Initial public release
A chezmoi-based fleet-dotfiles template for macOS workstations: - Two-way auto-sync via launchd watcher + 5-min puller - Mesh SSH via modify_authorized_keys driven by .chezmoidata/fleet.yaml - age-encrypted secrets file - Bundled Claude Code agentic team (11 agents) + /lite + /lite-sub commands - Verify-before-claiming Stop hook - Generic statusline + project-boundary validate-path hook - Reference launchd plist for cross-fleet task-durations aggregation (companion repo: gitea.tojo.team/cardinale/task-durations) - AGENTS.md walks an agent through the entire setup Q&A interactively - docs/ covers architecture, security model, fleet onboarding
This commit is contained in:
Anthony Cardinale
@@ -0,0 +1,234 @@
|
||||
---
|
||||
description: Subagent variant of /lite — same 4 advisory roles (scout, explorer, critic, tester) but dispatched as plain Opus subagents instead of an Agent Team. Two-wave flow (scout/explorer/critic in parallel → tester with their findings → orchestrator implements + verifies). No EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS dependency, no peer DMs, no team mailbox. Cheaper coordination, no mid-flight role drift correction. Do NOT use for trivial tasks, pure research, or multi-module architectural work.
|
||||
argument-hint: "<task description in quotes>"
|
||||
allowed-tools: Agent, Bash, Read, Edit, Write, Glob, Grep, WebSearch, WebFetch, TodoWrite, Skill
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# /lite-sub — Lite Agentic Team (Subagent edition, Opus)
|
||||
|
||||
Spawn the same four advisory roles as `/lite`, but as plain one-shot subagents pinned to Opus. The orchestrator dispatches them, collects their outputs, implements code, and verifies tests pass. No persistent teammates, no peer-to-peer messaging, no team lifecycle.
|
||||
|
||||
This is the subagent counterpart to `/lite`. Use when:
|
||||
|
||||
- You want the team's research/critique/test discipline without the Agent-Teams overhead.
|
||||
- `CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS` is unavailable or you want to avoid team artifacts on disk.
|
||||
- You want to compare /lite (teams) vs /lite-sub (subagents) on the same task.
|
||||
|
||||
## Tunable Limits
|
||||
|
||||
- `SUBAGENT_MODEL = "opus"` # forced via `model:` on every Agent call
|
||||
- `TEST_RETRY_MAX = 2` # how many times to refine impl on failing tests before escalating
|
||||
- `WALL_CLOCK_TARGET = 3-7 min` # advisory only
|
||||
- `WAVE_1_TIMEOUT_HINT = 4 min` # if a wave-1 subagent hasn't returned by then, surface the wait — do not abort
|
||||
|
||||
## Flow
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Guard
|
||||
|
||||
If `$ARGUMENTS` is empty: error `/lite-sub requires a task description in quotes` and stop.
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Pre-dispatch context gather
|
||||
|
||||
Per CLAUDE.md's pre-dispatch checklist, build a single context block reused for all subagent prompts.
|
||||
|
||||
- `pwd` and `git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null` → project root.
|
||||
- Detect language + test framework (in order):
|
||||
- `package.json` → Node — check deps for `vitest` | `jest` | `mocha`
|
||||
- `pyproject.toml` or `setup.py` → Python — `pytest` if in deps, else default `pytest`
|
||||
- `Package.swift` → Swift — XCTest
|
||||
- `go.mod` → Go — `go test`
|
||||
- `Cargo.toml` → Rust — `cargo test`
|
||||
- `Gemfile` → Ruby — `rspec` if in deps else `minitest`
|
||||
- None of the above → "no project detected" branch (see Error handling)
|
||||
- SSH hosts: `grep -A5 "Host " ~/.ssh/config` matching task domain.
|
||||
- Skills: `ls ~/.claude/skills/` matching task domain.
|
||||
- Env var NAMES: `grep -i <task-keyword> ~/.zshrc` (NAMES only, never values).
|
||||
- CLAUDE.md keywords: `grep -B1 -A10 <keyword> ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md` for any sections relevant to the task.
|
||||
|
||||
**Standard context block** (built once, pasted into every spawn prompt):
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
## Available System Access
|
||||
- SSH: <relevant hosts, or "n/a">
|
||||
- Skills: <relevant skill summaries, or "n/a">
|
||||
- Env vars: <relevant env var NAMES only>
|
||||
- Tools: WebSearch, WebFetch, Bash, Read, Glob, Grep
|
||||
- Project root: <path or "no git project">
|
||||
- Test framework: <auto-detected, or "none detected">
|
||||
|
||||
## Task (verbatim from user)
|
||||
$ARGUMENTS
|
||||
|
||||
## Relevant CLAUDE.md sections
|
||||
<paste matching grep output, or "n/a">
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Wave 1 — dispatch scout, explorer, critic in parallel
|
||||
|
||||
A SINGLE assistant message with THREE `Agent` tool calls. Every call uses:
|
||||
|
||||
- `model: "opus"`
|
||||
- `subagent_type`: the existing agentic-team agent name (`"Research Scout"`, `"Explorer"`, `"Critic"`)
|
||||
- `description`: 3-5 word summary
|
||||
- `prompt`: the standard prompt template below, with role-specific addenda
|
||||
|
||||
**Standard wave-1 prompt template:**
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You are a one-shot advisory subagent in the /lite-sub flow. You will run ONCE,
|
||||
produce your output, and exit. There is no team mailbox, no peer messaging,
|
||||
and no opportunity to react to other subagents — this is a single round.
|
||||
|
||||
Your full role definition is at:
|
||||
~/.claude/agents/agentic-team/<phase>/<role>.md
|
||||
|
||||
Read that file ONCE at the start — it defines your identity, what you produce,
|
||||
your rules, and your constraints. Stay in role.
|
||||
|
||||
<paste standard context block from step 2>
|
||||
|
||||
## Output discipline
|
||||
- Be concise. Your output goes directly into the orchestrator's context for
|
||||
synthesis. Long preambles waste tokens.
|
||||
- Lead with the deliverable your role specifies. End with a short "Notes for
|
||||
the tester" paragraph (≤4 bullets) flagging assumptions worth testing.
|
||||
- Do NOT propose implementation code. Do NOT ask clarifying questions —
|
||||
proceed with the most reasonable interpretation and note ambiguities.
|
||||
- Do NOT spawn further subagents. Do NOT call Agent.
|
||||
|
||||
## Your task in this run
|
||||
<role-specific addendum below>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Role-specific addenda:**
|
||||
|
||||
- **Research Scout**: "Find ≥3 references via WebSearch — libraries, blog posts, similar implementations. Check GitHub stars/last-commit on each. Output: a `## Prior art` brief with one paragraph per reference (what it does, why it's relevant, link), followed by `## Recommended approach` (1-2 paragraphs) and `## Notes for the tester` (assumptions to test)."
|
||||
- **Explorer**: "Verify every library/framework you would recommend (`npm view <pkg>`, `pip show`, `brew info`, `gh repo view`, or WebSearch the package registry). Output: a `## Version manifest` table with `<lib>@<ver> — last release <date> — status` rows, a `## Test framework` line stating what to use and which version, and `## Notes for the tester` (any version-pinning gotchas)."
|
||||
- **Critic**: "Read the task as if it were already a plan. Output: `## Concerns` (severity-tagged: critical/important/minor, each one paragraph), `## Ambiguity register` (a numbered list of unresolved questions and your default interpretation for each), and `## Notes for the tester` — the riskiest assumptions, ranked. Identify problems; do not propose solutions. Flag `FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG PLAN` only if the task is contradictory or impossible — put that flag on its own line at the very top if applicable."
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Inspect wave-1 outputs
|
||||
|
||||
When all three return:
|
||||
|
||||
- If Critic's first line contains `FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG PLAN`: STOP. Print Critic's reasoning to the user, ask them to confirm or revise, do NOT proceed to wave 2 or implementation.
|
||||
- Otherwise: synthesize a short "wave-1 digest" string (≤30 lines total) consisting of:
|
||||
- Scout's `Recommended approach` paragraph
|
||||
- Explorer's `Test framework` line + any `critical` version pins
|
||||
- Critic's `Notes for the tester` (riskiest assumptions)
|
||||
- The three `Notes for the tester` blocks merged and de-duplicated
|
||||
|
||||
This digest is the spec for wave 2.
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Wave 2 — dispatch tester (single Agent call)
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
You are the Tester subagent in the /lite-sub flow. You will run ONCE,
|
||||
write failing tests, and exit. Your full role definition is at:
|
||||
~/.claude/agents/agentic-team/implementation/tester.md
|
||||
|
||||
Read that file ONCE at the start. Stay in role.
|
||||
|
||||
<paste standard context block from step 2>
|
||||
|
||||
## Wave-1 digest (input from scout, explorer, critic)
|
||||
<paste digest from step 4>
|
||||
|
||||
## Your task
|
||||
Write FAILING tests in <detected test framework> at the project's standard
|
||||
test path. Cover the riskiest assumptions from the digest. Tests should fail
|
||||
because the implementation does not yet exist — not because of trivial syntax
|
||||
errors. Output: a `## Test files` list (absolute paths created), `## Coverage`
|
||||
(one bullet per concern from the digest, mapping concern → test name), and
|
||||
`## Notes for the implementer` (≤4 bullets — invariants the impl must hold).
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Use `model: "opus"` and `subagent_type: "Tester"`.
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Synthesis + implementation (orchestrator)
|
||||
|
||||
When tester returns AND the test files exist on disk:
|
||||
|
||||
- Read the test files (this is your spec).
|
||||
- Implement code in the project to make the failing tests pass. Use Critic's concerns + Scout's prior art + Explorer's version manifest as guardrails.
|
||||
- Do NOT refactor unrelated code.
|
||||
- Do NOT commit (the user controls commits).
|
||||
|
||||
**UX pass — required when the artifact has a user-facing surface.** Before considering the implementation done, identify whether the artifact will produce output a human reads:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Web** (HTML/CSS/React/Tailwind/marketing) → invoke the `hig-think` skill via the Skill tool.
|
||||
- **SwiftUI / iOS / macOS native** → invoke the `swift-front` skill.
|
||||
- **Other frontend** (React Native, generic JS UI, design systems) → invoke the `frontend-design` skill.
|
||||
- **CLI / terminal** → no dedicated skill; apply: bold for primary identifier, dim ANSI for metadata, color for category, respect `NO_COLOR` and `isatty()`, expose `--json` (or equivalent) as the machine-readable escape hatch, blank lines between logical sections, errors prefixed with program name.
|
||||
- **Backend / library / protocol** → skip; no human surface.
|
||||
|
||||
Apply the invoked skill's recommendations alongside the test-driven structure. Default to the human-readable form; gate machine output behind a flag. Do NOT skip this step on the grounds that "tests pass" — tests measure the data contract, not what the user sees.
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Verification
|
||||
|
||||
Run the project's test command (`pytest`, `npm test`, `swift test`, `go test ./...`, etc., per detected framework).
|
||||
|
||||
- Tests pass: continue to step 8.
|
||||
- Tests fail (iteration `n` of `TEST_RETRY_MAX` = 2):
|
||||
- If the failure is in your impl: refine the impl, re-run.
|
||||
- If the failure looks like a bad test (test asserts something the spec doesn't require): fix the test inline (you cannot DM the tester — it has exited). Note the test edit in the final report.
|
||||
- After `TEST_RETRY_MAX` failed iterations: STOP. Skip to step 8 with a failure report.
|
||||
|
||||
### 8. Final report
|
||||
|
||||
Concise final assistant message:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Mode:** subagent (Opus) — distinguishes from `/lite`'s team mode.
|
||||
- **Research:** 1-3 most relevant references scout found.
|
||||
- **Critiqued:** 1-3 most important concerns critic raised.
|
||||
- **Tested:** what assumptions are now under test.
|
||||
- **Built:** what was implemented.
|
||||
- **Files changed:** absolute paths.
|
||||
- **Test result:** pass / fail-after-N-retries / escalated.
|
||||
|
||||
## Error handling
|
||||
|
||||
| Failure | Behavior |
|
||||
|---|---|
|
||||
| `$ARGUMENTS` empty | Error: `/lite-sub requires a task description in quotes` |
|
||||
| Not in a git project | Continue, but tester writes to `~/lite-sub-scratch/<timestamp>/`; orchestrator implements there too |
|
||||
| No test framework detected | Continue; tester writes plain assertion script (e.g., a runnable Python file that exits non-zero on failure); report fallback used |
|
||||
| Wave-1 subagent fails to return | Surface which one. If 1 of 3 fails: continue without them, note in report. If 2+ fail: stop with error. |
|
||||
| Critic flags `FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG PLAN` | STOP. Print Critic's reasoning. Ask user to confirm/revise before proceeding. Do NOT proceed to wave 2. |
|
||||
| Tester fails to return | STOP. Surface error. Do not implement without tests. |
|
||||
| Tests fail after `TEST_RETRY_MAX` | Continue to step 8 (final report) with failure status. Print last test output. |
|
||||
|
||||
## Differences from `/lite` (Agent-Teams edition)
|
||||
|
||||
| Property | `/lite` (teams) | `/lite-sub` (subagents) |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Coordination | Persistent teammates + SendMessage + shared task list | One-shot subagents, no peer messaging |
|
||||
| Model | Whatever each agent's frontmatter specifies | Forced `model: "opus"` on every call |
|
||||
| Critic ↔ Tester | Live DM ("riskiest assumptions") | Wave-1 digest passed in tester's prompt |
|
||||
| Drift correction | Orchestrator DMs role-drifters mid-flight | Not possible — subagents complete in one shot |
|
||||
| Disk artifacts | `~/.claude/teams/<name>/`, `~/.claude/tasks/<name>/` | None |
|
||||
| Required env | `CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS=1` | None |
|
||||
| Cost | ~4-7× plain subagents | ~1× plain subagents (still 3-4 Opus calls) |
|
||||
| Wall clock | 3-7 min typical | 3-7 min typical (similar — wave-2 serial gate) |
|
||||
|
||||
The structural tradeoff: `/lite` lets Tester react to Critic's concerns mid-flight. `/lite-sub` collapses that interaction into a single digest hop, which loses fidelity but eliminates a class of coordination failures (orphan teams, debate spirals, role drift).
|
||||
|
||||
## Anti-patterns — when NOT to invoke `/lite-sub`
|
||||
|
||||
- Trivial tasks (rename, fix typo, format) — overhead > value.
|
||||
- Pure-research, no implementation — direct WebSearch is faster.
|
||||
- Cross-file architectural decisions — use the full team flow with Architect/Builder/Reviewer/Integrator.
|
||||
- Spec is unclear — clarify with the user first; `/lite-sub` will commit to one interpretation.
|
||||
- Time-sensitive emergencies — direct intervention is faster.
|
||||
- LLM-orchestrating CLI tasks where the team's testing instinct pushes toward `--json-schema` or `--model <smaller>` overrides. In your task description, explicitly say: "use the user's default model and inherit session context — do not add `--no-session-persistence`, `--system-prompt`, `--json-schema`, or `--model` overrides."
|
||||
|
||||
## Constraints (negative — what NOT to do)
|
||||
|
||||
- Do NOT introduce new agents. Use only the four existing ones (`Research Scout`, `Explorer`, `Critic`, `Tester`).
|
||||
- Do NOT dispatch all four in a single wave — Tester must run AFTER scout/explorer/critic so the digest is available. The structural reason /lite-sub keeps the two-wave shape is that without it Tester has no signal beyond the raw task.
|
||||
- Do NOT call `TeamCreate`, `TeamDelete`, or `SendMessage` — this command is the subagent variant by design. If you find yourself reaching for those tools, you are running the wrong command.
|
||||
- Do NOT let subagents write implementation code (except Tester writing test code). The orchestrator implements.
|
||||
- Do NOT ask the user clarifying questions during the flow — `/lite-sub` is fire-and-forget; if the task is ambiguous, proceed with the most reasonable interpretation and note it in the report.
|
||||
- Do NOT skip the test-pass verification (step 7) — claiming "done" without running tests violates `superpowers:verification-before-completion`.
|
||||
- Do NOT proceed past step 4 if Critic flags `FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG PLAN`.
|
||||
- Do NOT skip the UX pass on user-facing artifacts on the grounds that tests pass.
|
||||
- Do NOT omit `model: "opus"` on any of the four Agent calls — the whole point of `/lite-sub` is to pin Opus across the advisory wave + tester.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user