2.6 KiB
2.6 KiB
description
| description |
|---|
| Maximum quality pipeline — deep scout, thorough planning, plan review, approval gate, coding, 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: "Deep architectural investigation for: $@\n\nTrace all dependency chains, read tests, check types, understand WHY things are structured the way they are. Map subsystems and their boundaries. Your output enables a complex high-risk change." },
{ agent: "planner", task: "Create a detailed implementation plan for: $@\n\nDeep scout context:\n\n{previous}\n\nBe precise: every step must name exact files, functions, and line ranges. Address edge cases and error handling explicitly. Specify which steps can run in parallel. This is a high-risk change — be thorough." },
{ 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 plan-reviewer verdict to the user.
Show clearly:
- The implementation plan (steps, files, risks)
- Plan-reviewer's verdict (APPROVED / NEEDS_REVISION / REJECTED) 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 (re-run planner with the feedback) and present again.
Step 3: Implement (only after approval)
- Use "coder-claude" for the implementation steps
- For each coder run, include the approved plan verbatim: "Implement the following plan step(s). Do NOT deviate.\n\n\n{the approved plan steps}\n"
- For multiple independent steps, run them in parallel using separate coder-claude tasks, each assigned to specific files/plan steps to avoid conflicts
Step 4: Code review
Run the "reviewer" agent on all changes with this task: "Review all changes made for: $@\n\nCheck for correctness, edge cases, error handling, type safety, and consistency with the approved plan."
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.
Failure handling
- If any subagent fails, retry it once. If it fails again, stop and inform the user which agent failed, what the error was, and what had been completed so far. Do NOT continue with remaining steps after a second failure.