orchestrate
Skill14 starsChanged 4 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when an agent orchestrates other agents on a piece of work, of any kind (a plan, a task swarm, a brainswarm): proposing a run tuned to the work, built on the closest protocol (build-verify, idea-to-outcome, brainstorm, debate, editorial, a project's own), settling it with the person, dispatching each member with its brief and role, watching them, judging their findings and steering a drift. Not for the duties one kind adds (orchestrate-plan for a plan, swarm for a task swarm, brainswarm for a seat swarm), and not for the board they talk on (swarm-board).
161 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- alexratmanpl/business-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- gtonkov/claude-codetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- edilsonvilarinho/usage-monitortheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- nathanonn/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- peterpme/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- GDriem/agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use define-requirements, record-evidence and 8 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
sson0-erSkilldefine-requirements
Work with the user, one question at a time, to complete the requirements document (docs/claudex/<slug>/01-requirements.md). Run by the orchestrator (parent). Stays out of design and implementation.
Also in 3 projects that use this
sson0-erSkillrecord-evidence
How to record external facts (docs, command output, codebase findings) as evidence and design choices as decisions. Used by the researcher, designer and reviewer agents.
Also in 3 projects that use this
PinkneyJiangSkillimprove-architecture
扫描代码库中的架构摩擦点,识别浅模块并挖掘深模块演进机会。生成可视化交互式 HTML 诊断报告,并在用户确认后闭环实施深度重构。
Also in 4 projects that use this
kjnezSkillticket
Work on a JIRA/Linear ticket end-to-end: read ticket details, explore codebase, create a branch, implement with TDD, run quality checks, update ticket status, and create a PR. Use when the user provides a ticket ID to implement. Triggers on requests like "/ticket PROJ-123", "work on this ticket", "implement PROJ-123".
Also in 4 projects that use this
xfstudioSkillreverse-engineer
Expert reverse engineer specializing in binary analysis,
Also in 3 projects that use this
ranchengSkillcodex-imagegen
Generate or edit images by invoking OpenAI's gpt-image-2 ("image 2") through headless `codex exec`. Trigger when the user asks to create, generate, draw, design, or edit an image, logo, icon, illustration, banner, sprite sheet, placeholder art, or any visual asset — and they have not specified a different generator (Stable Diffusion, Midjourney, DALL·E API directly, etc.). Also use when the user wants to transform or extend a reference image they have provided locally.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions161 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- Ovich/swarmstorm★ 14100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 160
- Significant-Gravitas/AutoGPT★ 188ksame name
- rohitg00/pro-workflow★ 2.9ksame name
- apmantza/pi-lens★ 521same name
- boshu2/agentops★ 453same name
- quantumaikr/quant.cpp★ 403same name
- Noizefield/audio-plugin-coder★ 334same name
- kagenti/kagenti★ 303same name
- varun29ankuS/shodh-memory★ 294same name
- provencher/codex-skills★ 271same name
- first-fluke/fullstack-starter★ 226same name
150 more not listed
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 repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- brainstormSkill
- brainswarmSkill
- interviewSkill
- whiteboard-defenseSkill
- complexity-reworkSkill
- deepen-moduleSkill
- dependency-graphSkill
- simplify-reworkSkill
- simplifySkill
- write-diagramsSkill
- aiviewSkill
- swarm-boardSkill
- execute-planSkill
- long-horizonSkill
- orchestrate-planSkill
- guide-complexitySkill
- guide-createSkill
- guide-deepen-moduleSkill
- helpSkill
- next-stepSkill
- cold-readSkill
- write-planSkill
- roadmapSkill
- technical-writingSkill
- write-conventionsSkill
- pr-reviewSkill
- recurring-review-findingsSkill
- swarmSkill
- design-prototypeSkill
- point-atSkill
- validate-deliverySkill
- verification-skill-createSkill
- create-workbenchSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 143 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 33
Any with a cycle, of any kind, can add a reflect phase: when the loop circles instead of converging, on the person's ask or your judgment: …
- Very specific: line 39
Read the closest one's
protocol.md: before proposing; its other files where it says. - Very specific: line 62
The person says go, or adjusts lines: only what they change is talked through, one point at a time, through the interview skill, the table …
- Very specific: line 93
The brief is the only thing sent: Read references/brief.md before the first dispatch.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 143 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
Orchestrate
This session holds the kind's document, its charter, the briefs and the decisions; members do the work. A member never edits the kind's document or its charter.
Propose the run
Protocols are worked examples, never a menu: each is a proven way for members to work (its seats, its phases, what each may do, the phases that repeat and the goal that ends them) and the rules it learnt. Once the person and you are aligned on the work, however you got there, propose one run tuned to it, built on the closest example.
| Example | When it fits | Kinds | File |
| build-verify | code changed, then judged in the running product, until it holds | task swarm, plan | references/protocols/build-verify/protocol.md |
| idea-to-outcome | a list of ideas, each framed, built, proven live and accepted by the person in turn | task swarm | references/protocols/idea-to-outcome/protocol.md |
| brainstorm | options, many and varied, before choosing | brainswarm | references/protocols/brainstorm/protocol.md |
| debate | known questions to decide, with sources | brainswarm | references/protocols/debate/protocol.md |
| editorial | a text for a given reader: a letter, a proposal, a README | brainswarm | references/protocols/editorial/protocol.md |
Any of them can open with a prototype phase (charter prototype:) when the work adds or changes
a screen: the swarm's ideas forwarded to the prototyper, the person's go: references/prototype-phase.md.
Then, or alone, an architecture phase (charter architecture:) when the work brings a new module,
changes an interface or its shape is unclear: the system defined on the board, the prototype as
one of its inputs, the person's go: references/architecture-phase.md. Propose each, with why.
Any that changes code can add a simplify phase (charter simplify:): the code it changed cut
back after a verdict of ready, feature parity verified: references/simplify-phase.md. Offer it
when a run that changed code nears its close, with why.
Any with a cycle, of any kind, can add a reflect phase when the loop circles instead of converging, on the
person's ask or your judgment: the work paused, every voice asked once, the person deciding how to
go on: references/reflect-phase.md.
- The project's own come first: its
protocol-<name>skills in its local skills folder (.claude/skills/when it has no other), and its olderbrainswarm-<name>skills. - Read the closest one's
protocol.mdbefore proposing; its other files where it says. - Estimate the work first, and size the run from it: the work cut into tasks of one member's
context each (
references/tasks.md), how many can run in the same phase without waiting on each other, and how many phases that makes. The example's recommended seats are the starting point, reconsidered against that estimate: kept when the width matches, changed when it does not, the change named in the proposal with its reason; its rounds, verifiers and loop's cap are reconsidered the same way. For a brainswarm, the estimate is the viewpoints the question needs, one seat each that would catch what the others would not. The proposal states it in one line:≈ 12 tasks, 4 at once, 3 rounds → 4 builders. - The person's number wins: asked for more seats than proposed, re-cut the work finer so
every seat has work in the first phase (
references/tasks.md, Cutting), never seats left idle; asked for fewer, fold tasks together. When the finer cut costs something (tasks sharing files, waiting on each other, too small to be worth a member), say so in one line and go on unless they change their mind. - The proposal is one message:
Based on <protocol>, with these changes:, each change against the example with its reason (a seat added, a phase dropped, a cap lowered); then the run as one table (each phase, who acts in it, every seat's role and area, the special seats); then the loop, when it repeats (until <goal> · cap <n>,<n>, orunbounded); each seat's model and effort as a column of the table (Opus for all;mediumfor a seat that thinks,lowfor one that carries work out,references/charter.md); then the example's own fields. It ends onGo, or adjust? - The base's rules hold unless the proposal says it drops one: a verifier walks a copy of the data, the judged findings table, a fix task names its ids. Nothing departs from the example without being named.
- The person says go, or adjusts lines: only what they change is talked through, one point at
a time, through the
interviewskill, the table shown again after. A task swarm with no example is workers on call, taking tasks as they come. - Once approved, ask the run's authority (
references/authority.md, read then): what the person delegates, per role, before any dispatch. - The approved proposal is the charter (
references/charter.md, read before the first proposal), the base named in it and on the board (open --protocol <base>). - A run worth repeating is kept as the project's
protocol-<name>skill, on the person's yes: readreferences/protocols/new-protocol.mdfirst; the next proposal builds on it.
A loop runs as its charter says: each repeated phase's message names its iteration (verify
3 of 5); the judged findings table ends on the goal's state; the goal met closes the loop; at
the cap without it, pause and give the person the choice: one more iteration, a raised cap, or
the close. Never an iteration the charter did not grant.
Work that must survive a stop and resume the next day keeps a long-horizon document when
the person or the charter asks for one (long-horizon: in the charter): the long-horizon
skill, loaded with this one; its elements replace the run's findings kept in chat.
Handing the run off
A run that builds code, or any run longer than a sitting, is handed to an orchestrator of its
own once the proposal is approved: this session stays with the person and can hold several
runs at once. How, per harness (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor) and when nesting is refused:
references/handoff.md, read before the first handoff. A small run (one or two members, or one
the person wants to steer closely) is orchestrated here.
Dispatch
- One member per seat, given its work as tasks (
references/tasks.md, read before the first task), on a subagent definition carrying the charter's model and effort; the dispatch passes its model, and its effort where theAgenttool takes one; otherwise effort is carried by the subagent definition the dispatch names (effort:in its frontmatter). A dispatch naming neither inherits the session's level. When no subagent definition carries the charter's model and effort, say so to the person before dispatching, naming the nearest one; never dispatch on another level silently. - The member's agent follows its seat, never
general-purpose: every builder (a task swarm's, a plan's) on the plugin'sswarm-worker, a brainswarm seat onbrainswarm-seat, a handed-off run onorchestrator(or a fork), any verification (a verifier seat, one pass, the proof of a new verify skill) onverifier(subagent_type: "swarmstorm:<agent>"). It holds the rules every brief of that kind would otherwise have to repeat. - The brief is the only thing sent. Read
references/brief.mdbefore the first dispatch. - Check blockers before every dispatch.
- Every ready member's
Agentcall goes in one message, each in the background, nothing between them. - No member is dispatched with
isolation: a member whose kind needs a worktree gets it from its join (theswarm-boardskill), and its brief names its base and its install. On Windows, setgit config core.longpaths truebefore the first worktree removal.
Roles
A member given a role (a seat, an expert) gets it in a few sentences. Read references/roles.md before writing a member's role.
Watching
The completion notification ends a member; it does not tell you the work is healthy. On a swarm board, the board's member states and events replace the digest below (the swarm-board skill's orchestrator side). Otherwise, while members work:
- Every few minutes, run the digest and look at it:
node <skill-dir>/scripts/watch-agents.mjs <subagents-dir> [--label <id>=<member>] [--forbidden '<regex>']. One line per live member: calls, idle time, last tool, last words. Never open a transcript whole; it exhausts this session's context. Transcripts live under<claude home>/projects/<project>/<session id>/subagents/. - Report only what is news: a member that reads
stoppedorlost, a swarmstopped, aBREACHof the brief's boundary, work clearly outside the member's document.--forbiddenis the brief's boundary as a regex anchored on a command's verb, never a path. - Steer only a drift from the brief: one
SendMessagenaming the brief line it left. A member that drifts again is stopped and re-dispatched with the brief amended. Decisions its document leaves to the member are its own.
Findings
Weigh every finding a member returns before anything acts on it (a verifier's, a reviewer's, a worker's): you know the document, its decisions and the inputs, which the member may not. Findings travel as one table, and your answer is the same table judged, posted before anything is dispatched; only the rows that stand reach a fix. The table, its ids and the judged columns: references/findings.md, read before judging the first one.
A member that stops on a finding
It is done. Fix the kind's document or the member's; never re-brief it past what it found.
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.

