OpenCRE / rules

---
description: Two-phase planning for big changes; builder must not be sole judge
alwaysApply: true
---

# Multi-Agent Workflow (Human Plan → Agent Execute)

For **big changes**, split work into two phases. Do not skip Phase 1.

## What counts as a big change

- New feature, new standard importer, or new user-facing capability
- Expected to touch **3+ files** or **>500 lines** of diff
- Refactor or migration with behavioral risk
- Touches critical paths (auth, secrets, production data, payments)
- Incomplete requirements or meaningful product/design choices

Small fixes: single-file bugfix, typo, test-only tweak, clear one-liner → `plan-first-workflow.mdc` only.

## Phase 1 — Human-led planning (no code)

**Stop before editing.**

1. Acknowledge this is a big change; planning comes first.
2. Ask minimum questions: goal, data sources, pattern to mirror, acceptance criteria, out of scope.
3. Draft a plan: steps, `@` file paths, similar code, test/validation plan, risks.
4. Wait for explicit approval ("proceed", "approved", or confirmed edited plan).
5. No commits, push, or implementation code in Phase 1. Read-only research is fine.
   Tests and production code begin in Phase 2 after approval (see `tdd-workflow.mdc`).

## Phase 2 — Agent execution

After approval:

1. Execute per `autonomous-workflow.mdc`.
2. Follow the approved plan; pause if material deviation is needed.
3. Implement incrementally; verify as you go (`verifiable-goals.mdc`).
4. Hand off with checklist including test evidence.

## Builder ≠ Judge (required on substantive work)

| Role | Responsibility |
|------|----------------|
| **Builder** | Implements approved plan |
| **Judge** | Independent review — edge cases, security, test gaps |

Invoke judge via subagent, parallel agent, or fresh context:

- "Use a subagent to review this change for edge cases and security issues."

Do not mark substantive work complete without independent review or documented reason to skip.

**Re-review:** Required only when judge findings change behavior, tests, or security posture materially. Style-only nits fixed in-place do not require a second judge pass.

## Decision tree

```
User request received
  │
  ├─ Missing goal / criteria / context / constraints?
  │     └─ STOP → ask questions OR offer Requirements template (requirements-gate.mdc)
  │
  ├─ Typo / rename / one-sentence fix?
  │     └─ Implement → quality checks → show evidence
  │
  ├─ Multi-file / new feature / refactor / critical path?
  │     └─ Plan Mode → detailed plan → WAIT for approval → implement
  │           → quality checks → subagent review → handoff with evidence
  │
  └─ Otherwise
        └─ Brief plan → implement → quality checks → handoff with evidence
```