skills/workflow/SKILL.md
Reference for how the wicked-crew workflow engine operates — phase catalog, gate enforcement, rigor tiers, and facilitator rubric. Use when understanding or troubleshooting crew phase mechanics (gate config, CONDITIONAL resolution, phase dependencies). NOT for starting a project (use crew:start) or proposing a process plan (use propose-process).
npx skillsauth add mikeparcewski/wicked-garden wicked-garden-workflowInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Plain: wicked-crew v6 — propose-process rubric picks phases and rigor tier; gates are hard enforcement; two interaction modes (normal / yolo).
Facilitator-rubric orchestration with hard quality gates.
wicked-garden:propose-processUser project description
│
▼
propose-process facilitator
├── Score 9 risk factors (0-3 each)
├── Read skills/**/SKILL.md (context:fork) frontmatter → pick specialists
├── Pick phases from phases.json catalog
├── Set rigor_tier (minimal / standard / full)
└── Emit process-plan.md + full task chain
All phase selection is judgment-driven by the facilitator, not rule-based.
| Mode | How | Effect |
|------|-----|--------|
| normal | Default | Each phase gate requires explicit user approval before advancing |
| yolo | /wicked-garden:crew:auto-approve | Auto-advance through gates; gates still run, findings still logged |
| Tier | Complexity | Gates | Reviewers | |------|-----------|-------|-----------| | minimal | 0-2 | Advisory — gate findings logged but do not block | Single reviewer | | standard | 3-5 | Enforced — REJECT blocks advancement | Single reviewer | | full | 6-7 | Enforced — REJECT blocks; multi-reviewer | 2+ reviewers |
Security or compliance signals override to full regardless of complexity.
clarify → design → [challenge?] → [test-strategy?] → build → test → review
Brackets = optional phases. The facilitator picks which phases apply based on
factor readings. phases.json defines gate config per phase (min_gate_score,
valid_skip_reasons, depends_on).
| Phase | Goal | Key deliverable | |-------|------|-----------------| | clarify | Define success criteria | Outcome statement + success criteria | | design | Architect solution | Architecture docs + approach | | challenge | Adversarial stress-test | Challenge findings + revised design | | test-strategy | Define test approach pre-build | Test scenarios + risk assessment | | build | Implement | Working implementation | | test | Verify | Test results + convergence evidence | | review | Multi-perspective validation | Review findings + sign-off |
Gates are hard enforcement — not advisory — at standard and full rigor.
| Verdict | Effect |
|---------|--------|
| APPROVE | Phase advances |
| CONDITIONAL | conditions-manifest.json written; verify before next phase |
| REJECT | Blocks advancement; mandatory rework |
CONDITIONAL auto-resolution (AC-4.4): spec gap conditions → fixed inline. Intent-changing conditions → escalate to user or council.
Gate reviewer assignment happens at approve time, not at phase start. Banned
reviewer values: just-finish-auto, fast-pass, auto-approve-*.
Build depends on design (depends_on: ["clarify", "design"]). To migrate
legacy beta.3 projects: the adopt-legacy migration guide was removed in v9 — v6 is the baseline.
Crew discovers specialists by reading skills/**/SKILL.md frontmatter directly
at runtime — only skills declaring context: fork are dispatchable workers
(resolved by scripts/crew/specialist_resolver.py). No static enhances map.
Fallback fork skills (facilitator, researcher, implementer, reviewer) handle
phases when no specialist matches.
Artifact states: Designed → Built → Wired → Tested → Integrated → Verified.
The convergence-verify gate flips REJECT → APPROVE only when every tracked
artifact reaches Integrated. Stalls at threshold 3 sessions surface as findings.
| Command | Purpose |
|---------|---------|
| /wicked-garden:crew:start | Begin project — invokes propose-process |
| /wicked-garden:crew:status | View current phase and engaged specialists |
| /wicked-garden:crew:execute | Run current phase |
| /wicked-garden:crew:approve | Advance phase after gate |
| /wicked-garden:crew:just-finish | Autonomous completion (yolo-equivalent) |
| /wicked-garden:crew:gate | Run a specific quality gate |
| /wicked-garden:crew:evidence | Query evidence for a task |
| /wicked-garden:crew:auto-approve | Switch to auto-advance mode |
| Store | What |
|-------|------|
| Native tasks | TaskCreate/TaskUpdate with validated metadata (see scripts/_event_schema.py) |
| wicked-brain:memory | Cross-session learning at project completion and gate failures |
| Local JSON | DomainStore fallback; always available |
development
Pattern-conformance agent-half: evaluates a produced artifact or diff against a set of architectural/design pattern rules from the conformance-rule store (wicked_governance schema). Returns structured findings with rule ID, severity, and rationale — the deterministic half (mechanical rule recall) is done by the guard pipeline; this is the semantic evaluation step. Triggered by: the guard_pipeline `outgov_pattern` check (session-close), or explicitly by an engineering review when WICKED_OUTGOV_RULES_DIR is populated. NOT a replacement for the full `engineering` review skill — focuses only on conformance to stored Pattern rules; architecture and code-quality checks live in the `engineering` skill. Semantic evaluation reuses `wicked-garden-qe-semantic-reviewer` as the designated agent-half evaluator (per garden#983 spec). This skill is the orchestrating wrapper that loads applicable Pattern rules and delegates the per-rule semantic judgment to qe-semantic-reviewer.
tools
The FOUNDATIONAL domain-model capability: extract a codebase's domain — testable business rules (with confidence + provenance), entities, requirements — as a schema-conformant model on the estate graph. The workers annotate the store; wicked-core reads it and builds the requirements graph, coverage-gating fail-closed. Steers three fork workers. A shared substrate, not a modernization tool. The `modernize` archetype DERIVES from it; build / migrate / review / specify / explore consume the SAME domain model — none OWN it. Understanding a codebase's domain is upstream of almost everything else garden does. Use when: "extract the business rules / domain model from this codebase", "build a requirements graph from the code", "what does this system actually require", "reverse-engineer the domain before we build/port/migrate". Works on ANY codebase (modern or legacy) — the value is the domain model, not the porting. NOT the code transform itself (that is the archetype consuming this model). This skill produces the DOMAIN MODEL, not new code.
development
Domain-graph fork worker for the modernize archetype. Groups the estate's Louvain communities into business domains, attaches each requirement to its cluster (advisory cluster_id provenance), and invokes wicked-core's domain-graph build (which reads the annotated estate store, recomputes coverage fail-closed, and builds the requirements graph) — then validates core's output against the vendored schema. Use when: dispatched by wicked-garden-domain after rule extraction to turn a flat rule set into cluster-keyed domains; "group these into domains", "build the requirements graph", "translate clusters into a domain model". NOT for mining the rules themselves (that is domain-extractor) or threat-modeling (that is domain-coverage).
tools
Rule-extraction fork worker for the FOUNDATIONAL domain-model capability. Mines testable business rules from a codebase — each with a numeric confidence and a provenance{source, ref, source_kinds} — and annotates them into the estate store so wicked-core can build the domain-model requirements graph (coverage-gated). This is a substrate, not a modernization tool: the `modernize` archetype DERIVES from it, and build / migrate / review / specify / explore can consume the same domain model — none OWN it. Use when: dispatched by wicked-garden-domain to mine the business_rules of a codebase (or a module); "extract the domain rules", "what does this system require", building the requirements half of a domain model. NOT for grouping into domains (that is domain-modeler) or judging coverage (that is domain-coverage — a seat-distinct evaluator).