Execute work plans efficiently while maintaining quality and finishing features
Executes work plans systematically to ship complete features with quality checks and incremental commits.
/plugin marketplace add everyinc/compound-engineering-plugin/plugin install compound-engineering@compound-engineering-plugin[plan file, specification, or todo file path]ce/Execute a work plan efficiently while maintaining quality and finishing features.
This command takes a work document (plan, specification, or todo file) and executes it systematically. The focus is on shipping complete features by understanding requirements quickly, following existing patterns, and maintaining quality throughout.
<input_document> #$ARGUMENTS </input_document>
Read Plan and Clarify
Setup Environment
First, check the current branch:
current_branch=$(git branch --show-current)
default_branch=$(git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's@^refs/remotes/origin/@@')
# Fallback if remote HEAD isn't set
if [ -z "$default_branch" ]; then
default_branch=$(git rev-parse --verify origin/main >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo "main" || echo "master")
fi
If already on a feature branch (not the default branch):
[current_branch], or create a new branch?"If on the default branch, choose how to proceed:
Option A: Create a new branch
git pull origin [default_branch]
git checkout -b feature-branch-name
Use a meaningful name based on the work (e.g., feat/user-authentication, fix/email-validation).
Option B: Use a worktree (recommended for parallel development)
skill: git-worktree
# The skill will create a new branch from the default branch in an isolated worktree
Option C: Continue on the default branch
Recommendation: Use worktree if:
Create Todo List
Task Execution Loop
For each task in priority order:
while (tasks remain):
- Mark task as in_progress in TodoWrite
- Read any referenced files from the plan
- Look for similar patterns in codebase
- Implement following existing conventions
- Write tests for new functionality
- Run System-Wide Test Check (see below)
- Run tests after changes
- Mark task as completed in TodoWrite
- Mark off the corresponding checkbox in the plan file ([ ] → [x])
- Evaluate for incremental commit (see below)
System-Wide Test Check — Before marking a task done, pause and ask:
| Question | What to do |
|---|---|
| What fires when this runs? Callbacks, middleware, observers, event handlers — trace two levels out from your change. | Read the actual code (not docs) for callbacks on models you touch, middleware in the request chain, after_* hooks. |
| Do my tests exercise the real chain? If every dependency is mocked, the test proves your logic works in isolation — it says nothing about the interaction. | Write at least one integration test that uses real objects through the full callback/middleware chain. No mocks for the layers that interact. |
| Can failure leave orphaned state? If your code persists state (DB row, cache, file) before calling an external service, what happens when the service fails? Does retry create duplicates? | Trace the failure path with real objects. If state is created before the risky call, test that failure cleans up or that retry is idempotent. |
| What other interfaces expose this? Mixins, DSLs, alternative entry points (Agent vs Chat vs ChatMethods). | Grep for the method/behavior in related classes. If parity is needed, add it now — not as a follow-up. |
| Do error strategies align across layers? Retry middleware + application fallback + framework error handling — do they conflict or create double execution? | List the specific error classes at each layer. Verify your rescue list matches what the lower layer actually raises. |
When to skip: Leaf-node changes with no callbacks, no state persistence, no parallel interfaces. If the change is purely additive (new helper method, new view partial), the check takes 10 seconds and the answer is "nothing fires, skip."
When this matters most: Any change that touches models with callbacks, error handling with fallback/retry, or functionality exposed through multiple interfaces.
IMPORTANT: Always update the original plan document by checking off completed items. Use the Edit tool to change - [ ] to - [x] for each task you finish. This keeps the plan as a living document showing progress and ensures no checkboxes are left unchecked.
Incremental Commits
After completing each task, evaluate whether to create an incremental commit:
| Commit when... | Don't commit when... |
|---|---|
| Logical unit complete (model, service, component) | Small part of a larger unit |
| Tests pass + meaningful progress | Tests failing |
| About to switch contexts (backend → frontend) | Purely scaffolding with no behavior |
| About to attempt risky/uncertain changes | Would need a "WIP" commit message |
Heuristic: "Can I write a commit message that describes a complete, valuable change? If yes, commit. If the message would be 'WIP' or 'partial X', wait."
Commit workflow:
# 1. Verify tests pass (use project's test command)
# Examples: bin/rails test, npm test, pytest, go test, etc.
# 2. Stage only files related to this logical unit (not `git add .`)
git add <files related to this logical unit>
# 3. Commit with conventional message
git commit -m "feat(scope): description of this unit"
Handling merge conflicts: If conflicts arise during rebasing or merging, resolve them immediately. Incremental commits make conflict resolution easier since each commit is small and focused.
Note: Incremental commits use clean conventional messages without attribution footers. The final Phase 4 commit/PR includes the full attribution.
Follow Existing Patterns
Test Continuously
Figma Design Sync (if applicable)
For UI work with Figma designs:
Track Progress
Run Core Quality Checks
Always run before submitting:
# Run full test suite (use project's test command)
# Examples: bin/rails test, npm test, pytest, go test, etc.
# Run linting (per CLAUDE.md)
# Use linting-agent before pushing to origin
Consider Reviewer Agents (Optional)
Use for complex, risky, or large changes. Read agents from compound-engineering.local.md frontmatter (review_agents). If no settings file, invoke the setup skill to create one.
Run configured agents in parallel with Task tool. Present findings and address critical issues.
Final Validation
Prepare Operational Validation Plan (REQUIRED)
## Post-Deploy Monitoring & Validation section to the PR description for every change.No additional operational monitoring required and a one-line reason.Create Commit
git add .
git status # Review what's being committed
git diff --staged # Check the changes
# Commit with conventional format
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
feat(scope): description of what and why
Brief explanation if needed.
🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
EOF
)"
Capture and Upload Screenshots for UI Changes (REQUIRED for any UI work)
For any design changes, new views, or UI modifications, you MUST capture and upload screenshots:
Step 1: Start dev server (if not running)
bin/dev # Run in background
Step 2: Capture screenshots with agent-browser CLI
agent-browser open http://localhost:3000/[route]
agent-browser snapshot -i
agent-browser screenshot output.png
See the agent-browser skill for detailed usage.
Step 3: Upload using imgup skill
skill: imgup
# Then upload each screenshot:
imgup -h pixhost screenshot.png # pixhost works without API key
# Alternative hosts: catbox, imagebin, beeimg
What to capture:
IMPORTANT: Always include uploaded image URLs in PR description. This provides visual context for reviewers and documents the change.
Create Pull Request
git push -u origin feature-branch-name
gh pr create --title "Feature: [Description]" --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Summary
- What was built
- Why it was needed
- Key decisions made
## Testing
- Tests added/modified
- Manual testing performed
## Post-Deploy Monitoring & Validation
- **What to monitor/search**
- Logs:
- Metrics/Dashboards:
- **Validation checks (queries/commands)**
- `command or query here`
- **Expected healthy behavior**
- Expected signal(s)
- **Failure signal(s) / rollback trigger**
- Trigger + immediate action
- **Validation window & owner**
- Window:
- Owner:
- **If no operational impact**
- `No additional operational monitoring required: <reason>`
## Before / After Screenshots
| Before | After |
|--------|-------|
|  |  |
## Figma Design
[Link if applicable]
---
[](https://github.com/EveryInc/compound-engineering-plugin) 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)
EOF
)"
Update Plan Status
If the input document has YAML frontmatter with a status field, update it to completed:
status: active → status: completed
Notify User
For complex plans with multiple independent workstreams, enable swarm mode for parallel execution with coordinated agents.
| Use Swarm Mode when... | Use Standard Mode when... |
|---|---|
| Plan has 5+ independent tasks | Plan is linear/sequential |
| Multiple specialists needed (review + test + implement) | Single-focus work |
| Want maximum parallelism | Simpler mental model preferred |
| Large feature with clear phases | Small feature or bug fix |
To trigger swarm execution, say:
"Make a Task list and launch an army of agent swarm subagents to build the plan"
Or explicitly request: "Use swarm mode for this work"
When swarm mode is enabled, the workflow changes:
Create Team
Teammate({ operation: "spawnTeam", team_name: "work-{timestamp}" })
Create Task List with Dependencies
Spawn Specialized Teammates
Task({
team_name: "work-{timestamp}",
name: "implementer",
subagent_type: "general-purpose",
prompt: "Claim implementation tasks, execute, mark complete",
run_in_background: true
})
Task({
team_name: "work-{timestamp}",
name: "tester",
subagent_type: "general-purpose",
prompt: "Claim testing tasks, run tests, mark complete",
run_in_background: true
})
Coordinate and Monitor
Cleanup
Teammate({ operation: "requestShutdown", target_agent_id: "implementer" })
Teammate({ operation: "requestShutdown", target_agent_id: "tester" })
Teammate({ operation: "cleanup" })
See the orchestrating-swarms skill for detailed swarm patterns and best practices.
Before creating PR, verify:
Don't use by default. Use reviewer agents only when:
For most features: tests + linting + following patterns is sufficient.