feature-execution
Skill1 starsChanged 9 months agoMITView on GitHub
Orchestrate feature delivery as team lead: spawn agents by wave, manage review cycles (max 3 rounds), commit per wave.
1 other project uses a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- stepanenkoviktor0110-boop/ai-dev-methodologyedited, first seen May 31, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- stepanenkoviktor0110-boop/ai-dev-methodology★ 238% same
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
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 repository20 other files it gives its agents.
- skills/skill-master/references/agents.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- code-reviewingSkill
- code-writingSkill
- deploy-pipelineSkill
- documentation-writingSkill
- infrastructure-setupSkill
- methodologySkill
- post-deploy-qaSkill
- pre-deploy-qaSkill
- project-planningSkill
- prompt-masterSkill
- security-auditorSkill
- skill-masterSkill
- skill-test-designerSkill
- skill-testerSkill
- task-decompositionSkill
- tech-spec-planningSkill
- test-masterSkill
- user-spec-planningSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
23 rules. About 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 12 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈11
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
12
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 19
Read checkpoint, then read work/{feature}/decisions.md to confirm what was actually completed.
- Very specific: line 22
Check if ~/.claude/teams/{team_name}/config.json exists: if yes, team is alive.
- Very specific: line 27
Read work/{feature}/tech-spec.md and work/{feature}/user-spec.md
- Very specific: line 28
Read frontmatter of all task files in work/{feature}/tasks/ — extract fields:
- Distinctive: line 45
Create team via TeamCreate
- Very specific: line 46
Update work/{feature}/logs/checkpoint.yml: set total_waves from the execution plan.
- Very specific: line 53
Update frontmatter: status: planned → status: in_progress
- Very specific: line 56
Use teammate_name from task frontmatter as the agent name.
- Very specific: line 100
If task has reviewers: none — skip reviewer spawning.
- Distinctive: line 123
All agents work in parallel.
- Distinctive: line 137
All clean → proceed to Final Wave
- Distinctive: line 142
When lead spawns an agent outside the original execution plan (to fix audit findings, handle escalations, complete missing work):
- Distinctive: line 155
Checkpoint: all teammates reported "Task complete", decisions.md entries written.
- Very specific: line 159
Verify decisions.md entries exist and match template (~/.claude/shared/work-templates/decisions.md.template)
- Distinctive: line 160
If task had Smoke/User verification steps — confirm decisions.md Verification section includes results.
- Very specific: line 161
Update task frontmatter: status: in_progress → status: done
- Very specific: line 163
Update work/{feature}/logs/checkpoint.yml: set last_completed_wave, update task statuses, set next_wave.
- Distinctive: line 166
Checkpoint: all wave tasks done, committed, checkpoint updated.
- Distinctive: line 170
All waves done including Final Wave (QA, deploy if applicable, post-deploy verification if applicable).
- Very specific: line 175
All ok → finalize, shutdown team, delete work/{feature}/logs/checkpoint.yml
- Distinctive: line 185
Stop all work on the blocked task/wave
- Distinctive: line 187
Write decisions.md entry: summary of attempts + unresolved findings
- Distinctive: line 189
Wait for user decision before continuing
≈ “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.
Files
Feature Execution
Team lead orchestrates feature delivery. You are a dispatcher: spawn agents, track progress, commit code, escalate issues. Delegate all code reading, diff analysis, and report review to spawned agents. Your only inputs are status messages from teammates ("Task complete") and escalation requests.
Phase 1: Initialization
- Check
work/{feature}/logs/checkpoint.yml:last_completed_wave > 0→ this is a resume after context compaction. Read checkpoint, then readwork/{feature}/decisions.mdto confirm what was actually completed. For tasks in the resumed wave: if a task has a decisions.md entry, it completed — update its frontmatter todoneand skip it. Only re-execute tasks without a decisions.md entry. Check if~/.claude/teams/{team_name}/config.jsonexists: if yes, team is alive; if no, recreate via TeamCreate. Skip to Phase 2 starting fromnext_wave. Report to user: "Resuming from wave {N}. Waves 1-{N-1} completed."last_completed_wave: 0→ fresh start, proceed below.
- Read
work/{feature}/tech-spec.mdandwork/{feature}/user-spec.md Read frontmatter of all task files in
work/{feature}/tasks/— extract fields:Field Purpose statusplanned → in_progress → done waveParallel execution group number depends_onTask numbers that must be done first skillsSkills the teammate loads reviewersReviewer agents to spawn (source of truth) teammate_nameAgent name for team spawning (optional) verifyVerification types: [smoke], [user], [smoke, user], or [] (optional) Build waves: group tasks by
wavefield. Within a wave, all tasks run in parallel.- Build execution plan following template at
~/.claude/shared/work-templates/execution-plan.md.template - Save to
work/{feature}/logs/execution-plan.md - Show plan to user, wait for approval
- Create team via TeamCreate
- Update
work/{feature}/logs/checkpoint.yml: settotal_wavesfrom the execution plan.
Checkpoint: execution plan approved, team created, checkpoint initialized.
Phase 2: Execute Wave
- Find tasks for current wave:
status: planned, alldepends_ontasks aredone - Update frontmatter:
status: planned→status: in_progress For each task, spawn teammate + reviewers (if task has reviewers):
Use
teammate_namefrom task frontmatter as the agent name. If not set — pick a descriptive name based on the task.Teammate —
subagent_type: "general-purpose",model: "opus",team_name: "{team}"Prompt template:
You are "{name}" executing task {N}. Read task: {feature_dir}/tasks/{N}.md Load skills listed in task frontmatter. Follow the loaded skill workflow. If the task requires user actions — send the instruction to team lead via SendMessage. Team lead will forward to user and return confirmation. {reviewers_block} After task complete: - Write entry to {feature_dir}/decisions.md (follow template at ~/.claude/shared/work-templates/decisions.md.template). Summary: 1-3 sentences describing what was done and key decisions. Link JSON reports for review details. - Message team lead: "Task {N} complete. decisions.md updated." Feature dir: {feature_dir}{reviewers_block} — include only when task has reviewers (not
reviewers: none):Your reviewers: {reviewer_names} (list of teammate names). Review process — after task is complete, follow this review process (overrides review steps from loaded skills): 1. Run `git diff -- <your files>` and collect the list of changed files + full diff output. 2. Send each reviewer via SendMessage: list of changed files + full diff output. 3. Reviewers will perform review, write JSON report to `{feature_dir}/logs/working/task-{N}/{reviewer_name}-round{round}.json`, and send report path back to you. 4. Read reports, fix findings. After fixes: send updated diff to reviewers for next round. 5. Max 3 review rounds. Reason: diminishing returns — if 3 rounds cannot resolve findings, the issue requires human judgment. If unresolved after 3 → message team lead to escalate. Commit flow: 1. After implementation complete (tests pass): git commit `feat|fix: task {N} — {brief description}` 2. Send diff to reviewers for review. 3. After each round of fixes (tests pass): git commit `fix: address review round {M} for task {N}` 4. After all reviews pass (or max 3 rounds): git commit review reports with message `chore: review reports for task {N}`If task has
reviewers: none— skip reviewer spawning. The teammate works independently, commits code with messagefeat|fix: task {N} — {brief description}(tests pass), and reports completion directly to team lead.Each reviewer (when present) —
subagent_type: "{reviewer_agent}",model: "sonnet",team_name: "{team}"Prompt template:
You are reviewer "{name}" for task {N}. Read specs: {feature_dir}/user-spec.md, {feature_dir}/tech-spec.md Read task: {feature_dir}/tasks/{N}.md Wait for a message from teammate "{teammate_name}" with git diff of changes. When you receive it: 1. Perform your review based on the changed files list and diff provided 2. Write JSON report to: {feature_dir}/logs/working/task-{N}/{reviewer_name}-round{round}.json 3. Send report path to teammate "{teammate_name}" via SendMessage The teammate may send updated diffs for subsequent rounds (max 3). Review each round the same way. After the final round, shut down.- All agents work in parallel. Lead waits for teammates to report "Task complete."
Audit Wave tasks
Audit Wave tasks (Code Audit, Security Audit, Test Audit) have reviewers: none — each auditor teammate IS the review. Spawn them as standard teammates (general-purpose, opus), each loads its methodology skill.
Each auditor:
- Reads decisions.md to understand what was done in each task
- Reads all source files listed in tech-spec "Files to modify" across all implementation tasks
- Reviews the final state of code holistically (full files, not diffs)
- Writes report to
{feature_dir}/logs/working/audit/{auditor-name}.json - Writes decisions.md entry, reports to lead
After all 3 reports:
- All clean → proceed to Final Wave
- Issues found → spawn a fixer teammate (ad-hoc, code-writing skill), assign the auditors who found issues as reviewers, standard review protocol (max 3 rounds). After approval → proceed to Final Wave. If unresolved after 3 rounds → escalate (see Escalation).
Ad-hoc agents
When lead spawns an agent outside the original execution plan (to fix audit findings, handle escalations, complete missing work):
- Lead assigns a skill and reviewers matching the type of work:
- Code changes → skill:
code-writing, reviewers: code-reviewer, security-auditor, test-reviewer - Prompt changes → skill:
prompt-master, reviewers: prompt-reviewer - Skill changes → skill:
skill-master, reviewers: skill-checker - Deploy/CI changes → skill:
deploy-pipeline, reviewers: deploy-reviewer - Infrastructure changes → skill:
infrastructure-setup, reviewers: infrastructure-reviewer, security-auditor - Other tasks (research, config, manual steps) → no skill, no reviewers. Agent follows lead's instructions directly.
- Code changes → skill:
- The ad-hoc agent writes a decisions.md entry (same template as planned tasks)
- Standard review protocol: agent commits → sends diff to reviewers → fix → max 3 rounds
- Lead verifies decisions.md entry exists before considering ad-hoc work complete
Checkpoint: all teammates reported "Task complete", decisions.md entries written.
Phase 3: Wave Transition
- Verify decisions.md entries exist and match template (
~/.claude/shared/work-templates/decisions.md.template) - If task had Smoke/User verification steps — confirm decisions.md Verification section includes results. Missing results without explanation → ask user whether to proceed.
- Update task frontmatter:
status: in_progress→status: done - Git commit:
chore: complete wave {N} — update task statuses and decisions. Code is already committed by teammates. - Update
work/{feature}/logs/checkpoint.yml: setlast_completed_wave, update task statuses, setnext_wave. - Next wave → Phase 2
Checkpoint: all wave tasks done, committed, checkpoint updated.
Phase 4: User Review
All waves done including Final Wave (QA, deploy if applicable, post-deploy verification if applicable).
- Show results: what was built, key decisions, QA report summary
- Describe what to check manually (from execution plan "user checks" section)
- Issues found → fix → review → commit (max 3 rounds). If unresolved → escalate (see Escalation).
- All ok → finalize, shutdown team, delete
work/{feature}/logs/checkpoint.yml
Escalation
Call user when:
- 3 review/fix iterations exhausted with remaining findings
- Teammate reports blocker or ambiguous requirement
- Task depends on unavailable MCP tool or external service
When escalating:
- Stop all work on the blocked task/wave
- Report to user: what failed, what was tried (all 3 attempts), what remains unresolved
- Write decisions.md entry: summary of attempts + unresolved findings
- Git commit:
chore: escalate task {N} — unresolved after 3 fix rounds - Wait for user decision before continuing
Self-Verification
- Execution plan created and approved
- All tasks executed, reviewed where applicable (max 3 iterations each), decisions.md filled
- All waves committed (including Final Wave)
- User reviewed and approved
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.

