pi subagents and workflow skill plus HA

pi/.pi/agent/prompts/implement-critical.md

@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@
+---
+description: "Maximum quality pipeline — deep scout, Max planning, Opus plan review, approval gate, Sonnet coding, Opus code review"
+---
+
+Use the subagent tool to implement with maximum quality. This is for high-risk or architecturally significant changes.
+
+## Step 1: Deep scout + Plan + Plan review
+```
+{ chain: [
+  { agent: "deep-scout", task: "Thoroughly investigate all code relevant to: $@" },
+  { agent: "planner", task: "Create a detailed implementation plan for: $@\n\nDeep context:\n\n{previous}" },
+  { agent: "plan-reviewer", task: "Review this plan critically. Verify all file paths, line numbers, and assumptions against the codebase. Check for missing steps, edge cases, and risks.\n\n{previous}" }
+]}
+```
+
+## Step 2: APPROVAL GATE
+
+**STOP. Present the plan and the Opus review to the user.**
+
+Show clearly:
+- The implementation plan (steps, files, risks)
+- Opus's verdict and any issues found
+- Ask: "Approve this plan, or want changes?"
+
+Do NOT proceed until the user explicitly approves.
+If the user requests changes, revise the plan and present again.
+
+## Step 3: Implement (only after approval)
+- Use "coder-claude" (Sonnet 4.6) for the implementation steps
+- For multiple independent steps, run them in parallel using separate coder-claude tasks
+
+## Step 4: Opus review
+Run the "reviewer" agent on all changes.
+
+## Step 5: Fix
+If the reviewer says NEEDS_FIXES, run the "fixer" agent with the review output.
+
+## Step 6: Report
+Summarize everything: what was planned, what was implemented, what was reviewed, what was fixed, and any remaining concerns.

pi/.pi/agent/prompts/implement.md

@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+---
+description: "Adaptive implementation workflow — routes, plans, waits for approval, then implements"
+---
+
+Use the subagent tool to implement the following task. The workflow is ADAPTIVE — first evaluate, then plan, get user approval, then execute.
+
+## Step 1: Route
+
+Run the "router" agent with this task: $@
+
+The router will return a classification (SMALL, MEDIUM, LARGE, or HUGE).
+
+## Step 2: Execute based on classification
+
+### If SMALL:
+Run a single "coder" agent. No planning or review needed.
+After implementation, present what was done. Done.
+
+### If MEDIUM:
+Run the "scout" agent, then the "planner" agent as a chain.
+
+**STOP. Present the plan to the user and ask for approval before continuing.**
+
+Once approved (user says ok, go, approved, looks good, etc):
+- Run the "coder" agent to implement the plan
+- Run "reviewer-quick" on the result
+- If NEEDS_FIXES, run the "fixer" agent
+
+### If LARGE:
+Run a chain: "scout" → "planner" → "plan-reviewer"
+
+**STOP. Present the plan AND the Opus review to the user. Ask for approval before continuing.**
+
+Once approved:
+- Execute the plan steps using "coder" for sequential steps, or "coder-parallel" with parallel tasks if the plan identified parallelizable steps
+- Run the "reviewer" agent on all changes
+- If NEEDS_FIXES, run the "fixer" agent
+
+If the user requests changes to the plan, revise and present again before implementing.
+
+### If HUGE:
+Same as LARGE but use "deep-scout" instead of "scout", and prefer parallel execution with "coder-parallel" for independent steps.
+
+**STOP after planning. Same approval gate as LARGE.**
+
+## Important
+
+- **NEVER skip the approval gate** for MEDIUM, LARGE, or HUGE tasks. Always present the plan and wait.
+- When presenting the plan, format it clearly. Highlight: what will change, which files, risks, and the Opus review verdict (if applicable).
+- If the user says "with changes" or gives feedback, revise the plan and present again.
+- Always pass scout/planner context forward using {previous} in chain mode.
+- For parallel coder tasks, clearly assign each coder to specific files to avoid conflicts.
+- If any step fails, report what happened and stop.
+- After the final step, summarize: what was done, what files changed, what was reviewed, and any remaining concerns.

pi/.pi/agent/prompts/plan.md

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+---
+description: "Scout + plan + Opus plan review — no implementation"
+---
+
+Use the subagent tool with a chain to plan (but NOT implement) the following:
+
+```
+{ chain: [
+  { agent: "scout", task: "Find all code relevant to: $@" },
+  { agent: "planner", task: "Create a detailed implementation plan for: $@\n\nContext from scout:\n\n{previous}" },
+  { agent: "plan-reviewer", task: "Review this implementation plan. Verify file paths and line numbers against the actual codebase.\n\n{previous}" }
+]}
+```
+
+Present the plan and the review to me. Do NOT proceed to implementation.

pi/.pi/agent/prompts/review.md

@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
+---
+description: "Opus code review on recent changes or specified files"
+---
+
+Use the subagent tool to run the "reviewer" agent with this task:
+
+Review the following: $@
+
+If no specific files are mentioned, review recent git changes (`git diff` and `git diff --staged`).
+Report the review results. If the verdict is NEEDS_FIXES, ask if I want you to run the "fixer" agent to apply them.