subagent-execution
Execute implementation plans using subagents. Three modes: single task, batch (sequential), parallel. Two-stage review for every task.
适合你,如果需要将复杂计划拆解为子任务并自动执行
npx oh-my-skill add mahsumaktas/agent-evolution-kit/subagent-executioncurl -fsSL https://oh-my-skill.com/install.sh | bash -s -- mahsumaktas/agent-evolution-kit/subagent-executionnpx oh-my-skill verify mahsumaktas/agent-evolution-kit/subagent-execution怎么用
商店整理自技能原文 · 版本 c599c87 · 表述以原文为准装上后,Claude 会为每个任务启动一个全新的子代理来执行。每个任务都经过规范审查和代码质量审查两轮检查,确保结果可靠。
当你有一个实现计划(如来自 structured-brainstorming 技能),需要执行单个任务、按顺序执行多个任务或并行执行独立任务时触发。
技能原文 SKILL.md
Subagent Execution
Overview
Execute implementation plans using fresh subagents. Each task gets a new session. Every task goes through two-stage review (spec compliance + code quality).
Core principle: One subagent per task + two-stage review = high quality, fast iteration.
3 Execution Modes
Mode A -- Single Task Execution
Delegate a single task to a subagent.
1. Prepare task text (full context + requirements) 2. Spawn an implementer subagent 3. When subagent completes, run spec review 4. When spec passes, run code quality review 5. Update task status
Mode B -- Batch (Sequential Execution)
Execute tasks from a plan file in order. Checkpoint between each task.
1. Read the plan file, extract all tasks 2. Create $AEK_HOME/tasks/current-plan.md (for tracking) 3. Apply Mode A for each task 4. Update task status after each task 5. Run final review when all tasks complete
Mode C -- Parallel Execution
Run 2+ independent tasks simultaneously.
1. Verify independence (no shared files/state) 2. Spawn separate subagent for each task 3. Collect results when all subagents complete 4. Run spec + quality review for each 5. Resolve merge conflicts if any
Do NOT use parallel when:
- Tasks modify the same files
- Tasks have sequential dependencies
- Task outputs depend on each other
Task Tracking
Use $AEK_HOME/tasks/current-plan.md for plan tracking:
# Plan: [Feature Name] Date: YYYY-MM-DD Source: [plan file path] ## Task 1: [Name] -- COMPLETED - Implementer: session_xxx - Review: PASSED - Commit: abc1234 ## Task 2: [Name] -- IN PROGRESS - Implementer: session_yyy ## Task 3: [Name] -- PENDING
Process Flow (Mode B -- Detailed)
Read plan file
|
v
Extract all tasks (full text + context)
|
v
Create current-plan.md
|
v
[For each task]
|
v
Spawn implementer subagent
|
v
Subagent asking questions? --YES--> Answer, provide context
| |
NO v
| Subagent implements
v |
Subagent implements <----------------------+
|
v
Spawn spec reviewer subagent
|
v
Spec compliant? --NO--> Implementer fixes --> re-run spec review
|
YES
|
v
Spawn code quality reviewer subagent
|
v
Quality approved? --NO--> Implementer fixes --> re-run quality review
|
YES
|
v
Mark task as COMPLETED
|
v
More tasks? --YES--> Next task
|
NO
|
v
Final code review (entire implementation)
|
v
Pass through verification-gate
Subagent Prompts
Implementer Subagent
[spawn subagent]: task="Implement Task N: [task name] [FULL task text -- do not make the subagent read files, provide everything] ## Context [Where this task fits, dependencies, architecture] ## Before You Start If you have questions about requirements or approach, ASK FIRST. ## Task 1. Implement exactly what the spec says 2. Write tests (TDD) 3. Verify 4. Commit 5. Self-review 6. Report what was done" model="[your model]"
Spec Reviewer Subagent
[spawn subagent]: task="Spec Compliance Review -- Task N ## What Was Requested [FULL task requirements] ## Implementer's Claim [From their report] ## CRITICAL: Do NOT Trust the Report The implementer may have rushed. Verify everything INDEPENDENTLY. - Do not accept their claims at face value - Read the actual code - Compare requirements line by line - Look for missing parts, look for extra features Report: PASS -- Spec compliant OR FAIL -- Issues [list]" model="[your model]"
Code Quality Reviewer Subagent
[spawn subagent]: task="Code Quality Review -- Task N ## What Was Implemented [Summary] ## Checklist - OWASP Top 10 security - Clean code principles - Test quality (tests real behavior, not mocks) - Error handling appropriateness - Naming conventions - YAGNI -- any unnecessary complexity? Report: Strengths, Issues (Critical/Important/Minor), Verdict" model="[your model]"
When a Subagent Asks Questions
- Answer clearly and completely
- Provide additional context if needed
- Do not rush them -- good questions lead to good results
When a Reviewer Finds Issues
- The implementer (same subagent) fixes the issues
- The reviewer reviews again
- Repeat until approved
- Do NOT skip the re-review
Red Flags
Never:
- Skip reviews (spec OR quality)
- Proceed with unfixed issues
- Run multiple implementer subagents in parallel on dependent tasks
- Make the subagent read the plan file (PROVIDE the full text)
- Send a subagent without context
- Ignore subagent questions
- Accept "approximately compliant" (reviewer found issues = not done)
- Start code quality review before spec review passes (wrong order)
- Move to the next task while the current review has open issues
Integration
Required skills:
structured-brainstorming-- Creates the plan that this skill executestdd-workflow-- Subagents follow TDDverification-gate-- Final verification when all tasks completesystematic-debugging-- When a subagent hits an error