subagent-driven-development
Skill14 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Use when /virtual-team:implement --sdd is active — defines orchestration protocol for fresh subagent per task with two-stage review
189 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- DemonDamon/AgenticXtheir own version, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- roundpilot/superpowers-antigravitytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- REPOZY/superpowers-optimizedtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lingyired/status-triotheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- DJtx001/ai-coding-playbooktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- namlxuit056/social-forextheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use chinese-code-review, chinese-commit-conventions 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.
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-code-review
中文代码审查规范——在保持专业严谨的同时,用符合国内团队文化的方式给出有效反馈
Also in 8 projects that use this
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-commit-conventions
中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化
Also in 8 projects that use this
obraSkilldiagnosing-superpowers
Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor results, a skill that didn't fire, "it took too long", "why is it so expensive", "what is it doing" — or wants to build a bug report for the superpowers maintainers, for the current session or a past one identified by id or path, on any harness.
Also in 19 projects that use this
Tommy-ywSkillwebhook-subscriptions
Create and manage webhook subscriptions for event-driven agent activation, or for direct push notifications (zero LLM cost). Use when the user wants external services to trigger agent runs OR push notifications to chats.
Also in 5 projects that use this
math-incSkillminecraft-modpack-server
Set up a modded Minecraft server from a CurseForge/Modrinth server pack zip. Covers NeoForge/Forge install, Java version, JVM tuning, firewall, LAN config, backups, and launch scripts.
Also in 5 projects that use this
math-incSkillpokemon-player
Play Pokemon games autonomously via headless emulation. Starts a game server, reads structured game state from RAM, makes strategic decisions, and sends button inputs — all from the terminal.
Also in 5 projects that use this
- +3 more from Leodorareluctant259
- +2 more from math-inc
Other versions189 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 189
- obra/superpowers★ 314ksame name
- jnMetaCode/superpowers-zh★ 8.4ksame name
- openai/plugins★ 7.8ksame name
- farm-fe/farm★ 5.6ksame name
- lingyired/status-trio★ 1.8ksame name
- GanyuanRan/Aegis★ 1.4ksame name
- pcvelz/superpowers★ 1.3ksame name
- math-inc/OpenGauss★ 1.3ksame name
- DemonDamon/AgenticX★ 1ksame name
- coco-research/coco★ 797same name
179 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 repository50 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- adr-conventionSkill
- architecture-vocabularySkill
- backlog-externalSkill
- backlog-localSkill
- backlogSkill
- checkpointsSkill
- design-principlesSkill
- domain-glossarySkill
- git-practicesSkill
- grounded-claimsSkill
- knowledge-checkSkill
- policy-riskSkill
- positive-framingSkill
- receiving-code-reviewSkill
- skill-authoringSkill
- skill-awarenessSkill
- test-driven-developmentSkill
- token-efficientSkill
- triageSkill
- verification-before-completionSkill
- workflow-bugSkill
- workflow-checkSkill
- workflow-commitSkill
- workflow-contractsSkill
- workflow-debugSkill
- workflow-decisionsSkill
- workflow-docsSkill
- workflow-doctorSkill
- workflow-epicSkill
- workflow-featureSkill
- workflow-flow-fix-pipelineSkill
- workflow-flowSkill
- workflow-grillSkill
- workflow-handoffSkill
- workflow-ideaSkill
- workflow-implementSkill
- workflow-planSkill
- workflow-proposalSkill
- workflow-prSkill
- workflow-refineSkill
- workflow-researchSkill
- workflow-reviewSkill
- workflow-startSkill
- workflow-statusSkill
- workflow-tech-reviewSkill
- workflow-update-workflowSkill
- workflow-validateSkill
- workflow-worktreeSkill
- workflow-yoloSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 5 are very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 179 edited versions we read keep these.
7
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
5
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 12
When /virtual-team:implement --sdd is active, the main session becomes an orchestrator that never writes code itself.
- Distinctive: line 19
Run wave analysis BEFORE entering the task dispatch loop.
- Distinctive: line 29
If a step has no explicit "File:" line, treat it as modifying unknown files — it becomes a dependency barrier (must run after everything …
- Very specific: line 45
File conflict resolution: If two tasks in the same wave both create or modify the same file, move the task with fewer other dependents to …
- Distinctive: line 46
Fallback: If all tasks are sequentially dependent (each depends on the previous), produce N waves of 1 task each — behavior is identical to …
- Distinctive: line 83
Every subagent starts fresh.
- Distinctive: line 100
Use the model selection table below.
- Very specific: line 104
Use the implementer prompt template from implementer-prompt.md.
- Distinctive: line 109
All implementers in the wave run simultaneously.
- Very specific: line 129
Use the spec reviewer prompt template from spec-reviewer-prompt.md.
- Very specific: line 140
Use the code quality reviewer prompt template from code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md.
- Distinctive: line 180
When in doubt, use Sonnet — it's the safe middle ground.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 179 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
Subagent-Driven Development
Overview
The orchestrator dispatches, never implements. Fresh subagent per task. Two-stage review, every task.
When /virtual-team:implement --sdd is active, the main session becomes an orchestrator that never writes code itself. It dispatches implementer subagents, manages review cycles, and tracks progress.
Use SDD when: Plans with 5+ tasks, multi-file implementations, complex features.
Don't use SDD when: Small plans (< 3 tasks), quick fixes, single-file changes. Use inline /virtual-team:implement instead.
Wave Analysis
Run wave analysis BEFORE entering the task dispatch loop. This groups tasks into parallel waves based on file dependencies. The analysis is always run when SDD is active — the fallback (all tasks in one wave = sequential) is identical to current behavior.
1. File Reference Extraction
For each task/step in the plan, identify:
- Creates: Files listed with
(create)or[create]in the step's "File:" line - Modifies: Files listed with
(modify)or[modify]in the step's "File:" line - Reads/references: Files mentioned in "Pattern:" lines or "Follow
file:line" references
If a step has no explicit "File:" line, treat it as modifying unknown files — it becomes a dependency barrier (must run after everything before it, and everything after it depends on it).
2. Dependency Edge Rules
- Task B depends on Task A if: B reads or modifies a file that A creates or modifies
- Read-read is NOT a dependency — two tasks reading the same file can run in parallel
- Create-create on the same file is a CONFLICT — same file created twice, move one to the next wave
- Modify-modify on the same file is a CONFLICT — same file modified by two parallel tasks, move one to the next wave
3. Wave Grouping Algorithm
- Build dependency edges from the file references
- Topologically sort into waves:
- Wave 1: tasks with no incoming dependency edges
- Wave 2: tasks whose dependencies are ALL in Wave 1
- Wave N: tasks whose dependencies are ALL in Waves 1 through N-1
- File conflict resolution: If two tasks in the same wave both create or modify the same file, move the task with fewer other dependents to the next wave. Log: "T3 and T5 both modify
file.ext— T5 moved to Wave N+1" - Fallback: If all tasks are sequentially dependent (each depends on the previous), produce N waves of 1 task each — behavior is identical to current sequential SDD
4. Presentation
Present the wave grouping to the user before dispatching:
## Wave Analysis
**Tasks:** [N] total
**Waves:** [N] (speedup: [N]x vs sequential)
| Wave | Tasks | Dependencies |
|------|-------|-------------|
| 1 | T1, T2 | none (independent) |
| 2 | T3, T4, T5 | T3→T1, T4→T2, T5→T1+T2 |
| 3 | T6 | T3, T4, T5 |
**File conflicts resolved:** [none | list]
**Estimated subagent sessions:** [N tasks] implementers + [N tasks × 2] reviewers + 1 holistic review = [total] sessionsOrchestration Protocol
For each wave (from wave analysis):
Within a wave — dispatch all tasks in parallel:
For each task in the current wave, simultaneously execute steps 1-4 using multiple Agent tool calls in a single message:
1. Extract Task
Pull full task text from the plan. Include the step description, file references, pattern references, and what-to-do instructions. Never tell the subagent to "read the plan file" — provide everything it needs in the prompt.
2. Build Scene-Setting Context
Every subagent starts fresh. It has no memory of previous tasks. Provide:
- Tasks completed so far and their outcomes (all previous waves)
- Files created or modified by previous waves
- Verification results from previous waves
- Where this task fits in the overall plan
For tasks in Wave 2+, the {scene_setting} in the implementer prompt should include:
**Previously completed (Waves 1-N):**
- Wave 1: [task names] — files created/modified: [list]
- Wave 2: [task names] — files created/modified: [list]
- All previous wave tasks passed spec and quality reviews.
- [Any issues found and resolved during reviews]3. Select Model
Use the model selection table below. When in doubt, use Sonnet.
4. Dispatch Implementer Subagent
Use the implementer prompt template from implementer-prompt.md. Fill in:
{scene_setting}— context from step 2{task_text}— full task text from step 1{domain_skill_instruction}— the relevant Layer 1 domain skill for this task
All implementers in the wave run simultaneously. Wait for all to return.
Parallel dispatch cap: Maximum 3 simultaneous implementer subagents per wave. If a wave has more than 3 tasks, split into sub-waves of 3.
After all implementers in the wave return:
For each task in the wave (sequentially — reviews don't parallelize across tasks):
5. Handle Implementer Status
- DONE → Proceed to spec review (step 6)
- DONE_WITH_CONCERNS → Read concerns. If they're minor, proceed to review. If they indicate a problem, address before reviewing.
- NEEDS_CONTEXT → Provide the missing context and re-dispatch the implementer.
- BLOCKED → Assess root cause:
- Context problem → Re-dispatch with more context
- Reasoning problem → Upgrade model (e.g., Sonnet → Opus) and re-dispatch
- Plan problem → Escalate to founder (stop and report)
6. Dispatch Spec Reviewer
Use the spec reviewer prompt template from spec-reviewer-prompt.md. Fill in:
{acceptance_criteria}— from the feature spec for this task{git_diff_or_sha_range}— the changes from the implementer
7. Handle Spec Review Result
- APPROVED → Proceed to code quality review (step 8)
- ISSUES → Dispatch implementer to fix → Spec reviewer re-reviews → Loop (max 3 iterations). After 3 failed iterations, escalate to founder.
8. Dispatch Code Quality Reviewer
Use the code quality reviewer prompt template from code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md. Fill in:
{plan_requirements}— what this task was supposed to do{git_diff_or_sha_range}— the changes (including any fixes from spec review)
9. Handle Quality Review Result
- APPROVED → Mark task complete (step 10)
- ISSUES (Critical or Important) → Dispatch implementer to fix → Quality reviewer re-reviews → Loop (max 3 iterations). Minor issues are logged but don't block.
10. Mark Task Complete
Log the outcome.
After all tasks in the wave are reviewed and complete:
Build cumulative scene-setting context including ALL tasks from this wave and all previous waves. Proceed to the next wave.
After all waves: Dispatch a final holistic code review across the entire implementation (all tasks combined). Then proceed to the standard /virtual-team:implement completion flow (verification, DoD alignment, backlog updates).
Key Rules
- Never dispatch multiple implementers for the SAME file in parallel — Wave analysis ensures tasks in the same wave don't share files. Within a wave, parallel dispatch is safe. Across waves, sequential execution prevents conflicts.
- Cap parallel dispatch at 3 subagents per wave — prevents API rate limit issues. Split larger waves into sub-waves of 3.
- Never skip reviews — Both spec compliance AND code quality, every task
- Spec review BEFORE code quality review — Wrong order wastes quality reviewer time on code that doesn't meet spec
- Never let implementer read the plan file — Provide full task text directly
- Provide scene-setting context — Every subagent starts fresh, needs orientation
- Cap review loops at 3 iterations — Escalate to founder after that
- Implementer subagents load Layer 0 skills — TDD, verification, review reception
Model Selection
| Task Type | Signals | Model |
| Mechanical implementation | 1-2 files, clear spec, follows existing pattern | Haiku or Sonnet |
| Integration work | Multi-file changes, coordination between components | Sonnet |
| Architecture/design | New patterns, judgment calls, broad codebase impact | Opus |
| Spec review | Comparison task, structured checklist | Sonnet |
| Code quality review | Pattern matching, security awareness | Sonnet |
When in doubt, use Sonnet — it's the safe middle ground.
Integration
This skill is loaded by:
/virtual-team:implement— When--sddflag is active, defines the execution model/virtual-team:flow— Propagates--sddto/virtual-team:implementwhen--deepis used (SDD is not a direct/flowflag — it's implied by--deep)
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.

