subagent-driven-development

Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session

Safety Notice

This listing is from the official public ClawHub registry. Review SKILL.md and referenced scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "subagent-driven-development" with this command: npx skills add user-wangjun/subagent-driven-dev

Subagent-Driven Development

Execute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after each: spec compliance review first, then code quality review.

Core principle: Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration

When to Use

digraph when_to_use {
    "Have implementation plan?" [shape=diamond];
    "Tasks mostly independent?" [shape=diamond];
    "Stay in this session?" [shape=diamond];
    "subagent-driven-development" [shape=box];
    "executing-plans" [shape=box];
    "Manual execution or brainstorm first" [shape=box];

    "Have implementation plan?" -> "Tasks mostly independent?" [label="yes"];
    "Have implementation plan?" -> "Manual execution or brainstorm first" [label="no"];
    "Tasks mostly independent?" -> "Stay in this session?" [label="yes"];
    "Tasks mostly independent?" -> "Manual execution or brainstorm first" [label="no - tightly coupled"];
    "Stay in this session?" -> "subagent-driven-development" [label="yes"];
    "Stay in this session?" -> "executing-plans" [label="no - parallel session"];
}

vs. Executing Plans (parallel session):

  • Same session (no context switch)
  • Fresh subagent per task (no context pollution)
  • Two-stage review after each task: spec compliance first, then code quality
  • Faster iteration (no human-in-loop between tasks)

The Process

digraph process {
    rankdir=TB;

    subgraph cluster_per_task {
        label="Per Task";
        "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
        "Implementer subagent asks questions?" [shape=diamond];
        "Answer questions, provide context" [shape=box];
        "Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" [shape=box];
        "Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
        "Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?" [shape=diamond];
        "Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps" [shape=box];
        "Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
        "Code quality reviewer subagent approves?" [shape=diamond];
        "Implementer subagent fixes quality issues" [shape=box];
        "Mark task complete in TodoWrite" [shape=box];
    }

    "Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite" [shape=box];
    "More tasks remain?" [shape=diamond];
    "Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation" [shape=box];
    "Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];

    "Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create TodoWrite" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
    "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" -> "Implementer subagent asks questions?";
    "Implementer subagent asks questions?" -> "Answer questions, provide context" [label="yes"];
    "Answer questions, provide context" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
    "Implementer subagent asks questions?" -> "Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" [label="no"];
    "Implementer subagent implements, tests, commits, self-reviews" -> "Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)";
    "Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)" -> "Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?";
    "Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?" -> "Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps" [label="no"];
    "Implementer subagent fixes spec gaps" -> "Dispatch spec reviewer subagent (./spec-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="re-review"];
    "Spec reviewer subagent confirms code matches spec?" -> "Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="yes"];
    "Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)" -> "Code quality reviewer subagent approves?";
    "Code quality reviewer subagent approves?" -> "Implementer subagent fixes quality issues" [label="no"];
    "Implementer subagent fixes quality issues" -> "Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent (./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="re-review"];
    "Code quality reviewer subagent approves?" -> "Mark task complete in TodoWrite" [label="yes"];
    "Mark task complete in TodoWrite" -> "More tasks remain?";
    "More tasks remain?" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" [label="yes"];
    "More tasks remain?" -> "Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation" [label="no"];
    "Dispatch final code reviewer subagent for entire implementation" -> "Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch";
}

Prompt Templates

  • ./implementer-prompt.md - Dispatch implementer subagent
  • ./spec-reviewer-prompt.md - Dispatch spec compliance reviewer subagent
  • ./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md - Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent

Example Workflow

You: I'm using Subagent-Driven Development to execute this plan.

[Read plan file once: docs/plans/feature-plan.md]
[Extract all 5 tasks with full text and context]
[Create TodoWrite with all tasks]

Task 1: Hook installation script

[Get Task 1 text and context (already extracted)]
[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]

Implementer: "Before I begin - should the hook be installed at user or system level?"

You: "User level (~/.config/superpowers/hooks/)"

Implementer: "Got it. Implementing now..."
[Later] Implementer:
  - Implemented install-hook command
  - Added tests, 5/5 passing
  - Self-review: Found I missed --force flag, added it
  - Committed

[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]
Spec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant - all requirements met, nothing extra

[Get git SHAs, dispatch code quality reviewer]
Code reviewer: Strengths: Good test coverage, clean. Issues: None. Approved.

[Mark Task 1 complete]

Task 2: Recovery modes

[Get Task 2 text and context (already extracted)]
[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]

Implementer: [No questions, proceeds]
Implementer:
  - Added verify/repair modes
  - 8/8 tests passing
  - Self-review: All good
  - Committed

[Dispatch spec compliance reviewer]
Spec reviewer: ❌ Issues:
  - Missing: Progress reporting (spec says "report every 100 items")
  - Extra: Added --json flag (not requested)

[Implementer fixes issues]
Implementer: Removed --json flag, added progress reporting

[Spec reviewer reviews again]
Spec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant now

[Dispatch code quality reviewer]
Code reviewer: Strengths: Solid. Issues (Important): Magic number (100)

[Implementer fixes]
Implementer: Extracted PROGRESS_INTERVAL constant

[Code reviewer reviews again]
Code reviewer: ✅ Approved

[Mark Task 2 complete]

...

[After all tasks]
[Dispatch final code-reviewer]
Final reviewer: All requirements met, ready to merge

Done!

Advantages

vs. Manual execution:

  • Subagents follow TDD naturally
  • Fresh context per task (no confusion)
  • Parallel-safe (subagents don't interfere)
  • Subagent can ask questions (before AND during work)

vs. Executing Plans:

  • Same session (no handoff)
  • Continuous progress (no waiting)
  • Review checkpoints automatic

Efficiency gains:

  • No file reading overhead (controller provides full text)
  • Controller curates exactly what context is needed
  • Subagent gets complete information upfront
  • Questions surfaced before work begins (not after)

Quality gates:

  • Self-review catches issues before handoff
  • Two-stage review: spec compliance, then code quality
  • Review loops ensure fixes actually work
  • Spec compliance prevents over/under-building
  • Code quality ensures implementation is well-built

Cost:

  • More subagent invocations (implementer + 2 reviewers per task)
  • Controller does more prep work (extracting all tasks upfront)
  • Review loops add iterations
  • But catches issues early (cheaper than debugging later)

Red Flags

Never:

  • Skip reviews (spec compliance OR code quality)
  • Proceed with unfixed issues
  • Dispatch multiple implementation subagents in parallel (conflicts)
  • Make subagent read plan file (provide full text instead)
  • Skip scene-setting context (subagent needs to understand where task fits)
  • Ignore subagent questions (answer before letting them proceed)
  • Accept "close enough" on spec compliance (spec reviewer found issues = not done)
  • Skip review loops (reviewer found issues = implementer fixes = review again)
  • Let implementer self-review replace actual review (both are needed)
  • Start code quality review before spec compliance is ✅ (wrong order)
  • Move to next task while either review has open issues

If subagent asks questions:

  • Answer clearly and completely
  • Provide additional context if needed
  • Don't rush them into implementation

If reviewer finds issues:

  • Implementer (same subagent) fixes them
  • Reviewer reviews again
  • Repeat until approved
  • Don't skip the re-review

If subagent fails task:

  • Dispatch fix subagent with specific instructions
  • Don't try to fix manually (context pollution)

Integration

Required workflow skills:

  • superpowers:writing-plans - Creates the plan this skill executes
  • superpowers:requesting-code-review - Code review template for reviewer subagents
  • superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch - Complete development after all tasks

Subagents should use:

  • superpowers:test-driven-development - Subagents follow TDD for each task

Alternative workflow:

  • superpowers:executing-plans - Use for parallel session instead of same-session execution

Handling Subagent Help Requests

When subagent sends <request_help>:

Identify Priority & Type

PriorityResponse TimeAction
🔴 HighImmediateStop everything, address first
🟡 MediumWithin taskAddress before proceeding
🟢 LowEnd of taskNote it, address later

Respond by Type

ambiguity → Clarify the task description

<help_response>
  <clarification>具体意思是 X,不是 Y</clarification>
  <example>比如这个场景下应该...</example>
</help_response>

blocked → Remove the blocker or provide workaround

<help_response>
  <solution>我已经创建了这个依赖文件</solution>
  <workaround>或者你可以先用这个临时方案...</workaround>
</help_response>

conflict → Make the call

<help_response>
  <decision>用方案 A</decision>
  <reason>因为 B 会导致 C 问题</reason>
</help_response>

decision → Make the decision and explain

<help_response>
  <choice>选 X 方案</choice>
  <why>因为 Y,而且 Z</why>
  <tradeoffs>代价是 A,但可以接受因为 B</tradeoffs>
</help_response>

scope → Either expand scope or handle it yourself

<help_response>
  <scope_decision>expanded | separate_task | lead_handles</scope_decision>
  <instruction>如果是 expanded:这个也算你的任务 / 如果 separate_task:记下来稍后处理 / 如果 leadHandles:我来搞</instruction>
</help_response>

critical → Take over or guide through recovery

<help_response>
  <action>我正在介入处理</action>
  <guidance>你先做 X,Y 留给我</guidance>
</help_response>

Response Quality Checklist

  • ✅ Clear and specific (no vague answers)
  • ✅ Actionable (subagent knows exactly what to do next)
  • ✅ Explains why (so subagent learns)
  • ✅ Addresses the priority appropriately
  • ❌ No "figure it out yourself"
  • ❌ No skipping the response

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

General

Gigo Lobster Resume

🦞 GIGO · gigo-lobster-resume: 续跑入口:v2 stable 当前会清理旧 checkpoint 并从头重跑;保留此 slug 作为旧 checkpoint 兼容入口。 Triggers: 继续试吃 / 恢复评测 / resume tasting / continue lobster...

Registry SourceRecently Updated
General

YiHui CONTEXT MODE

context-mode is an MCP server that saves 98% of your context window by sandboxing tool outputs. It routes large file reads, shell outputs, and web fetches th...

Registry SourceRecently Updated
General

xinyi-drink

Use when users ask about 新一好喝/新一咖啡 drinks, stores, menu, activities, Skill用户大礼包, today drink recommendations, afternoon tea, feeling sleepy, or personalized...

Registry SourceRecently Updated
General

vedic-destiny

吠陀命盘分析中文入口。用于完整命盘研判、命主盘 Rashi chart 与九分盘 Navamsha chart 联读、既往事件回看、出生时间稳定度判断、事业主题、婚姻主题、时空盘专题,以及基于 Jagannatha Hora PDF、星盘截图或文本命盘数据的系统拆盘。当用户提到完整星盘、事业方向、婚姻问题、关系窗...

Registry SourceRecently Updated