agentleFS
mgiovanimgiovani/cc-arsenal/skills/orchestrate/SKILL.md

orchestrate

Skill8 starsChanged 48 days agoMITView on GitHub

Turn any task into a model-tiered multi-agent plan, decompose it into

161 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use define-requirements, orchestrate-plan and 9 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-erSkill

    define-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

  • EternallLightSkill

    orchestrate-plan

    Use when executing a locked, reviewed PLAN.md by delegating the implementation to visible worker agents in Orca, herdr, or cmux ONE PHASE at a time — splitting the plan into context-window-sized phases, giving every phase a pristine worker context, and (when the plan touches INDEPENDENT repos) running one worker per repo IN PARALLEL. Triggers on "run the plan with a worker", "execute the plan in the other pane", "split the plan into phases and build it with workers", "build the backend and frontend in parallel panes". Not for edits you can finish inline; outside Orca, herdr, or cmux use tgc-skills:orchestrate.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • sson0-erSkill

    record-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

  • PinkneyJiangSkill

    improve-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

  • kjnezSkill

    ticket

    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

  • xfstudioSkill

    reverse-engineer

    Expert reverse engineer specializing in binary analysis,

    Also in 3 projects that use this

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 3 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 144 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 3

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Before decomposing anything, check whether the task genuinely splits into 2+ independent pieces of real work.

    line 30
  2. Distinctive:

    If it passes this bar, continue to Step 1.

    line 37
  3. Very specific:

    Every spawn call MUST set model explicitly.

    line 60
  4. Very specific:

    If the task touched code, run the project's real verification commands (test/lint/ build): discover them from the repo, don't assume npm …

    line 85
  5. Distinctive:

    Run the exact same Step 1-4 structure yourself, inline, sequentially, in dependency order: research tracks first, then planning, then …

    line 92

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 144 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.

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

Orchestrate

Turn a task into a model-tiered multi-agent plan, run it, and synthesize the result yourself.

Task

$ARGUMENTS

Step 0: Is orchestration warranted?

Before decomposing anything, check whether the task genuinely splits into 2+ independent pieces of real work. A task confined to one file, needing just one command, or with a single obvious fix, doesn't need a plan or a subagent: do it directly and say so in one line. Below that bar, spawning, tracking, and merging subagents costs more than the work itself, and a fabricated multi-phase plan for a one-line change is worse than no plan.

If it passes this bar, continue to Step 1.

Step 1: Decompose

Break the task into subtasks. For each, state its concrete input, its expected output, and classify it as one of:

ClassificationCovers
researchexploration, search, finding code or facts, reading, gathering information; no code written
implementationwriting or editing code, config, or content
planningarchitecture/design decisions, non-trivial trade-off calls
synthesismerging multiple subagents' outputs into one final deliverable

Step 2: Model table (model is required, never inherited)

Classificationsubagent_typemodelWhy
researchExplorehaikucheap, good at search/find/read; use haiku for every research subtask, even if spawned as general-purpose
planningPlanopusbest reasoning for architecture/trade-offs
implementationgeneral-purpose (or the repo's own agent)sonnetbalance of cost and capability
synthesisn/a (orchestrator itself)n/anever delegate the final merge

Every spawn call MUST set model explicitly. An unset model silently inherits the caller (often the most expensive model available) and defeats the whole point of tiering. Treat a missing model field as an incomplete call, not a default to fill in later.

Step 3: Parallelize with strict file ownership

Group subtasks into independent tracks: a track is independent if it shares no file or directory with any other track. Before spawning, write down the ownership map (track → files/dirs it will touch) and confirm no two tracks overlap. Two agents editing the same file is a merge conflict you caused, not one you'll resolve later: split the map instead of hoping it works out.

Spawn every independent track's subagent(s) in parallel: multiple Task calls in the same turn. Sequential subtasks (B depends on A's output) run one after another in the same session, passing A's actual output forward, never a paraphrase of it.

Step 4: Orchestrator does the synthesis and the git

Once every track reports back:

  1. Review each subagent's actual diff or output: don't take a subagent's self-report on faith.
  2. Merge/synthesize the final deliverable yourself. Never spawn a subagent to do the final merge.
  3. If the task touched code, run the project's real verification commands (test/lint/ build): discover them from the repo, don't assume npm test or make test exist.
  4. Any git operation (commit, push) is the orchestrator's job alone: no subagent commits.

Portability: no Task/subagent tool available

Run the exact same Step 1-4 structure yourself, inline, sequentially, in dependency order: research tracks first, then planning, then implementation, then your own synthesis. Nothing about the plan's correctness depends on subagents existing; they're a speed optimization, not a requirement.

Worked examples

Research sweep (independent, parallel research tracks)

Task: "Research current pricing for 4 competitors, write a comparison table."

  • 4 research subtasks (one per competitor), each Explore/haiku, no shared file: spawn all 4 in the same turn.
  • Orchestrator synthesizes the 4 reports into the comparison table itself.

Codebase-wide refactor (independent, parallel implementation tracks)

Task: "Rename Invoice to Bill across models/, api/, tests/, docs/."

  • One research subtask first (Explore/haiku): grep every reference, return the full list.
  • 4 implementation subtasks, one per directory, each general-purpose/sonnet, ownership map = {models/, api/, tests/, docs/} with zero overlap.
  • Orchestrator runs the test suite, reviews all 4 diffs, commits once, alone.

Mixed build (research → plan → parallel implementation → synthesis)

Task: "Add a new payment provider integration."

  • 1 research subtask (Explore/haiku): find the existing provider abstraction and its test patterns.
  • 1 planning subtask (Plan/opus): design the new provider's interface against what research found.
  • 2-3 parallel implementation subtasks (sonnet) against the approved plan, one per component (client, tests, config), each with a distinct file scope.
  • Orchestrator integrates, verifies, commits.

Output format

Report the subtask list with each classification and model, the parallel groupings actually run, and the synthesized result. If Step 0 concluded orchestration wasn't warranted, say so in one line and do the work directly instead: no plan needed for that case.

Usage

/orchestrate Research current pricing for 4 payment competitors and write a comparison table
/orchestrate Rename the Invoice model to Bill everywhere in the codebase
/orchestrate Add support for a new payment provider (client + tests + config)

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.