delegate
Skill6 starsChanged 13 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Split work across subagents with explicit contracts, interfaces, and merge strategies. Use when parallelizing tasks, distributing workload, or orchestrating multi-agent workflows.
78 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- brasillero/brstacktheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- go-sphere/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- victor-falcon/skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- AlomoesDataScience/claude-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lehcode/claudelegatetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- codewhale-hq/codewhale-plugin-marketplacetheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use preview, prd and 6 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.
kv0906Skillpreview
Render vault notes as styled HTML and open in browser. Turn markdown docs, decisions, progress reports into readable previews. Use for "/preview docs/project-a/checkout-flow.md", "/preview progress all", "/preview decide auth-approach", or when user wants to see a doc before sharing.
Also in 3 projects that use this
GitHubSkillprd
Generate high-quality Product Requirements Documents (PRDs) for software systems and AI-powered features. Includes executive summaries, user stories, technical specifications, and risk analysis.
Also in 5 projects that use this
nicolasestremSkilldocument
Create focused documentation for specific components or features
Also in 3 projects that use this
Microsoft AzureSkillskill-authoring
Write Agent Skills that comply with the agentskills.io specification. WHEN: "create a skill", "new skill", "write a skill", "skill template", "skill structure", "review skill", "skill PR", "skill compliance", "SKILL.md format", "skill frontmatter", "skill best practices". DO NOT USE FOR: general documentation. INVOKES: vally CLI.
Also in 3 projects that use this
dubwoahSkillask
Answer questions about the codebase without generating or modifying any code. Use when the user wants to understand how something works, find where something is defined, or explore the project structure. Invoked with /ask.
Also in 3 projects that use this
VercelSkillinvestigate
Investigate an issue report, or analyze the constraints of a proposed change, with strict, evidence-driven diagnosis.
Also in 3 projects that use this
Other versions78 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 78
- prassanna-ravishankar/repowire★ 270same name
- HurricaHjz/SecondSelf★ 156same name
- wlsdks/ontology-atlas★ 149same name
- HurricaHjz/second-yourself★ 105same name
- spmtitsolution/OpenBA-Kit★ 38same name
- pvjbuilds/delegate-router★ 32same name
- PyModel/claude-architect★ 31same name
- peterpme/skills★ 28same name
- jisuzzzz/haechi★ 17same name
- mhlaghari/stuntman★ 16same name
68 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 repository42 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- attributeSkill
- auditSkill
- gap-analysis-workflowSkill
- checkpointSkill
- classifySkill
- compareSkill
- constrainSkill
- critiqueSkill
- debug-workflowSkill
- decomposeSkill
- detectSkill
- digital-twin-bootstrapSkill
- digital-twin-sync-workflowSkill
- discover-capabilitiesSkill
- discoverSkill
- executeSkill
- explainSkill
- generateSkill
- groundSkill
- inquireSkill
- integrateSkill
- invokeSkill
- measureSkill
- mutateSkill
- observeSkill
- persistSkill
- perspective-validationSkill
- planSkill
- predictSkill
- recallSkill
- receiveSkill
- retrieveSkill
- rollbackSkill
- searchSkill
- sendSkill
- simulateSkill
- stateSkill
- synchronizeSkill
- transformSkill
- transitionSkill
- verifySkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. 0 are common, 7 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 68 edited versions we read keep these.
7
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 57
Use decompose capability patterns
- Distinctive: line 396
Verification tools: Read (for contract validation)
- Distinctive: line 406
Never delegate without explicit contracts
- Distinctive: line 407
Ensure all subtasks have verification criteria
- Distinctive: line 410
Do not delegate tasks requiring approval without noting it
- Distinctive: line 425
Never delegate without failure handling
- Distinctive: line 426
Never delegate mutating tasks without noting safety requirements
- Distinctive: line 427
Avoid circular dependencies between subtasks
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 68 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
Intent
Delegate a complex task to one or more subagents by defining clear contracts, input/output interfaces, and strategies for merging results. Ensure coordinated execution with conflict resolution.
Success criteria:
- Task decomposed into delegatable subtasks
- Each subtask has explicit contract (inputs, outputs, constraints)
- Interface between tasks is well-defined
- Merge strategy handles conflicts and failures
- Dependencies between subtasks are clear
Compatible schemas:
schemas/output_schema.yaml
Inputs
| Parameter | Required | Type | Description |
task | Yes | object | The overall task to delegate |
agent | Yes | string | Target agent |
constraints | No | object | Global constraints (timeout, resource limits) |
fresh_context | No | boolean | Start the delegate without this agent's context, e.g. for an independent review (Standard v1.1 delegation@1) |
model_family | No | string | Model family the delegate should run on (delegation@1) |
role | No | string | Role the delegate takes, e.g. reviewer (delegation@1) |
read_only | No | boolean | The delegate may read but must not change anything (delegation@1); the host attests it in effective.read_only |
Inputs not listed here are outside the capability's contract: a workflow step that binds them gets W604 (STANDARD v1.1 §5.5).
The host reports the settings it actually used as effective in the
output; a review quorum (quorum@1, on constrain) relies on them. With
wait (wait@1) the step delegates, then waits for that delegate's
result, which the output carries as result; a retry delegates again.
Procedure
- Analyze task: Understand the overall objective
- Identify the goal and success criteria
- Determine if task is parallelizable
- Identify shared state or resources
- Assess complexity and scope
- Decompose into subtasks: Break into delegatable units
- Each subtask should be independently executable
- Minimize dependencies between subtasks
- Identify natural parallelization boundaries
- Use
decomposecapability patterns
- Define contracts: Specify expectations for each subtask
- Input: what data/context each subtask receives
- Output: what each subtask must produce
- Constraints: limits on time, resources, scope
- Verification: how to check subtask completion
- Design interfaces: Specify data flow between subtasks
- Format of inputs and outputs
- Required fields and optional extensions
- Error formats and status codes
- Handoff protocols
- Plan merge strategy: How to combine results
- Handle successful completions
- Resolve conflicts between subtask outputs
- Aggregate partial results
- Determine final output format
- Handle failures: Define recovery behavior
- What happens if a subtask fails
- Retry policies and limits
- Fallback strategies
- Partial result handling
- Establish coordination: Define execution order
- Parallel vs sequential execution
- Dependency ordering
- Synchronization points
- Progress tracking
Output Contract
Return a structured object:
accepted: boolean # Whether the target agent accepted the task
task_id: string # Delegated task ID
agent: string # Assigned agent (the `agent` input)
effective: # Delegation settings actually used, as attested by the host
fresh_context: boolean
model_family: string
role: string
read_only: boolean
result: object | null # The delegate's result (with its sender) when the step waits for it (wait@1)
delegation:
task: string # Original task description
delegated_to: array # List of agents/subtasks
status: pending | running | completed | failed
subtasks:
- id: string # Subtask identifier
agent: string # Assigned agent
contract:
inputs: object # What subtask receives
outputs: object # What subtask must produce
constraints: object # Limits and requirements
verification: string # How to verify completion
dependencies: array[string] # Subtask IDs this depends on
status: pending | running | completed | failed
result: object | null # Subtask output when complete
interfaces:
- from: string # Source subtask
to: string # Destination subtask
format: object # Data format specification
required_fields: array[string]
merge_plan:
strategy: first_wins | consensus | aggregate | custom
conflict_resolution: string # How to handle conflicts
final_output_format: object # Expected merged result
failure_handling:
policy: abort | continue | retry
max_retries: integer
fallback: string | null
handoff_context:
- key: string # Context key
value: object # Shared context data
confidence: 0..1
evidence_anchors: ["task:analysis", "agent:capability"]
assumptions: []Field Definitions
| Field | Type | Description |
accepted | boolean | Whether the target agent accepted the task |
task_id | string | Identifier of the delegated task |
agent | string | The agent the task was assigned to |
effective | object | Settings the host actually used (fresh_context, model_family, role, read_only); a review quorum relies on them |
result | object | The delegate's result, with its sender (and sender_identity under identity@1), when the step waits for it; otherwise null |
delegation | object | Overall delegation summary |
subtasks | array | Individual subtask definitions with contracts |
interfaces | array | Data flow between subtasks |
merge_plan | object | Strategy for combining results |
failure_handling | object | Recovery policies |
handoff_context | array | Shared context for all subtasks |
confidence | number | 0.0-1.0 based on delegation clarity |
evidence_anchors | array | References supporting delegation design |
assumptions | array | Explicit assumptions about agents/capabilities |
Examples
Example 1: Parallel Code Review
agent names who receives the task: here a review pool that fans it out to
the agents the task lists.
Input:
agent: "review-pool"
task:
description: "Review pull request #123 for security, performance, and style"
agents:
- id: "security-agent"
capabilities: ["security-analysis", "vulnerability-detection"]
- id: "perf-agent"
capabilities: ["performance-analysis", "profiling"]
- id: "style-agent"
capabilities: ["lint", "style-check"]
constraints:
timeout: "10m"
max_issues_per_category: 20Output:
accepted: true
task_id: "deleg-pr123-review"
agent: "review-pool"
effective:
fresh_context: false
role: "reviewer"
read_only: true
result: null # Step does not wait; subtasks are still pending
delegation:
task: "Review pull request #123"
delegated_to: ["security-agent", "perf-agent", "style-agent"]
status: pending
subtasks:
- id: "security-review"
agent: "security-agent"
contract:
inputs:
pr_number: 123
files: ["src/**/*.ts"]
focus: "security"
outputs:
issues: "array of {severity, file, line, description}"
summary: "string"
passed: "boolean"
constraints:
timeout: "5m"
max_issues: 20
verification: "issues array is valid, severity in [low, medium, high, critical]"
dependencies: []
status: pending
result: null
- id: "perf-review"
agent: "perf-agent"
contract:
inputs:
pr_number: 123
files: ["src/**/*.ts"]
focus: "performance"
outputs:
issues: "array of {severity, file, line, description}"
metrics: "object with timing estimates"
passed: "boolean"
constraints:
timeout: "5m"
max_issues: 20
verification: "issues array is valid, metrics object present"
dependencies: []
status: pending
result: null
- id: "style-review"
agent: "style-agent"
contract:
inputs:
pr_number: 123
files: ["src/**/*.ts"]
focus: "style"
outputs:
issues: "array of {severity, file, line, description}"
passed: "boolean"
constraints:
timeout: "3m"
max_issues: 20
verification: "issues array is valid"
dependencies: []
status: pending
result: null
interfaces:
- from: "all_subtasks"
to: "merge"
format:
issues: "array"
passed: "boolean"
required_fields: ["issues", "passed"]
merge_plan:
strategy: aggregate
conflict_resolution: "Combine all issues, AND passed flags"
final_output_format:
all_issues: "array (combined)"
passed: "boolean (all must pass)"
summary: "string (generated)"
failure_handling:
policy: continue
max_retries: 1
fallback: "Return partial results with failed subtask noted"
handoff_context:
- key: "repository"
value: { "owner": "org", "repo": "project" }
- key: "base_branch"
value: "main"
confidence: 0.9
evidence_anchors:
- "task:pr-review-decomposition"
- "agent:security-agent:has-security-analysis"
assumptions:
- "All agents have access to repository"
- "PR #123 exists and is accessible"Evidence pattern: Task analysis informed decomposition, agent capabilities matched to subtasks.
Example 2: Sequential Data Pipeline
Input:
agent: "pipeline-runner"
task:
description: "Process customer data: validate, enrich, and store"
agents:
- id: "validator"
- id: "enricher"
- id: "persister"
merge_strategy: "sequential"Output:
accepted: true
task_id: "deleg-batch-2024-01-15"
agent: "pipeline-runner"
effective:
fresh_context: false
read_only: false
result: null
delegation:
task: "Process customer data pipeline"
delegated_to: ["validator", "enricher", "persister"]
status: pending
subtasks:
- id: "validate-data"
agent: "validator"
contract:
inputs:
data: "raw customer records"
outputs:
valid_records: "array of validated records"
invalid_records: "array with error reasons"
constraints:
schema: "customer_v2"
verification: "All valid_records match schema"
dependencies: []
status: pending
result: null
- id: "enrich-data"
agent: "enricher"
contract:
inputs:
records: "${validate-data.valid_records}"
outputs:
enriched_records: "array with added fields"
constraints:
enrich_fields: ["company_size", "industry"]
verification: "All records have enrich_fields populated"
dependencies: ["validate-data"]
status: pending
result: null
- id: "store-data"
agent: "persister"
contract:
inputs:
records: "${enrich-data.enriched_records}"
outputs:
stored_count: "integer"
storage_location: "string"
constraints:
destination: "customer_db"
verification: "stored_count matches input count"
dependencies: ["enrich-data"]
status: pending
result: null
interfaces:
- from: "validate-data"
to: "enrich-data"
format:
records: "array of customer objects"
required_fields: ["id", "name", "email"]
- from: "enrich-data"
to: "store-data"
format:
records: "array of enriched customer objects"
required_fields: ["id", "name", "email", "company_size", "industry"]
merge_plan:
strategy: custom
conflict_resolution: "N/A - sequential pipeline"
final_output_format:
processed: "integer"
stored: "integer"
errors: "array"
failure_handling:
policy: abort
max_retries: 0
fallback: null
handoff_context:
- key: "batch_id"
value: "batch-2024-01-15"
confidence: 0.85
evidence_anchors:
- "task:pipeline-stages"
assumptions:
- "Enrichment service is available"
- "Database has capacity for new records"Verification
- All subtasks have complete contracts
- Dependencies form a valid DAG
- Interfaces are compatible between connected subtasks
- Merge strategy handles all expected outputs
- Failure handling is defined
Verification tools: Read (for contract validation)
Safety Constraints
mutation: falserequires_checkpoint: falserequires_approval: falserisk: medium
Capability-specific rules:
- Never delegate without explicit contracts
- Ensure all subtasks have verification criteria
- Define failure handling before delegation
- Validate interface compatibility
- Do not delegate tasks requiring approval without noting it
Composition Patterns
Commonly follows:
plan- Delegation is often part of plan execution (REQUIRES plan)decompose- Break task before delegatingprioritize- Order subtasks by importance
Commonly precedes:
synchronize- Merge results from delegated subtasksverify- Check all subtasks completed correctlyaudit- Record delegation and outcomes
Anti-patterns:
- Never delegate without failure handling
- Never delegate mutating tasks without noting safety requirements
- Avoid circular dependencies between subtasks
Workflow references:
- See
reference/composition_patterns.md#enrichment-pipelinefor parallel delegation
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.

