Help us improve
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
From claude-swe-workflows
Orchestrates full-lifecycle project workflow: batches tickets, implements via /implement-batch, runs smoke tests, then executes quality pipeline (refactor, review-arch, review-test, tidy-docs, review-release). Maximizes autonomy with andon cord escalation.
npx claudepluginhub chrisallenlane/claude-swe-workflows --plugin claude-swe-workflowsHow this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/claude-swe-workflows:implement-projectopusThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Orchestrates an entire project from tickets to release-ready code. Implements batched tickets via `/implement-batch`, runs smoke tests, then executes a comprehensive quality pipeline. Maximizes autonomy — the andon cord is the only planned escalation path.
Orchestrates a batch of tickets as a cohesive unit, implementing each via /implement in autonomous mode and running cross-cutting quality passes.
Orchestrates a full build pipeline from PRD: plans tasks, implements in parallel, and reviews results. Routes simple work to a lighter workflow.
Guides developers through the full development pipeline: discover, brainstorm, plan, execute, review, and ship. Invoke when starting work on a bug, feature, improvement, or task.
Share bugs, ideas, or general feedback.
Orchestrates an entire project from tickets to release-ready code. Implements batched tickets via /implement-batch, runs smoke tests, then executes a comprehensive quality pipeline. Maximizes autonomy — the andon cord is the only planned escalation path.
This skill implements the autonomy discipline documented in references/autonomy.md: the five levers (altitude rule, pre-loaded options, pre-rebutted recommendation, commander's intent, risk budgets), the cascade rule, the shared handoff template, and the "log instead of escalate" pattern. Its commander's-intent schema is the four-field variant defined there (tickets, acceptance bar, constraints, non-goals).
Autonomy is the default; escalation is the exception. The goal is to complete an entire project — multiple batches of tickets, quality passes, and verification — without user intervention. When stuck, try /think-deliberate first. Only pull the andon cord when autonomous resolution has failed or is clearly futile.
The project branch is the single integration point. All work flows into the project branch. Batches merge into it, quality passes commit to it, and the user makes one decision at the end: merge or don't.
Quality is layered. Each quality pass builds on the previous one. Refactoring cleans the code so review-arch can focus on structure. Arch-review surfaces structural recommendations (advisory only — /review-arch no longer implements changes; see the "Advisory aspiration" section of references/autonomy.md) so review-test can survey coverage of the current form. Review-test surfaces ticket-shaped test work (advisory only — /review-test no longer writes tests in-skill). Tidy-docs documents what actually shipped. Release-review validates the whole.
Fresh eyes catch what familiarity misses. Each quality pass runs its full workflow, including any embedded sub-passes (e.g., /refactor runs its own /tidy-docs). Redundancy is intentional — each agent sees the project with fresh context and may catch issues that prior passes normalized.
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ PROJECT WORKFLOW │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 1. Gather tickets and batching strategy │
│ 2. Discuss smoke testing procedures │
│ 3. Plan execution + elicit commander's intent │
│ 4. Create project branch │
│ 5. Per-batch loop: │
│ ├─ 5a. Create batch branch from project branch │
│ ├─ 5b. Run /implement-batch workflow (autonomous mode) │
│ ├─ 5c. Merge batch branch → project branch │
│ ├─ 5d. Post-merge verification │
│ └─ 5e. Clean up and checkpoint │
│ 6. Smoke testing │
│ 7. Quality pipeline: │
│ ├─ 7a. /refactor (MAXIMUM aggression) │
│ ├─ 7b. /review-arch (advisory; ticket proposal) │
│ ├─ 7c. /review-test (advisory; ticket proposal) │
│ ├─ 7d. /tidy-docs │
│ └─ 7e. /review-release │
│ 8. Final report │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
The former conditional second /refactor (previously step 7c, which ran when /review-arch made substantive changes) is removed. /review-arch is now advisory and does not make changes; the conditional can never fire.
Beyond the mainline workflow, the orchestrator has access to additional workflows:
/think-deliberate: Adversarial deliberation for difficult autonomous decisions. Spawns advocates to argue options before rendering a verdict. Prefer this over gut-feel decisions when stakes are high or trade-offs are unclear./bug-fix: Coordinated bug-fixing for challenging issues encountered during any phase. Handles diagnosis, reproduction, and targeted fixes.This protocol applies throughout the entire workflow. The andon cord is the escape valve for problems that cannot be resolved autonomously.
Before pulling the andon cord:
/think-deliberate to reason through options.When the andon cord is pulled:
references/autonomy.md. The escalation must include pre-loaded options (2–3 named choices), an explicit recommendation, the one tradeoff that would flip the recommendation, and a pre-rebutted counterargument. Include the skill-specific state: current phase and step, what /think-deliberate was already considered, current state of all branches (what's merged into the project branch, what's in-progress), and how far through the per-batch loop or quality pipeline the run is.Andon cord triggers (skill-specific):
Ask the user:
batch-1, batch-2; or user specifies explicit grouping)If batching is unclear: Ask. Do not guess at grouping — the user has a reason for the batch structure.
Fetch all tickets using the shared tracker detection from references/trackers.md. Gather title, description, acceptance criteria, labels, and dependencies for each.
Ask the user: "What smoke testing should be performed after implementation? This varies by project type."
Offer examples if the user needs prompts:
Record the procedure. It will be used for:
Analyze all tickets across all batches and produce an execution plan, and elicit the commander's-intent fields beyond the tickets themselves.
Per-batch analysis:
Cross-batch analysis:
Elicit commander's intent (the four-field schema from references/autonomy.md):
| Field | Default | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Tickets | Already gathered in step 1 | Pre-filled; operator confirms. |
| Acceptance bar | "All tickets implemented, full pipeline passes" | Operator may extend (e.g., "and CHANGELOG mentions every user-visible change"). |
| Constraints | None | Cross-cutting limits not encoded in individual tickets (e.g., "must remain compatible with library version X"). |
| Non-goals | None | Explicit out-of-scope items. The orchestrator will not touch these even if it sees opportunity. |
Acceptance bar, constraints, and non-goals frame the orchestrator's judgment for the rest of the run. When the quality pipeline surfaces opportunities outside these bounds, they are deferred to the final report rather than acted on.
Present the plan to the user. This is the primary planned user interaction point. Include:
feat/project-<name>, with feat/batch-<name> per batchWait for user approval before proceeding.
main or master)feat/project-<descriptive-name>PROJECT_PROGRESS.md with project metadata and batch planFor each batch in the planned order:
feat/batch-<descriptive-name>/implement-batch Workflow (Autonomous Mode)Invoke the /implement-batch workflow with these autonomous overrides:
/implement-batch Step | Autonomous Override |
|---|---|
| Step 1 (receive tickets) | Pre-loaded — pass the batch's ticket list directly |
| Step 2 (detect tracker & fetch) | Normal operation |
| Step 3 (batch planning) | Orchestrator approves the plan autonomously. Review the proposed execution order. Use /think-deliberate if the ordering is unclear or if there are concerning dependency patterns. Only pull the andon cord if tickets are fundamentally incoherent. |
| Step 4 (create project branch) | Skip — already on the batch branch. The batch branch serves as /implement-batch's "project branch." Topic branches are created from it. |
| Steps 5a-5e (per-ticket loop) | Normal operation. Topic branches are created from the batch branch. Andon cord triggers cascade up to the project orchestrator. |
| Step 6 (quality passes) | Normal operation. Let /implement-batch run its own refactor + tidy-docs. |
| Step 7 (final review) | Orchestrator reviews autonomously. Log the summary to PROJECT_PROGRESS.md. Do not wait for user input. |
git merge --no-ff feat/batch-<name>--no-ff preserves batch branch history for claritygit branch -d feat/batch-<name>PROJECT_PROGRESS.md: mark batch as complete, record summaryExecute the smoke testing procedure established in step 2.
On issues found:
/bug-fix workflow/think-deliberate first, then andon cord if unresolvableUpdate PROJECT_PROGRESS.md with smoke test results and any fixes applied.
Run each quality pass sequentially. The orchestrator may use judgment to skip passes for trivial projects (e.g., 2 small tickets with no architectural impact may not need /review-arch). If skipping, note the reason in the final report.
Run the /refactor workflow with:
Run the /review-arch workflow. As of v8.0.0, /review-arch no longer makes changes — it produces an analysis and proposes a ticket structure for the recommended work.
Invocation parameters:
The orchestrator receives /review-arch's ticket-structure proposal and applies its own judgment per references/autonomy.md:
For items the orchestrator declines (intending to handle inline), surface them in the final report (step 8) under "Architectural Recommendations Acted On" along with what was actually implemented. For items where tickets were cut, surface them under "Deferred Items / Architectural Recommendations" with their ticket numbers, so the operator knows to follow up after the project ships.
The orchestrator should be conservative: cutting a ticket for a finding is always safer than declining it (declining commits the orchestrator to handling it inline, which may not actually happen in the current pipeline).
Run the /review-test workflow. As of v9.0.0, /review-test is advisory only — it surveys all five phases (unit coverage, integration, E2E, fuzz, quality) and produces a ticket-structure proposal rather than implementing test changes in-skill. The orchestrator receives the proposal and applies its own autonomy judgment per references/autonomy.md:
For items the orchestrator declines (intending to handle inline), surface them in the final report (step 8) under "Test Recommendations Acted On" along with what was actually implemented. For items where tickets were cut, surface them under "Deferred Items / Test Recommendations" with their ticket numbers.
Phase 3's journey-classification confirmation step still requires user input even when invoked autonomously — the classification shapes ticket priorities and is the most subjective input in the analysis. The orchestrator should answer based on the project's commander's intent (which user journeys are critical to this project) and surface any uncertainty as an andon-cord pull rather than guessing.
The orchestrator should be conservative: cutting a ticket for a test finding is safer than declining it (declining commits the orchestrator to handling it inline, which may not actually happen in the current pipeline).
Run the /tidy-docs workflow:
Run the /review-release workflow with autonomous overrides:
For each finding the release review surfaces:
Present comprehensive summary to user:
## Project Complete
### Batches Implemented
- Batch 1 (<name>): N tickets completed
- #12: <title> — <brief outcome>
- #15: <title> — <brief outcome>
- Batch 2 (<name>): N tickets completed
- #18: <title> — <brief outcome>
### Smoke Testing
- Result: PASS / N issues found and fixed
- [Brief description of any fixes applied]
### Quality Pipeline Results
- Refactor (pass 1): N commits, net -XXX lines
- Arch Review: advisory report produced (no changes made — /review-arch is advisory)
- Test Review: advisory report produced; N tickets created / N declined / N approved-inline
- Tidy-Docs: N documentation updates
- Release Review: N findings resolved, N deferred
### Deferred Items / Architectural Recommendations
[Items the orchestrator chose not to implement, with rationale.
Includes /review-arch's recommendations from step 7b — each names
a specific follow-up skill with scope hint (e.g.,
"Dead code in src/foo/: /refactor scoped to that directory").
These are actionable next steps for the user.]
### Deferred Items / Test Recommendations
[Tickets cut from step 7c that the orchestrator chose not to handle
inline, plus any items it implemented inline alongside the ticket
numbers. Each ticket names a specific follow-up skill with scope hint.]
### Statistics
- Total commits: N
- Net lines changed: +/-N
- Tests added during batch implementation: N (this counts tests written
by SMEs during ticket implementation in step 5; /review-test does not
add tests itself — it surfaces ticket-shaped work)
- Documentation files updated: N
### Branch Status
- Project branch: feat/project-<name>
- Base branch: <main branch>
- Ready for review and merge
User decides next steps: merge to main, further work, or discard.
Maintain a progress file at the repository root throughout the workflow. This file is gitignored and serves two purposes: human-readable progress tracking and crash recovery context.
Structure:
# Project: <name>
Started: <timestamp>
Branch: feat/project-<name>
Status: <current phase>
## Configuration
- Smoke testing: <procedure summary>
- Batches: <count>
## Batch Progress
### Batch 1: <name> — COMPLETE
- Tickets: #12, #15
- Commits: N
- Summary: <brief>
### Batch 2: <name> — IN PROGRESS
- Tickets: #18, #20
- Current ticket: #20
- Status: implementing
## Quality Pipeline
- [x] Refactor
- [ ] Arch Review (advisory)
- [ ] Test Review
- [ ] Tidy-Docs
- [ ] Release Review
## Issues Log
- <timestamp>: <issue description and resolution>
Update at every major transition: batch start/complete, quality pass start/complete, andon cord events, smoke test results.
Sequential execution:
Context management:
PROJECT_PROGRESS.md provides durable state outside the context windowSub-workflow invocation:
/refactor, /review-arch, /review-test, /tidy-docs, /review-release): invoke as skills/implement-batch: invoke as a skill with autonomous overrides/think-deliberate, /bug-fix: invoke as skills when neededAbort current batch:
Abort quality pass:
/think-deliberateAbort entire workflow:
Do NOT abort for:
/implement-batch)Relationship to /implement-batch:
/implement-project is a higher-level orchestrator that runs /implement-batch for each batch of tickets/implement-batch handles the per-ticket implementation loop via /implement/implement-project adds: multi-batch coordination, smoke testing, comprehensive quality pipelineRelationship to /scope:
/scope creates tickets; /implement-project consumes them/scope to plan → organize tickets into batches → /implement-project to implementRelationship to quality passes:
/implement-project runs each quality pass as a complete workflowHierarchy:
/implement-project
├── /implement-batch (per batch)
│ ├── /implement (per ticket)
│ ├── /refactor (per-batch quality)
│ └── /tidy-docs (per-batch quality)
├── /refactor (project-level quality)
├── /review-arch (project-level quality, advisory; ticket proposal)
├── /review-test (project-level quality)
├── /tidy-docs (project-level quality)
└── /review-release (project-level quality)