swarm
Skill249 starsChanged 15 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when executing a superlite plan that has a %% taskgraph. Runs a ready-queue scheduler over an idle agent pool, with scripts for the mechanical steps, selective reviews, and a packet-only final review.
87 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- niksavis/basiclytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- endqwerty/endstacktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- tristanphvn/keeltheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- hidenobunagai/astacktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- Belweave/hstacktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- blinkboxhq/Blinkboxtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use poteto-help, make-bot-ui and 10 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.
ianclearySkillpoteto-help
Guides users through pstack setup, /poteto-mode, and picking the skill, playbook, or principle for a task. Type /poteto-help with a question.
Also in 14 projects that use this
eryzerzSkillmake-bot-ui
Use when building a custom UI (page, dashboard, buttons) that should wake a Grok Bot over a webhook, when the user must provide a webhook sender key, or when exposing that UI on Tailscale.
Also in 19 projects that use this
ianclearySkillprinciple-explain-the-number
Apply before you trust, report, or act on a number you measured: a speedup, a regression, a throughput, a latency, or an eval result. Find what limits it, and rule out that it measured something other than the work you think.
Also in 27 projects that use this
bnemaSkillsetup-pstack
Configure which Pi models pstack uses per role. Detects available provider/model specs and writes pstack's user configuration. Use for /setup-pstack, "configure pstack models", or changing pstack model choices.
Also in 23 projects that use this
jaydubya818Skillprinciple-attack-the-premise
Apply when repeated fixes fail and a shared assumption may be wrong.
Also in 31 projects that use this
jaydubya818Skillpoteto-mode
Use when non-trivial work should follow the smallest rigorous Jstack workflow.
Also in 27 projects that use this
- +5 more from jaydubya818
Other versions87 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 87
- backnotprop/pstack★ 3.8ksame name
- langchain-ai/langchain-skills★ 1.3ksame name
- moeru-ai/xsai★ 667same name
- zaxbysauce/opencode-swarm★ 519same name
- ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm★ 518same name
- guaardvark/guaardvark★ 306same name
- apple-ouyang/book-to-skill★ 148same name
- jtaroreh/agystack★ 128same name
- uzairansaruzi/p3-stack★ 126same name
- cj-vana/claude-swarm★ 110same name
77 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 repository15 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- commands/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- .cursor/rules/feature-worktrees.mdcCursor rule
- .cursor/rules/no-cursor-commit-notes.mdcCursor rule
- diagnosisSkill
- draftingSkill
- feature-prototypeSkill
- inventingSkill
- mvp-prototypeSkill
- proofSkill
- shippingSkill
- testingSkill
- using-superliteSkill
- writing-specsSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 83 edited versions we read keep these.
1
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
3
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- could be automatic: a setting could enforce it
- Very specific: line 47
Keep .superlite/pool.json: …
- Very specific: line 72
Every test run is run_tests ...
- Very specific: line 89
Start superlite:final-reviewer at the same moment, fresh, brief = SUPERLITE=<path> and "read .superlite/review-packet.md", nothing more.
- Distinctive: line 103
Stop and ask only for: an irreversible or destructive operation.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 83 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
Swarm
You are the coordinator. You decide, dispatch and rule; scripts do everything with a definite answer; agents design, write, review and fix. Read each script's one-line output. One line of narration per tool call.
Shorthand (every agent brief states SUPERLITE=<path>):
SUPERLITE = the plugin root, two levels above this skill's "Base directory for this skill: ..." path: SUPERLITE="$(cd "<base dir>/../.." && pwd)", passing the base dir through cygpath -u first when that exists. CLI="$SUPERLITE/skills/swarm/scripts/superlite-cli"; always run it as bash "$CLI" .... PLAN = the plan file; pass --plan $PLAN everywhere. Exit 3 means no Python: bash "$CLI" incident add it and continue.
You never edit code or run raw pytest; fixes go to fixer agents: tiers, escalation and contract in fixing.md (Fixing). Never pass model.
Rulings, not stalls. Decide conflicts and plan defects yourself (spec binds when present: done+why outranks the plan's how; superlite-cli agent_specs status). Append Ruling: <decision> - <why> - <cost if wrong> to .superlite/progress.md.
Setup
- One feature, one worktree (AGENTS.md): if this plan is a feature (or any multi-file build that could collide with another in-flight change), work only in that feature's git worktree on branch
superlite/<topic>— cut withgit worktree add -b superlite/<topic> .superlite/worktrees/<topic> <base>if missing, and move the agent root there before edits. Never edit a second feature in the same checkout. Trivial one-line fixes on the current branch are exempt. Write the start SHA to.superlite/progress.md(- start <sha>).checkpointadds.superlite/to.git/info/excludeitself. - Wave 0 is never yours: when the machine plan is written, run
bash "$CLI" wave0 --plan $PLANand send Wave 0 in the same message aslint --stable. Lint skips START FIRST once the brief exists;STUB UPDATE:means refresh stubs.wave0 --planreprints the line. Thencheckpoint T0. Tasks do not wait for T0. Thenbash "$CLI" plan_tools adapter --plan $PLAN. - Prime now:
bash "$CLI" build_prime --plan $PLANprintshash sizeand writes the slim.superlite/prime.md(rules, header, constraints, stable interfaces;--prime full --spec SPEC --sections "1,3"= whole plan). Start the first ready tasks now. - Incidents:
.superlite/incidents.jsonl(agents callbash "$CLI" incident add); you log BLOCKED and NEEDS_CONTEXT with--agent coordinator. - Graphify:
bash "$CLI" graphify_gateprints JSON.usefalse: skip. Installed:graphify update ..needs_installandallowed:uv tool install graphifyy,graphify extract . --code-only. You alone rungraphify update .after each package is checkpointed.
Planning check
widget: from lint or finish: show that file verbatim with your inline widget tool (e.g. show_widget).
Fixed order, nothing waits on plan polishing: write plan -> bash "$CLI" plan_tools lint --plan $PLAN --spec SPEC --stable (show the body of its GRAPH block to the user as a ```mermaid block; lists STABLE and FIX tasks, writes .superlite/stable.json; prints SEND BEFORE ANY PLAN EDIT:, ends with DISPATCH NOW: T2 T4 or none) -> dispatch and start every task on that line in the same turn -> only then patch the FIX tasks (edits or a rewrite) -> re-lint -> dispatch the newly stable tasks -> repeat until lint passes. No agent waits on plan polishing: never patch, rewrite or re-lint while a DISPATCH NOW task is unsent.
Each dispatch round, in the same message as the Agent calls, run the THEN LOG line lint prints (it appends unblocked: dispatched T2 T4 at HH:MM:SS; waiting on fixes: T1 T3 to .superlite/progress.md). finish checks it against lint-log.jsonl.
Dispatched tasks are frozen: a rewrite keeps their blocks byte-identical, else lint says FROZEN: (restore it; a real change is a follow-up fix task). **Status:** draft is an optional manual hold. MISSED TARGET: ... critical path T1 -> T5 is a warning: split or stub the named tasks, or Ruling: accept predicted <N> min - <why sequential> - <cost>. NOTE: is advice.
The scheduling loop
flowchart TB
N[dispatch] --> A{per batch}
A -- agent=ID --> M[task message]
A -- poll IDS --> Q[relevance poll] --> M
A -- fresh --> P[prime verbatim] -- READY --> M
M --> D[DONE reports] --> C[checkpoint T.. --dispatch] --> A
C -. background .-> PR[probe_run --checkpoint]
C -. both sides in .-> SM[pt_review contract seam]Keep .superlite/pool.json: {"agents":[{"id","tasks":[...],"files":[...],"context_k":N,"idle_min":N,"busy":false,"current":"Tn","tier":"haiku|sonnet"}]} (tier = the line's; T0's is haiku). Sending a line or spawning its agent sets busy: true and current: Tn (a batch: Tn,Tm); checkpoint clears each task it records. The ledger and current are the state: you keep no lists.
bash "$CLI" dispatch --plan $PLAN --cap 10prints one line per batch (TnorTn,Tm) from packing that minimizes max(B+A, F/T) (busy counted; CP alone; context budget), longest first:Tn agent=ID tier=T,Tn poll ID,ID tier=TorTn fresh tier=T agent=TYPE; no empty lines, no agent on two. Tiers from lint (config/routing.json); never override or cross tiers. Start exactly those batches. Compact every 30 minutes (compact_due).- Per line:
agent=ID: SendMessage the task to that idle agent.poll ID,ID: one SendMessage to each listed agent, "Relevance 0-10 for Tn (files, consumes)? Replyscore: N - reason"; use the replies present at your next turn, highest wins, tie to the smallestcontext_k.fresh tier=T agent=TYPE: Agent TYPE with its tier's prime file pasted verbatim (.superlite/prime.md; haiku:build_prime --tier haikuwritesprime-haiku.md), same bytes for the whole run, and send its task only after its replyREADY.evict=ID(stderr): drop it.dispatchnever offers a busy agent, or one past its tier's limits. - Task message (a batch: one message, tasks in line order): heading and
PLAN, "your task text:bash "$CLI" task Tn --plan $PLAN" (current plan, never retyped; also reads neighbours), Owns and files not to touch, the Review Focus categories for its files, rulings and interface names (a fake returns the producer'se.g.examples),SUPERLITE=<path>, the verify command (bash "$CLI" run_tests --fast PATHS --background, then--wait), and "reply in at most 200 words per task: status DONE / DONE_WITH_CONCERNS / NEEDS_CONTEXT / BLOCKED, files, test result, open questions". - Mark reporters
busy: false, then record all DONE tasks in one call (hidden checkpoints; nothing is committed during a run):bash "$CLI" checkpoint T3 T5 --plan $PLAN --dispatchsaves each task's own files, printsTn <sha>orTn FAILED(one task: just the SHA), thennext:and dispatch lines. A FAILED task lists unowned files or syntax/import problems: send it back. DONE_WITH_CONCERNS: fix correctness ones first. NEEDS_CONTEXT: always answer the same implementer; if the plan is silent, add aRuling:and answer with it; resume with the answered task first (checkpoint --question/--answered). BLOCKED: log (checkpoint --blocked T --tier X); fixer one tier up (Fixing). A haiku miss:bash "$CLI" routing miss --task Tn --plan $PLAN; never retried on Haiku. Act on thenext:lines. - Each checkpoint has already started
probe_run --checkpointand, for each seam whose two sides are now both checkpointed,pt_review contract --seamin the background. A pass logsverified; a mismatch is an incident. Route the fix perfixing.md. - Probe failures:
incident hotspots --files <task files>before the next work; open failures go to fixers (fixing.md).checkpointaccepts generatedtests/regression/files from any task.
Reviews (D16)
flowchart LR
C[checkpoint] --> T{seam, Complexity >= 5, Review Focus risk, open incident?}
T -- yes --> R1[package-reviewer on that task]
T -- no --> W[wait for the package] --> R2[one package-reviewer, all its diffs]
R1 & R2 --> X[fixes + regression tests] --> K[checkpoint again]- Matching tasks get
superlite:package-revieweron checkpoint, in the same message as the next dispatches. Others get one review per package once checkpointed. In the last package, review each task on checkpoint. - Brief:
SUPERLITE=<path>, checkpoint or range, spec slice,PLAN, files in scope,incident hotspotsoutput, adapter path. It reviews, fixes with regression tests, logs; you checkpoint its fixes; its files are off limits meanwhile.
Coordinator batching
- One message per turn: all dispatches, reviews, background starts.
- Every test run is
run_tests ... --background; never wait, except the one--waitbefore the final checkpoint.
Final review
flowchart TB
G[all reviewed + saved] --> PK[packet from existing summary]
G --> ST[run_tests --full, background]
PK --> FR[fresh final-reviewer, findings only]
FR --> V{findings, suite red?}
ST --> V
V -- yes --> FX[fixers by tier] --> ST2[run_tests --background]
V -- no --> W[run_tests --wait] --> Z[freeze]- Gate: every task checkpointed, every review reported and checkpointed, every seam
verified. - Build the packet now:
bash "$CLI" plan_tools packet --plan $PLAN --base <start-sha>uses the existing.superlite/test-summary.json, the probe results and the incidents, and writes.superlite/review-packet.md. Its header saysFAST PATHorREVIEW REQUIRED. In the same message startbash "$CLI" run_tests --full --background; do not wait for it. - Start
superlite:final-reviewerat the same moment, fresh, brief =SUPERLITE=<path>and "read .superlite/review-packet.md", nothing more. The tree stays frozen. It answers in one turn from the packet only:Verdict: APPROVEDorCHANGES_REQUESTEDplusfile:line - problem - fix - tier Nlines. - Red suite lines are findings too. Send all to fixers (
fixing.md: tier by understanding, split by file), thencheckpoint Tnper owning task and one morerun_tests --background. Leftovers become aRuling:. - Right before the final checkpoint,
bash "$CLI" run_tests --waitonce; green means freeze.
Measure and budget
Hooks write .superlite/metrics.jsonl; details in metrics.md. lint and dispatch print budget: lines when they change (**Budget-usd:** in the plan header is the cap). At WARN finish what is in flight; at OVER CAP start no extra review rounds and no fix rounds beyond the first, then checkpoint and finish. LATE: critical path ... names the task to unblock first.
Freeze, rulings, finish
After a green suite: freeze. Archive .superlite/incidents.jsonl and progress.md next to the plan. Run bash "$CLI" finish --plan $PLAN; print its rulings in your closing message under "Rulings I made", each with its cost. Its last block is the report summary: print it before any merge or PR option; full: <plan>.report.md. Then invoke superlite:shipping.
Stop conditions
Stop and ask only for: an irreversible or destructive operation; a security-sensitive action; an outward side effect (merge, push, publish); a plan so broken every path is a guess.
AI orchestrator (superlite-cli orchestrator status; also user away, "decide yourself"): never end your turn to wait. Take the safe path: defer the outward or destructive action, read a broken plan conservatively, record the ruling; list what you deferred. Human orchestrator: nothing is built, dispatched or written but the review plan before the human's approving reply; ask in plain text, end the turn, then if you understand their answer as approval send bash "$CLI" orchestrator approve --review PATH and the machine plan. Do not pass their words through. lint --stable, dispatch, wave0, build_prime refuse before (orchestrator.md).
Red flags
| Thought or act | Do instead |
| Typing the prime or a task before READY | build_prime, paste verbatim, wait for READY |
| Work to a busy agent, or "after T3" | dispatch |
Editing code, raw pytest, or a foreground suite | Fixer agent; run_tests --background |
git commit by hand | checkpoint T3 T5 --dispatch |
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.

