- Following TDD red-green-refactor cycle
- Completing phase checkpoints
- Managing git commits and notes
- Understanding quality assurance gates
- Handling verification protocols
- Recording progress in plan files
TDD Task Lifecycle
Follow these 11 steps for each task:
Step 1: Select Next Task
Read plan.md and identify the next pending [ ] task. Select tasks in order within the current phase. Do not skip ahead to later phases.
Step 2: Mark as In Progress
Update plan.md to mark the task as [~]:
- [~] **Task 2.1**: Implement user validationCommit this status change separately from implementation.
Step 3: RED - Write Failing Tests
Write tests that define the expected behavior before writing implementation:
- Create test file if needed
- Write test cases covering happy path
- Write test cases covering edge cases
- Write test cases covering error conditions
- Run tests - they should FAIL
Example:
def test_validate_user_email_valid():
user = User(email="test@example.com")
assert user.validate_email() is True
def test_validate_user_email_invalid():
user = User(email="invalid")
assert user.validate_email() is FalseStep 4: GREEN - Implement Minimum Code
Write the minimum code necessary to make tests pass:
- Focus on making tests green, not perfection
- Avoid premature optimization
- Keep implementation simple
- Run tests - they should PASS
Step 5: REFACTOR - Improve Clarity
With green tests, improve the code:
- Extract common patterns
- Improve naming
- Remove duplication
- Simplify logic
- Run tests after each change - they should remain GREEN
Step 6: Verify Coverage
Check test coverage meets the 80% target:
pytest --cov=module --cov-report=term-missingIf coverage is below 80%:
- Identify uncovered lines
- Add tests for missing paths
- Re-run coverage check
Step 7: Document Deviations
If implementation deviated from plan or introduced new dependencies:
- Update tech-stack.md with new dependencies
- Note deviations in plan.md task comments
- Update spec.md if requirements changed
Step 8: Commit Implementation
Create a focused commit for the task:
git add -A
git commit -m "feat(user): implement email validation
- Add validate_email method to User class
- Handle empty and malformed emails
- Add comprehensive test coverage
Task: 2.1
Track: user-auth_20250115"Commit message format:
- Type: feat, fix, refactor, test, docs, chore
- Scope: affected module or component
- Summary: imperative, present tense
- Body: bullet points of changes
- Footer: task and track references
Step 9: Attach Git Notes
Add rich task summary as git note:
git notes add -m "Task 2.1: Implement user validation
Summary:
- Added email validation using regex pattern
- Handles edge cases: empty, no @, no domain
- Coverage: 94% on validation module
Files changed:
- src/models/user.py (modified)
- tests/test_user.py (modified)
Decisions:
- Used simple regex over email-validator library
- Reason: No external dependency for basic validation"Step 10: Update Plan with SHA
Update plan.md to mark task complete with commit SHA:
- [x] **Task 2.1**: Implement user validation `abc1234`Step 11: Commit Plan Update
Commit the plan status update:
git add conductor/tracks/*/plan.md
git commit -m "docs: update plan - task 2.1 complete
Track: user-auth_20250115"Phase Completion Protocol
When all tasks in a phase are complete, execute the verification protocol:
Identify Changed Files
List all files modified since the last checkpoint:
git diff --name-only <last-checkpoint-sha>..HEADEnsure Test Coverage
For each modified file:
- Identify corresponding test file
- Verify tests exist for new/changed code
- Run coverage for modified modules
- Add tests if coverage < 80%
Run Full Test Suite
Execute complete test suite:
pytest -v --tb=shortAll tests must pass before proceeding.
Generate Manual Verification Steps
Create checklist of manual verifications:
## Phase 1 Verification Checklist
- [ ] User can register with valid email
- [ ] Invalid email shows appropriate error
- [ ] Database stores user correctly
- [ ] API returns expected response codesWAIT for User Approval
Present verification checklist to user:
Phase 1 complete. Please verify:
1. [ ] Test suite passes (automated)
2. [ ] Coverage meets target (automated)
3. [ ] Manual verification items (requires human)
Respond with 'approved' to continue, or note issues.Do NOT proceed without explicit approval.
Create Checkpoint Commit
After approval, create checkpoint commit:
git add -A
git commit -m "checkpoint: phase 1 complete - user-auth_20250115
Verified:
- All tests passing
- Coverage: 87%
- Manual verification approved
Phase 1 tasks:
- [x] Task 1.1: Setup database schema
- [x] Task 1.2: Implement user model
- [x] Task 1.3: Add validation logic"Record Checkpoint SHA
Update plan.md checkpoints table:
## Checkpoints
| Phase | Checkpoint SHA | Date | Status |
| ------- | -------------- | ---------- | -------- |
| Phase 1 | def5678 | 2025-01-15 | verified |
| Phase 2 | | | pending |Quality Assurance Gates
Before marking any task complete, verify these gates:
Passing Tests
- All existing tests pass
- New tests pass
- No test regressions
Coverage >= 80%
- New code has 80%+ coverage
- Overall project coverage maintained
- Critical paths fully covered
Style Compliance
- Code follows style guides
- Linting passes
- Formatting correct
Documentation
- Public APIs documented
- Complex logic explained
- README updated if needed
Type Safety
- Type hints present (if applicable)
- Type checker passes
- No type: ignore without reason
No Linting Errors
- Zero linter errors
- Warnings addressed or justified
- Static analysis clean
Mobile Compatibility
If applicable:
- Responsive design verified
- Touch interactions work
- Performance acceptable
Security Audit
- No secrets in code
- Input validation present
- Authentication/authorization correct
- Dependencies vulnerability-free
Git Integration
Commit Message Format
<type>(<scope>): <subject>
<body>
<footer>Types:
feat: New featurefix: Bug fixrefactor: Code change without feature/fixtest: Adding testsdocs: Documentationchore: Maintenance
Git Notes for Rich Summaries
Attach detailed notes to commits:
git notes add -m "<detailed summary>"View notes:
git log --show-notesBenefits:
- Preserves context without cluttering commit message
- Enables semantic queries across commits
- Supports track-based operations
SHA Recording in plan.md
Always record the commit SHA when completing tasks:
- [x] **Task 1.1**: Setup schema `abc1234`
- [x] **Task 1.2**: Add model `def5678`This enables:
- Traceability from plan to code
- Semantic revert operations
- Progress auditing
Verification Checkpoints
Why Checkpoints Matter
Checkpoints create restore points for semantic reversion:
- Revert to end of any phase
- Maintain logical code state
- Enable safe experimentation
When to Create Checkpoints
Create checkpoint after:
- All phase tasks complete
- All phase verifications pass
- User approval received
Checkpoint Commit Content
Include in checkpoint commit:
- All uncommitted changes
- Updated plan.md
- Updated metadata.json
- Any documentation updates
How to Use Checkpoints
For reverting:
# Revert to end of Phase 1
git revert --no-commit <phase-2-commits>...
git commit -m "revert: rollback to phase 1 checkpoint"For review:
# See what changed in Phase 2
git diff <phase-1-sha>..<phase-2-sha>Handling Deviations
During implementation, deviations from the plan may occur. Handle them systematically:
Types of Deviations
Scope Addition Discovered requirement not in original spec.
- Document in spec.md as new requirement
- Add tasks to plan.md
- Note addition in task comments
Scope Reduction Feature deemed unnecessary during implementation.
- Mark tasks as
[-](skipped) with reason - Update spec.md scope section
- Document decision rationale
Technical Deviation Different implementation approach than planned.
- Note deviation in task completion comment
- Update tech-stack.md if dependencies changed
- Document why original approach was unsuitable
Requirement Change Understanding of requirement changes during work.
- Update spec.md with corrected requirement
- Adjust plan.md tasks if needed
- Re-verify acceptance criteria
Deviation Documentation Format
When completing a task with deviation:
- [x] **Task 2.1**: Implement validation `abc1234`
- DEVIATION: Used library instead of custom code
- Reason: Better edge case handling
- Impact: Added email-validator to dependenciesError Recovery
Failed Tests After GREEN
If tests fail after reaching GREEN:
- Do NOT proceed to REFACTOR
- Identify which test started failing
- Check if refactoring broke something
- Revert to last known GREEN state
- Re-approach the implementation
Checkpoint Rejection
If user rejects a checkpoint:
- Note rejection reason in plan.md
- Create tasks to address issues
- Complete remediation tasks
- Request checkpoint approval again
Blocked by Dependency
If task cannot proceed:
- Mark task as
[!]with blocker description - Check if other tasks can proceed
- Document expected resolution timeline
- Consider creating dependency resolution track
TDD Variations by Task Type
Data Model Tasks
RED: Write test for model creation and validation
GREEN: Implement model class with fields
REFACTOR: Add computed properties, improve typesAPI Endpoint Tasks
RED: Write test for request/response contract
GREEN: Implement endpoint handler
REFACTOR: Extract validation, improve error handlingIntegration Tasks
RED: Write test for component interaction
GREEN: Wire components together
REFACTOR: Improve error propagation, add loggingRefactoring Tasks
RED: Add characterization tests for current behavior
GREEN: Apply refactoring (tests should stay green)
REFACTOR: Clean up any introduced complexityWorking with Existing Tests
When modifying code with existing tests:
Extend, Don't Replace
- Keep existing tests passing
- Add new tests for new behavior
- Update tests only when requirements change
Test Migration
When refactoring changes test structure:
- Run existing tests (should pass)
- Add new tests for refactored code
- Migrate test cases to new structure
- Remove old tests only after new tests pass
Regression Prevention
After any change:
- Run full test suite
- Check for unexpected failures
- Investigate any new failures
- Fix regressions before proceeding
Checkpoint Verification Details
Automated Verification
Run before requesting approval:
# Test suite
pytest -v --tb=short
# Coverage
pytest --cov=src --cov-report=term-missing
# Linting
ruff check src/ tests/
# Type checking (if applicable)
mypy src/Manual Verification Guidance
For manual items, provide specific instructions:
## Manual Verification Steps
### User Registration
1. Navigate to /register
2. Enter valid email: test@example.com
3. Enter password meeting requirements
4. Click Submit
5. Verify success message appears
6. Verify user appears in database
### Error Handling
1. Enter invalid email: "notanemail"
2. Verify error message shows
3. Verify form retains other entered dataPerformance Considerations
Test Suite Performance
Keep test suite fast:
- Use fixtures to avoid redundant setup
- Mock slow external calls
- Run subset during development, full suite at checkpoints
Commit Performance
Keep commits atomic:
- One logical change per commit
- Complete thought, not work-in-progress
- Tests should pass after every commit
Best Practices
- Never skip RED: Always write failing tests first
- Small commits: One logical change per commit
- Immediate updates: Update plan.md right after task completion
- Wait for approval: Never skip checkpoint verification
- Rich git notes: Include context that helps future understanding
- Coverage discipline: Don't accept coverage below target
- Quality gates: Check all gates before marking complete
- Sequential phases: Complete phases in order
- Document deviations: Note any changes from original plan
- Clean state: Each commit should leave code in working state
- Fast feedback: Run relevant tests frequently during development
- Clear blockers: Address blockers promptly, don't work around them
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

