skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md
Use when executing an implementation plan by dispatching subagents for each task, when you have independent tasks to implement from a plan, or when you need fresh-context execution with two-stage review (spec compliance then code quality). Also use when asked to 'implement this plan' or 'execute these tasks'. NEVER for creating the plan itself (use superpowers:writing-plans), for tightly coupled tasks requiring shared state, or for parallel-session execution (use superpowers:executing-plans).
npx skillsauth add sharkitect-solutions/sharkitect-claude-toolkit subagent-driven-developmentInstall 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.
Execute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after each: spec compliance review first, then code quality review.
Core principle: Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration
digraph when_to_use {
"Have implementation plan?" [shape=diamond];
"Tasks mostly independent?" [shape=diamond];
"Stay in this session?" [shape=diamond];
"subagent-driven-development" [shape=box];
"executing-plans" [shape=box];
"Manual execution or brainstorm first" [shape=box];
"Have implementation plan?" -> "Tasks mostly independent?" [label="yes"];
"Have implementation plan?" -> "Manual execution or brainstorm first" [label="no"];
"Tasks mostly independent?" -> "Stay in this session?" [label="yes"];
"Tasks mostly independent?" -> "Manual execution or brainstorm first" [label="no - tightly coupled"];
"Stay in this session?" -> "subagent-driven-development" [label="yes"];
"Stay in this session?" -> "executing-plans" [label="no - parallel session"];
}
vs. Executing Plans (parallel session):
digraph process {
rankdir=TB;
subgraph cluster_per_task {
label="Per Task";
"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
"Implementer subagent asks questions?" [shape=diamond];
"Answer questions, provide context" [shape=box];
"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" [shape=box];
"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?" [shape=diamond];
"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps" [shape=box];
"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?" [shape=diamond];
"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues" [shape=box];
"Mark task complete in TodoWrite" [shape=box];
}
"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite" [shape=box];
"More tasks remain?" [shape=diamond];
"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation" [shape=box];
"Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];
"Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
"Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" -> "Implementer subagent asks questions?";
"Implementer subagent asks questions?" -> "Answer questions, provide context" [label="yes"];
"Answer questions, provide context" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
"Implementer subagent asks questions?" -> "Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" [label="no"];
"Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" -> "Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)";
"Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)" -> "Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?";
"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?" -> "Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps" [label="no"];
"Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps" -> "Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="re-review"];
"Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?" -> "Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="yes"];
"Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)" -> "Code quality reviewer subagent approves?";
"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?" -> "Implementer subagent fixes quality issues" [label="no"];
"Implementer subagent fixes quality issues" -> "Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="re-review"];
"Code quality reviewer subagent approves?" -> "Mark task complete in TodoWrite" [label="yes"];
"Mark task complete in TodoWrite" -> "More tasks remain?";
"More tasks remain?" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" [label="yes"];
"More tasks remain?" -> "Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation" [label="no"];
"Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation" -> "Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch";
}
./implementer-prompt.md - Dispatch implementer subagent./spec-reviewer-prompt.md - Dispatch spec compliance reviewer subagent./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md - Dispatch code quality reviewer subagentYou: I'm using Subagent-Driven Development to execute this plan.
[Read plan file once: docs/plans/feature-plan.md]
[Extract all 5 tasks with full text and context]
[Create TodoWrite with all tasks]
Task 1: Hook installation script
[Get Task 1 text and context (already extracted)]
[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]
Implementer: "Before I begin - should the hook be installed at user or system level?"
You: "User level (~/.config/superpowers/hooks/)"
Implementer: "Got it. Implementing now..."
[Later] Implementer:
- Implemented install-hook command
- Added tests, 5/5 passing
- Self-review: Found I missed --force flag, added it
- Committed
[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]
Spec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant - all requirements met, nothing extra
[Get git SHAs, dispatch code quality reviewer]
Code reviewer: Strengths: Good test coverage, clean. Issues: None. Approved.
[Mark Task 1 complete]
Task 2: Recovery modes
[Get Task 2 text and context (already extracted)]
[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]
Implementer: [No questions, proceeds]
Implementer:
- Added verify/repair modes
- 8/8 tests passing
- Self-review: All good
- Committed
[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]
Spec reviewer: ❌ Issues:
- Missing: Progress reporting (spec says "report every 100 items")
- Extra: Added --json flag (not requested)
[Implementer fixes issues]
Implementer: Removed --json flag, added progress reporting
[Spec reviewer reviews again]
Spec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant now
[Dispatch code quality reviewer]
Code reviewer: Strengths: Solid. Issues (Important): Magic number (100)
[Implementer fixes]
Implementer: Extracted PROGRESS_INTERVAL constant
[Code reviewer reviews again]
Code reviewer: ✅ Approved
[Mark Task 2 complete]
...
[After all tasks]
[Dispatch final code-reviewer]
Final reviewer: All requirements met, ready to merge
Done!
vs. Manual execution:
vs. Executing Plans:
Efficiency gains:
Quality gates:
Cost:
Never:
If subagent asks questions:
If reviewer finds issues:
If subagent fails task:
| Rationalization | When It Appears | Why It's Wrong | |---|---|---| | "I'll review after all tasks are done" | Wanting to batch reviews | Issues compound -- a bad Task 2 built on bad Task 1 means double rework. Review after each task. | | "The implementer's self-review is enough" | Self-review found no issues | Self-review is biased -- the same context that produced the code can't objectively evaluate it. Two-stage review is mandatory. | | "This task is too simple for spec review" | Small task, seems obvious | Simple tasks are where requirements get misunderstood most -- spec review catches over-building and under-building. | | "I'll skip code quality review to save time" | Behind schedule | Code quality issues caught later cost 10x more than catching them now. Never skip. | | "I can fix it myself instead of dispatching a subagent" | Small fix needed | Fixing in the controller pollutes context. Dispatch a fix subagent to keep context clean. | | "The tasks aren't really independent, but I'll parallelize anyway" | Tasks share state | Parallel implementation of coupled tasks causes merge conflicts and inconsistent state. Serialize them. |
Required workflow skills:
Subagents should use:
Alternative workflow:
development
When the user wants help with paid advertising campaigns on Google Ads, Meta (Facebook/Instagram), LinkedIn, Twitter/X, or other ad platforms. Also use when the user mentions 'PPC,' 'paid media,' 'ad copy,' 'ad creative,' 'ROAS,' 'CPA,' 'ad campaign,' 'retargeting,' or 'audience targeting.' This skill covers campaign strategy, ad creation, audience targeting, and optimization.
testing
--- name: using-sharkitect-methodology description: Use when starting any conversation in a Sharkitect workspace OR before any task involving NEW pricing, positioning, proposal, strategy, plan-execution, or schema-design work — mandates invocation of Sharkitect-specific methodology skills (pricing-strategy, marketing-strategy-pmm, smb-cfo, hq-revenue-ops, executing-plans, brainstorming) under the same anti-rationalization discipline as using-superpowers. Documentation has failed 4 times across H
testing
Use when user says 'end session', 'wrap up', 'stop for the day', 'done for today', 'close out', 'save session', 'wrapping up', or invokes /end-session. Runs the full 9-step end-of-session protocol: resource audit, MEMORY.md update, lessons capture, plan status, pending items, workspace checklist, .tmp/ audit, git commit+push, Supabase brain sync, session brief, summary. Final step schedules a detached self-kill of the current session ONLY (3s delay) so the window closes cleanly. Other claude.exe processes (active workspaces) are NOT touched -- orphan cleanup is handled separately by Claude-Orphan-Cleanup-Hourly with proper age safeguards. Do NOT use for: mid-session quick saves (use session-checkpoint), skill syncing (use sync-skills.py), brain memory queries (use supabase-sync.py pull), document freshness reviews (use document-lifecycle), resource gap detection (use resource-auditor).
testing
Remove signs of AI-generated writing from text. Use when editing or reviewing text to make it sound more natural and human-written. Based on Wikipedia's comprehensive "Signs of AI writing" guide. Detects and fixes patterns including: inflated symbolism, promotional language, superficial -ing analyses, vague attributions, em dash overuse, rule of three, AI vocabulary words, passive voice, negative parallelisms, and filler phrases.