agentleFS
catlog22catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow/.claude/skills/team-roadmap-dev/SKILL.md

team-roadmap-dev

Skill2.1k starsChanged 7 months agoMITArchived repositoryView on GitHub

Unified team skill for roadmap-driven development workflow. Coordinator discusses roadmap with user, then dispatches phased execution pipeline (plan -> execute -> verify). All roles invoke this skill with --role arg. Triggers on "team roadmap-dev".

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    When the pipeline completes:

    line 130

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Team Roadmap Dev

Roadmap-driven development with phased execution pipeline. Coordinator discusses roadmap with the user and manages phase transitions. Workers are spawned as team-worker agents.

Architecture

Skill(skill="team-roadmap-dev", args="<task-description>")
                    |
         SKILL.md (this file) = Router
                    |
     +--------------+--------------+
     |                             |
  no --role flag              --role <name>
     |                             |
  Coordinator                  Worker
  roles/coordinator/role.md    roles/<name>/role.md
     |
     +-- roadmap-discuss -> dispatch -> spawn workers -> STOP
                                    |
                    +-------+-------+-------+
                    v       v       v
                 [planner] [executor] [verifier]
                 (team-worker agents)

Pipeline (per phase):
  PLAN-N01 -> EXEC-N01 -> VERIFY-N01 (gap closure loop if needed)

Multi-phase:
  Phase 1 -> Phase 2 -> ... -> Phase N -> Complete

Role Registry

RolePathPrefixInner Loop
coordinatorroles/coordinator/role.md——
plannerroles/planner/role.mdPLAN-*true
executorroles/executor/role.mdEXEC-*true
verifierroles/verifier/role.mdVERIFY-*true

Role Router

Parse $ARGUMENTS:

  • Has --role <name> → Read roles/<name>/role.md, execute Phase 2-4
  • No --role → @roles/coordinator/role.md, execute entry router

Shared Constants

  • Session prefix: RD
  • Session path: .workflow/.team/RD-<slug>-<date>/
  • Team name: roadmap-dev
  • CLI tools: ccw cli --mode analysis (read-only), ccw cli --mode write (modifications)
  • Message bus: mcp__ccw-tools__team_msg(session_id=<session-id>, ...)

Worker Spawn Template

Coordinator spawns workers using this template:

Agent({
  subagent_type: "team-worker",
  description: "Spawn <role> worker",
  team_name: "roadmap-dev",
  name: "<role>",
  run_in_background: true,
  prompt: `## Role Assignment
role: <role>
role_spec: <skill_root>/roles/<role>/role.md
session: <session-folder>
session_id: <session-id>
team_name: roadmap-dev
requirement: <task-description>
inner_loop: true

## Progress Milestones
session_id: <session-id>
Report progress via team_msg at natural phase boundaries (context loaded -> core work done -> verification).
Report blockers immediately via team_msg type="blocker".
Report completion via team_msg type="task_complete" after final SendMessage.

Read role_spec file (@<skill_root>/roles/<role>/role.md) to load Phase 2-4 domain instructions.
Execute built-in Phase 1 (task discovery) -> role Phase 2-4 -> built-in Phase 5 (report).`
})

All worker roles (planner, executor, verifier): Set inner_loop: true.

User Commands

CommandAction
check / statusOutput execution status graph (phase-grouped), no advancement
resume / continueCheck worker states, advance next step

Session Directory

.workflow/.team/RD-<slug>-<date>/
+-- roadmap.md                 # Phase plan with requirements and success criteria
+-- state.md                   # Living memory (<100 lines)
+-- config.json                # Session settings (mode, depth, gates)
+-- wisdom/                    # Cross-task knowledge accumulation
|   +-- learnings.md
|   +-- decisions.md
|   +-- conventions.md
|   +-- issues.md
+-- phase-1/                   # Per-phase artifacts
|   +-- context.md
|   +-- IMPL_PLAN.md
|   +-- TODO_LIST.md
|   +-- .task/IMPL-*.json
|   +-- summary-*.md
|   +-- verification.md
+-- phase-N/
|   +-- ...
+-- .msg/
    +-- messages.jsonl          # Team message bus log
    +-- meta.json               # Session metadata + shared state

Completion Action

When the pipeline completes:

AskUserQuestion({
  questions: [{
    question: "Roadmap Dev pipeline complete. What would you like to do?",
    header: "Completion",
    multiSelect: false,
    options: [
      { label: "Archive & Clean (Recommended)", description: "Archive session, clean up tasks and team resources" },
      { label: "Keep Active", description: "Keep session active for follow-up work or inspection" },
      { label: "Export Results", description: "Export deliverables to a specified location, then clean" }
    ]
  }]
})

Specs Reference

  • specs/pipelines.md — Pipeline definitions and task registry

Error Handling

ScenarioResolution
Unknown --role valueError with role registry list
Role file not foundError with expected path (roles/{name}/role.md)
project-tech.json missingCoordinator invokes /workflow:spec:setup
Phase verification fails with gapsCoordinator triggers gap closure loop (max 3 iterations)
Max gap closure iterations (3)Report to user, ask for guidance
Worker crashRespawn worker, reassign task
Session corruptionAttempt recovery, fallback to manual reconciliation

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.