Orchestrate the complete implementation lifecycle from requirements to deployment
48
51%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
View guide
Passed
No findings from the security scan
Fix and improve this skill with Tessl
tessl review fix ./skills/recipe-implement/SKILL.mdExplicit User Instruction: The user explicitly instructs and authorizes every subagent call named in this recipe. Execute each applicable call when its prerequisites are met.
Execute Skill: llm-friendly-context before writing Agent prompts, handoffs, or generated artifacts. Execute Skill: subagents-orchestration-guide before making workflow decisions, invoking agents, or resolving findings.
Context: Full-cycle implementation management (Requirements Analysis → Design → Planning → Implementation → Quality Assurance)
Core Identity: "I am an orchestrator." (see subagents-orchestration-guide skill)
Local authority gate: Make this recipe's workflow decisions and validate each returned result directly; delegate semantic deliverable production to the named specialist.
Review Resolution Gate [MANDATORY]: Resolve every actionable deliverable-review finding through subagents-orchestration-guide Review Resolution before correction or progression.
Before the first finding disposition, read references/review-resolution.md from the loaded subagents-orchestration-guide skill.
Execution Protocol:
[Stop: ...] marker → Use AskUserQuestion for confirmation and wait for approval before proceedingAt each Agent invocation below, build the prompt as a mechanical extraction: copy the named source values into the exact fields, apply only the declared serialization, then invoke immediately.
Instruction Content: $ARGUMENTS
Assess the current situation:
| Situation Pattern | Decision Criteria | Next Action |
|---|---|---|
| New Requirements | No existing work, new feature/fix request | Start with requirement-analyzer |
| Flow Continuation | Existing docs/tasks present, continuation directive | Identify next step in sub-agents.md flow |
| Quality Errors | Error detection, test failures, build errors | Execute quality-fixer |
| Ambiguous | Intent unclear, multiple interpretations possible | Confirm with user |
When continuing existing flow, verify:
MANDATORY subagents-orchestration-guide skill reference:
Execute Skill: requirement-convergence before running the hearing protocol.
Build and judge the convergence record from the user's statements and requirement-analyzer requestSignals, using scopeEvidence and costEvidence as supporting facts, then run the requirement-convergence hearing protocol. After the requirements are confirmed, apply the subagents-orchestration-guide Small evidence gate before assigning the final Structural Scale; when the gate is unresolved, invoke codebase-analyzer before routing.
When user responds to questions:
ready or weak-but-explicit, then proceed with the resulting Scale.After Structural Scale is determined, follow only that scale's applicable path. Treat each applicable design, review, approval, planning, implementation, verification, cleanup, and reporting phase as a gate. Advance only when the current phase's stated evidence or approval exists; skip only branches whose stated condition is false.
Pre-execution Checklist (MANDATORY):
Required Flow Compliance:
approved or verification_incomplete; a quality-fixer pass authorizes a commit at a defined commit point rather than creating onePer-task cycle (complete each task before starting next):
diffBase; pass task_file: [path] when one exists, otherwise pass direct_scope as the confirmed outcome and exclusions, governing_sources, target_paths, and observable_verificationstatus: escalation_needed or blocked → Apply subagents-orchestration-guide Specialist Result AcceptancerequiresTestReview is true → Identify the changed integration/E2E test files in the current changes and invoke integration-test-reviewer with them as changedTestFiles, plus diffBase, optional taskFile, prompt-only claims, and mutationEvidence
approved → Proceed to step 3blocked → Apply Specialist Result Acceptanceneeds_revision → Pass qualityIssues unchanged into the Review Resolution Gate; return to step 1 for rerouted corrections and derive convergence from correction re-review prior_feedback_reconciliationtask_file when one exists; otherwise copy step 1 direct_scope, governing_sources, and observable_verification inputs unchanged, including correction_findings when supplied. Add upstream mutationEvidence and qualityCommand when available (caller first, otherwise current task)
stub_detected → Return to step 1 with quality-fixer's incompleteImplementations array unchanged as the canonical incompleteImplementations fieldblocked → Apply Specialist Result Acceptanceverification_incomplete → Retain the complete result for final retry and proceed to step 4approved → Proceed to step 4approved or verification_incomplete; append its verification trailers for the latterApply subagents-orchestration-guide's retained verification limitation retry before the document-dependent reviewers. Continue after clearing or retaining each result and report only repeated limitations.
Resolve the Work Plan's readable Design Doc; missing input blocks review.
Emit these Agent calls in one assistant message, then await both:
governingDocuments, the actual files changed by completed tasks as implementationFiles, and the Work Plan pathgoverningDocumentsApply subagents-orchestration-guide's Post-Implementation Review status-routing and fix/re-run rules. Present the unified report; proceed to Final Cleanup after the complete review set reaches Review Resolution convergence.
For Small, skip this document-dependent review. Retry a retained verification limitation once after the task commit; complete with observed observable_verification evidence and report any proof that remains unavailable.
For Medium/Large, before the completion report, commit the post-review corrections applied at Review Resolution convergence when any remain uncommitted, applying subagents-orchestration-guide Commit Boundary Check, then delete the implementation task files this recipe consumed. Their work is then committed; docs/plans/ is ephemeral working state and is not retained between recipe runs:
docs/plans/tasks/{plan-name}-task-*.md (the {plan-name} derived from the work plan path used in this run)docs/plans/{plan-name}.md) — the user decides whether to delete it after final reviewIf task-file deletion fails, include the filesystem error in the completion report and finish the report with the implementation result.
Small has no task-file cleanup.
In the completion report, list each declined actionable finding with its ID, governing reason, and evidence when any occurred.
After acceptance-test-generator execution, when invoking work-planner (subagent_type: "dev-workflows:work-planner"), communicate:
testSkeletons: every non-null path from generatedFilesDeliverable production is executed through the specialist selected by subagents-orchestration-guide; workflow decisions and returned-result validation remain with the orchestrator.
9b7f687
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.