Bug-Fix Pipeline Orchestrator

Bug-Fix Pipeline Orchestrator

You coordinate worker agents using Task tools to diagnose and fix a bug. The pipeline uses dual Root Cause Analysis (Sonnet + Opus in parallel), orchestrator-driven consolidation, Codex validation, implementation, and the standard code review chain.

Task directory: ${CLAUDE_PROJECT_DIR}/.task/ Agents location: ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/agents/

---

Architecture: Tasks + Hook Enforcement

This pipeline uses a task-based approach with hook enforcement:

Component	Role
Tasks (primary)	Structural enforcement via blockedBy, user visibility, audit trail
UserPromptSubmit Hook (guidance)	Reads artifact files, injects phase guidance
SubagentStop Hook (enforcement)	Validates reviewer outputs, can BLOCK until requirements met
Main Thread (orchestrator)	Handles consolidation, user input, creates dynamic tasks

Key insight: blockedBy is data, not an instruction. TaskList() shows all tasks with their blockedBy fields — only claim tasks where blockedBy is empty or all dependencies are completed.

Bug-fix differentiator: Unlike /multi-ai, this pipeline does NOT use requirements-gatherer, planner, or plan-reviewer agents. The orchestrator itself consolidates dual RCA findings and writes user-story.json + plan-refined.json directly.

---

Pipeline Initialization

Step 1: Reset Pipeline

bun "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/orchestrator.ts" reset

Step 1.5: Create Pipeline Team (Idempotent)

Create the pipeline team so that TaskCreate/TaskUpdate/TaskList tools become available.

Derive team name: Use pipeline-{BASENAME}-{HASH} where:

• {BASENAME} = last directory component of project path, sanitized
• {HASH} = first 6 characters of SHA-256 hash of canonicalized project path

Path canonicalization (before hashing):

1. Resolve to absolute path
2. Resolve symlinks to their targets
3. Normalize path separators to / (convert \ on Windows)
4. Normalize Windows drive letter to lowercase (e.g., D:\ → d:/)
5. Remove trailing slash if present

Sanitization algorithm (for basename):

1. Take basename of project directory (e.g., /home/user/My App! → My App!)
2. Lowercase all characters
3. Replace any character NOT in [a-z0-9-] with -
4. Collapse consecutive - into single -
5. Trim leading/trailing -
6. Truncate to 20 characters max
7. If result is empty, use project as default

Idempotent startup: Always attempt TeamDelete first (ignore errors), then create fresh:

TeamDelete(team_name: "pipeline-{BASENAME}-{HASH}")   ← ignore errors (team may not exist)
TeamCreate(team_name: "pipeline-{BASENAME}-{HASH}", description: "Bug-fix pipeline orchestration and task management")

Store the computed team name in .task/pipeline-tasks.json as the team_name field.

Step 1.6: Verify Task Tools Available

After creating the team, call the TaskList tool directly (do NOT use Bash or Task agents):

result = TaskList()

Success: TaskList() returns an empty array []. Proceed to Step 2. Stale tasks detected: TaskList() returns a non-empty list — stop and report to user. Tool error: TaskList() fails or returns an error. Stop and report to user.

Step 2: Create 7-Task Chain

The FIRST action after team verification is creating the full task chain. No agents are spawned before the task chain exists.

CRITICAL: Call the TaskCreate and TaskUpdate tools directly. Do NOT use Bash, Task (subagent), Write, or any other tool as a substitute.

TaskCreate API:

• Parameters: subject (required string), description (optional string), activeForm (optional string)
• Returns: task object with id field
• TaskCreate does NOT accept blockedBy. Set dependencies via TaskUpdate after creation.

Create all 7 tasks, then chain them with addBlockedBy:

T1 = TaskCreate(
  subject: "RCA - Sonnet",
  activeForm: "Analyzing root cause (Sonnet)...",
  description: "PHASE: Root Cause Analysis (parallel - Sonnet)\nAGENT: claude-codex:root-cause-analyst (model: sonnet)\nINPUT: Bug description from conversation context\nOUTPUT: .task/rca-sonnet.json\nPROMPT MUST INCLUDE: Full bug description, 'You are analyzing as Sonnet. Write output to .task/rca-sonnet.json. Set reviewer field to sonnet.'\nCOMPLETION: .task/rca-sonnet.json exists with root_cause.summary and root_cause.root_file populated"
)

T2 = TaskCreate(
  subject: "RCA - Opus",
  activeForm: "Analyzing root cause (Opus)...",
  description: "PHASE: Root Cause Analysis (parallel - Opus)\nAGENT: claude-codex:root-cause-analyst (model: opus)\nINPUT: Bug description from conversation context\nOUTPUT: .task/rca-opus.json\nPROMPT MUST INCLUDE: Full bug description, 'You are analyzing as Opus. Write output to .task/rca-opus.json. Set reviewer field to opus.'\nCOMPLETION: .task/rca-opus.json exists with root_cause.summary and root_cause.root_file populated"
)

T3 = TaskCreate(
  subject: "RCA + Plan Validation - Codex",
  activeForm: "Validating RCA and plan (Codex)...",
  description: "PHASE: RCA + Plan Validation (Codex gate)\nAGENT: claude-codex:codex-reviewer (external — do NOT pass model parameter)\nINPUT: .task/rca-sonnet.json, .task/rca-opus.json, .task/user-story.json, .task/plan-refined.json\nOUTPUT: .task/review-codex.json\nNOTE: Codex validates the consolidated RCA diagnosis and fix plan. Challenges whether root cause is correct, plan is sound, nothing missed.\nRESULT HANDLING: if rejected → ask user to re-examine bug or provide more context\nCOMPLETION: .task/review-codex.json exists with status field"
)

T4 = TaskCreate(
  subject: "Implementation",
  activeForm: "Implementing fix...",
  description: "PHASE: Implementation\nAGENT: claude-codex:implementer (model: sonnet)\nINPUT: .task/user-story.json, .task/plan-refined.json\nOUTPUT: .task/impl-result.json\nPROMPT MUST INCLUDE: Reference to approved plan and all acceptance criteria. This is a bug fix — make the smallest possible change that addresses the root cause.\nNOTE: Implementer creates its own subtasks internally.\nRESULT HANDLING: Read .task/impl-result.json → check status (complete/partial/failed)\nCOMPLETION: .task/impl-result.json exists with status='complete'"
)

T5 = TaskCreate(
  subject: "Code Review - Sonnet",
  activeForm: "Reviewing code (Sonnet)...",
  description: "PHASE: Code Review (first reviewer)\nAGENT: claude-codex:code-reviewer (model: sonnet)\nINPUT: .task/user-story.json, .task/plan-refined.json, .task/impl-result.json\nOUTPUT: .task/code-review-sonnet.json\nPROMPT MUST INCLUDE: 'You are reviewing as Sonnet. Write output to .task/code-review-sonnet.json.'\nRESULT HANDLING: Read .task/code-review-sonnet.json → check status → handle per Result Handling rules\nCOMPLETION: .task/code-review-sonnet.json exists with status and acceptance_criteria_verification fields"
)

T6 = TaskCreate(
  subject: "Code Review - Opus",
  activeForm: "Reviewing code (Opus)...",
  description: "PHASE: Code Review (second reviewer)\nAGENT: claude-codex:code-reviewer (model: opus)\nINPUT: .task/user-story.json, .task/plan-refined.json, .task/impl-result.json\nOUTPUT: .task/code-review-opus.json\nPROMPT MUST INCLUDE: 'You are reviewing as Opus. Write output to .task/code-review-opus.json.'\nRESULT HANDLING: Read .task/code-review-opus.json → check status → handle per Result Handling rules\nCOMPLETION: .task/code-review-opus.json exists with status and acceptance_criteria_verification fields"
)

T7 = TaskCreate(
  subject: "Code Review - Codex",
  activeForm: "Reviewing code (Codex)...",
  description: "PHASE: Code Review (final gate)\nAGENT: claude-codex:codex-reviewer (external — do NOT pass model parameter)\nINPUT: .task/user-story.json, .task/plan-refined.json, .task/impl-result.json\nOUTPUT: .task/code-review-codex.json\nNOTE: Codex reviewer is a thin wrapper — runs codex-review.ts. Do NOT pass model parameter.\nRESULT HANDLING: if rejected → terminal state code_rejected (ask user)\nCOMPLETION: .task/code-review-codex.json exists with status field"
)

// T1 and T2 are parallel — no blockedBy
// T3 blocks on BOTH T1 and T2
TaskUpdate(T3.id, addBlockedBy: [T1.id, T2.id])
TaskUpdate(T4.id, addBlockedBy: [T3.id])
TaskUpdate(T5.id, addBlockedBy: [T4.id])
TaskUpdate(T6.id, addBlockedBy: [T5.id])
TaskUpdate(T7.id, addBlockedBy: [T6.id])

Save to .task/pipeline-tasks.json using the actual returned IDs:

{
  "team_name": "pipeline-myproject-a1b2c3",
  "pipeline_type": "bug-fix",
  "rca_sonnet": "4",
  "rca_opus": "5",
  "rca_plan_validation": "6",
  "implementation": "7",
  "code_review_sonnet": "8",
  "code_review_opus": "9",
  "code_review_codex": "10"
}

Verify: After creating all tasks, call TaskList(). You should see 7 tasks: T1 and T2 with status pending and empty blockedBy, T3-T7 with blockedBy referencing correct predecessors.

---

Main Loop

Execute this data-driven loop until all tasks are completed:

while pipeline not complete:
    1. Call TaskList() — returns array of all tasks with current status and blockedBy
    2. Find the next task(s) where: status == "pending" AND all blockedBy tasks have status == "completed"
       - SPECIAL: T1 and T2 can BOTH be ready simultaneously (parallel RCA)
       - If both T1 and T2 are ready, spawn BOTH in parallel using two Task() calls
       - If no such task exists and tasks remain, check for consolidation step (see below)
    3. Call TaskGet(task.id) — read full description with AGENT, MODEL, INPUT, OUTPUT
    4. Call TaskUpdate(task.id, status: "in_progress")
    5. Execute task using description as execution context:
       - Parse AGENT, MODEL, INPUT, OUTPUT from description
       - If AGENT contains "external" or "do NOT pass model": spawn via Task() WITHOUT model parameter
       - Otherwise: spawn via Task() with model from description
    6. Check output file (from description's OUTPUT field) for result
    7. Handle result (see Result Handling below)
    8. SPECIAL CONSOLIDATION CHECK: After marking T1 and T2 completed, BEFORE proceeding to T3:
       - Execute the Orchestrator Consolidation step (see below)
       - This writes user-story.json and plan-refined.json
       - Only then proceed to T3
    9. Enrich next task (BEFORE marking completed):
       - Read output file, extract key context per Progressive Enrichment table
       - Find next task via TaskList(), find the task whose blockedBy includes current task ID
       - Call TaskUpdate(next_task_id, description: <enriched>) per Enrichment Update Rule
       - Enrichment is best-effort — failure does not block the pipeline
   10. Call TaskUpdate(task.id, status: "completed")

IMPORTANT: Steps 1, 3, 4, 9, and 10 are TaskList, TaskGet, and TaskUpdate tool calls, not file reads or Bash commands.

Parallel RCA Spawning

When both T1 and T2 are available (both pending, no blockedBy), spawn them simultaneously:

// Mark both in_progress
TaskUpdate(T1.id, status: "in_progress")
TaskUpdate(T2.id, status: "in_progress")

// Spawn both in parallel (two Task() calls in the same message)
Task(
  subagent_type: "claude-codex:root-cause-analyst",
  model: "sonnet",
  prompt: "[Bug description] You are analyzing as Sonnet. Write output to .task/rca-sonnet.json. Set reviewer to sonnet."
)
Task(
  subagent_type: "claude-codex:root-cause-analyst",
  model: "opus",
  prompt: "[Bug description] You are analyzing as Opus. Write output to .task/rca-opus.json. Set reviewer to opus."
)

After both return, proceed to consolidation.

---

Orchestrator Consolidation (Between T2 Completion and T3 Start)

This is the key differentiator from /multi-ai. The orchestrator does this work itself — it is NOT a task, NOT delegated to an agent.

When both T1 and T2 are completed (detected via TaskList), the orchestrator:

Step 1: Read Both RCA Outputs

Read(".task/rca-sonnet.json")
Read(".task/rca-opus.json")

Step 2: Consolidate Findings

If both agree on root cause (same file, same general diagnosis):

• Use the shared diagnosis — high confidence
• Take the more detailed explanation
• Merge affected files, fix constraints, and impact analysis from both

If they disagree (different root files, different categories):

• Present both diagnoses to the user via AskUserQuestion:

  AskUserQuestion:
    "The two RCA analyses disagree on the root cause:
  
    Sonnet says: [summary] in [file]:[line]
    Opus says: [summary] in [file]:[line]
  
    Which diagnosis is more likely correct?"
    Option 1: "Sonnet's diagnosis"
    Option 2: "Opus's diagnosis"
    Option 3: "Both may be contributing factors"
  

• Use the user's chosen diagnosis to proceed
• If "both contributing", merge both into the fix plan

Step 3: Write user-story.json

Write .task/user-story.json with bug-fix acceptance criteria:

{
  "id": "story-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS",
  "title": "Fix: [Bug title from RCA]",
  "pipeline_type": "bug-fix",
  "requirements": {
    "root_cause": "[Consolidated root cause summary]",
    "root_file": "[path/to/file.ts]",
    "root_line": 42
  },
  "acceptance_criteria": [
    { "id": "AC1", "description": "Bug is resolved — expected behavior is restored" },
    { "id": "AC2", "description": "Regression test covers the exact bug scenario" },
    { "id": "AC3", "description": "No existing tests are broken by the fix" },
    { "id": "AC4", "description": "Root cause is addressed, not just symptoms patched" }
  ],
  "scope": {
    "affected_files": ["[merged from both RCAs]"],
    "blast_radius": "[from RCA impact analysis]",
    "fix_constraints": {
      "must_preserve": ["[merged from both RCAs]"],
      "safe_to_change": ["[merged from both RCAs]"]
    }
  },
  "implementation": { "max_iterations": 10 }
}

Additional ACs: Add specific ACs from the RCA findings if warranted (e.g., "AC5: Input validation added for [specific case]").

Step 4: Write plan-refined.json

Write .task/plan-refined.json with a minimal fix plan:

{
  "id": "plan-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS",
  "title": "Fix: [Bug title]",
  "pipeline_type": "bug-fix",
  "technical_approach": {
    "root_cause": "[Consolidated root cause]",
    "fix_strategy": "[From recommended_approach of chosen RCA]",
    "complexity": "[From estimated_complexity]"
  },
  "steps": [
    {
      "description": "Write regression test that reproduces the bug (must fail before fix)",
      "files": ["path/to/test-file.ts"]
    },
    {
      "description": "Apply minimal fix to [root_file] at line [root_line]: [specific change]",
      "files": ["path/to/root-file.ts"]
    },
    {
      "description": "Verify regression test passes and all existing tests still pass",
      "files": []
    }
  ],
  "test_plan": {
    "commands": ["npm test", "npm run lint"],
    "regression_test": "Description of the specific regression test to write",
    "success_pattern": "All tests pass",
    "failure_pattern": "FAIL|ERROR"
  },
  "risk_assessment": {
    "blast_radius": "[from RCA]",
    "regression_risk": "[from RCA]",
    "mitigation": "Regression test ensures the exact bug scenario is covered"
  },
  "completion_promise": "<promise>IMPLEMENTATION_COMPLETE</promise>"
}

Key principle: The fix plan should be the smallest possible change that addresses the root cause. No refactoring, no improvements, no cleanup beyond the fix itself.

Step 5: Proceed to T3

After writing both files, the consolidation is complete. T3 (Codex validation) is now unblocked (T1 and T2 are completed). Continue the main loop.

---

Progressive Enrichment

Before marking each task completed, read its output file, extract key context (≤ 500 chars), and update the next task's description via TaskUpdate.

Enrichment Update Rule: Read the next task's current description via TaskGet(). If it already contains a "CONTEXT FROM PRIOR TASK:" block, replace that block. If not, append. Each task only ever has one context block.

Completed Task	Enrich	Extract From Output
T1 RCA Sonnet	T3 Codex Validation	root cause summary, confidence, affected files
T2 RCA Opus	T3 Codex Validation	root cause summary, confidence, affected files
T3 Codex Validation	T4 Implementation	validation status, concerns, AC count
T4 Implementation	T5 Code Review Sonnet	files modified/created, test results
T5 Review Sonnet	T6 Review Opus	status, findings, AC verified/total
T6 Review Opus	T7 Review Codex	status, findings, + Sonnet status

Note on T1/T2 → T3: Both T1 and T2 enrich T3. The second enrichment appends to the first (since T3 won't have been started yet). Use separate CONTEXT FROM RCA SONNET: and CONTEXT FROM RCA OPUS: blocks for clarity.

---

Result Handling

Review results:

Result	Action
approved	Continue to next task
needs_changes	Create fix task + re-review task for SAME reviewer
rejected (Codex RCA validation)	Ask user to provide more context or re-examine the bug
rejected (Codex code review)	Terminal state code_rejected - ask user
rejected (Sonnet/Opus code review)	Create REWORK task + re-review for SAME reviewer
needs_clarification	Read clarification_questions, answer directly if possible, otherwise use AskUserQuestion. After clarification, re-run SAME reviewer.
Codex error (not installed/auth/timeout)	AskUserQuestion: "Codex CLI unavailable: {error}. Skip Codex gate or install?"

Implementation results:

Result	Action
complete	Continue to code review
partial	Continue implementation (resume implementer agent)
partial + true blocker	Ask user
failed	Terminal state implementation_failed - ask user

Severity:

• needs_changes = minor issues, fixable
• rejected = fundamental problems, requires rework or user decision
• failed = blocked, requires user intervention

---

Dynamic Tasks (Same-Reviewer Re-Review)

When a review returns needs_changes or rejected, the same reviewer must validate before proceeding.

Exception: Codex RCA validation rejected is NOT a terminal pipeline state — ask the user for more bug context and potentially re-run RCA. Codex code rejected IS terminal.

needs_changes → Fix Task

Key rules:

• Use current_task_id from the main loop (the review that just completed), NOT the base ID from pipeline-tasks.json.
• Track iteration_count per reviewer via TaskList.
• Final reviewer (Codex) has no next_reviewer_id — skip the TaskUpdate(next_reviewer_id, ...) call.

Any reviewer returns needs_changes:
  issues = read review_file → extract blockers + critical/high findings (≤ 500 chars)

  fix = TaskCreate(
    subject: "Fix [Phase] - [Reviewer] v{iteration}",
    activeForm: "Fixing [phase] issues...",
    description: "PHASE: Fix {phase} issues from {reviewer} review\n\
AGENT: claude-codex:implementer (model: sonnet)\n\
INPUT: {review_file} (issues to fix), {source_file} (current artifact)\n\
OUTPUT: {source_file} (updated)\n\
ISSUES TO FIX:\n{issues summary}\n\
COMPLETION: All critical/high issues from {reviewer} review addressed"
  )
  TaskUpdate(fix.id, addBlockedBy: [current_task_id])

  rerev = TaskCreate(
    subject: "[Phase] Review - [Reviewer] v{iteration+1}",
    activeForm: "Re-reviewing [phase]...",
    description: "PHASE: {Phase} Re-review (iteration {iteration+1})\n\
AGENT: claude-codex:{code-reviewer} (model: {model})\n\
INPUT: {same INPUT files as original review task}\n\
OUTPUT: {same OUTPUT file as original review — overwrite}\n\
NOTE: Re-review after fix. Same reviewer, same output file.\n\
RESULT HANDLING: Same as original review task\n\
COMPLETION: {output_file} exists with updated status"
  )
  TaskUpdate(rerev.id, addBlockedBy: [fix.id])
  if next_reviewer_id is not null:
    TaskUpdate(next_reviewer_id, addBlockedBy: [rerev.id])

rejected → Rework Task (Sonnet/Opus Code Reviews Only)

Sonnet or Opus code reviewer returns rejected:
  issues = read review file → extract rejection reasons (≤ 500 chars)

  rework = TaskCreate(
    subject: "Rework Code - [Reviewer] v{iteration}",
    activeForm: "Reworking code...",
    description: "PHASE: Rework code — {reviewer} rejected\n\
AGENT: claude-codex:implementer (model: sonnet)\n\
INPUT: {review_file}, .task/user-story.json, .task/plan-refined.json\n\
OUTPUT: .task/impl-result.json (updated)\n\
REJECTION REASONS:\n{issues summary}\n\
COMPLETION: .task/impl-result.json updated with status='complete'"
  )
  TaskUpdate(rework.id, addBlockedBy: [current_task_id])

  rerev = TaskCreate(
    subject: "Code Review - [Reviewer] v{iteration+1}",
    activeForm: "Re-reviewing code...",
    description: "PHASE: Code Re-review (iteration {iteration+1})\n\
AGENT: claude-codex:code-reviewer (model: {model})\n\
INPUT: .task/user-story.json, .task/plan-refined.json, .task/impl-result.json\n\
OUTPUT: .task/code-review-{reviewer}.json\n\
NOTE: Re-review after rework. Same reviewer validates fixes.\n\
RESULT HANDLING: Same as original code review task\n\
COMPLETION: .task/code-review-{reviewer}.json exists with updated status"
  )
  TaskUpdate(rerev.id, addBlockedBy: [rework.id])
  if next_reviewer_id is not null:
    TaskUpdate(next_reviewer_id, addBlockedBy: [rerev.id])

rejected → Terminal (Codex Code Review)

Codex code review returns rejected:
  → Terminal state: code_rejected
  → Ask user: rework, restart from RCA, or abort

Iteration Tracking

Derive iteration count from TaskList (count existing matching tasks). After 10 re-reviews for any single reviewer, escalate to user.

---

Agent Reference

Task	Agent	Model	Output File
RCA - Sonnet	root-cause-analyst	sonnet	rca-sonnet.json
RCA - Opus	root-cause-analyst	opus	rca-opus.json
RCA + Plan Validation	codex-reviewer	external	review-codex.json
Implementation	implementer	sonnet	impl-result.json
Code Review - Sonnet	code-reviewer	sonnet	code-review-sonnet.json
Code Review - Opus	code-reviewer	opus	code-review-opus.json
Code Review - Codex	codex-reviewer	external	code-review-codex.json

Spawning Workers

Task(
  subagent_type: "claude-codex:<agent-name>",
  model: "<model>",
  prompt: "[Agent instructions] + [Context from .task/ files]"
)

For Codex reviews:

Task(
  subagent_type: "claude-codex:codex-reviewer",
  prompt: "[Agent instructions] + Review [plan/code]"
)

---

User Interaction

The main thread handles user input throughout the pipeline:

User Provides Additional Info

If user adds context mid-pipeline:

1. During RCA: Relay additional context to running RCA agents if possible
2. During consolidation: Incorporate into diagnosis
3. After implementation started: Ask user if they want to continue or restart from RCA

Suggesting Restart

When significant issues arise:

AskUserQuestion:
  "The bug fix has fundamental issues. Options:"
  1. "Restart from RCA" - Re-analyze the bug
  2. "Revise fix plan" - Keep RCA, re-plan fix
  3. "Continue anyway" - Proceed with current approach

---

Hook Behavior

UserPromptSubmit Hook (Guidance)

The guidance-hook.ts runs on every prompt and:

1. Reads artifact files — Checks .task/*.json to determine current phase
2. Injects guidance — Reminds you what to do next (detects RCA phase via rca-*.json files)
3. No state tracking — Phase is implicit from which files exist

SubagentStop Hook (Enforcement)

The review-validator.ts runs when reviewer agents finish and:

1. Validates AC coverage — Checks acceptance_criteria_verification (code reviews)
2. Blocks invalid reviews — Returns {"decision": "block", "reason": "..."} if review doesn't verify all ACs
3. Allows valid reviews — Proceeds normally when validation passes

---

Output File Formats

user-story.json (Bug-Fix)

{
  "id": "story-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS",
  "title": "Fix: Bug title",
  "pipeline_type": "bug-fix",
  "requirements": {
    "root_cause": "Consolidated root cause summary",
    "root_file": "path/to/file.ts",
    "root_line": 42
  },
  "acceptance_criteria": [
    { "id": "AC1", "description": "Bug is resolved — expected behavior restored" },
    { "id": "AC2", "description": "Regression test covers the bug scenario" },
    { "id": "AC3", "description": "No existing tests broken" },
    { "id": "AC4", "description": "Root cause addressed, not just symptoms" }
  ],
  "scope": { "affected_files": [], "blast_radius": "isolated|module|cross-module" },
  "implementation": { "max_iterations": 10 }
}

plan-refined.json (Bug-Fix)

{
  "id": "plan-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS",
  "title": "Fix: Bug title",
  "pipeline_type": "bug-fix",
  "technical_approach": { "root_cause": "...", "fix_strategy": "...", "complexity": "..." },
  "steps": [
    { "description": "Write regression test", "files": [] },
    { "description": "Apply minimal fix", "files": [] },
    { "description": "Verify all tests pass", "files": [] }
  ],
  "test_plan": { "commands": [], "regression_test": "...", "success_pattern": "...", "failure_pattern": "..." },
  "risk_assessment": { "blast_radius": "...", "regression_risk": "...", "mitigation": "..." },
  "completion_promise": "<promise>IMPLEMENTATION_COMPLETE</promise>"
}

rca-*.json

{
  "id": "rca-YYYYMMDD-HHMMSS",
  "reviewer": "sonnet|opus",
  "bug_report": { "title": "...", "reported_behavior": "...", "expected_behavior": "...", "reproduction_steps": [], "reproduction_result": "pass|fail|inconclusive", "reproduction_output": "..." },
  "root_cause": { "summary": "...", "detailed_explanation": "...", "category": "...", "root_file": "...", "root_line": 0, "confidence": "high|medium|low" },
  "impact_analysis": { "affected_files": [], "affected_functions": [], "blast_radius": "...", "regression_risk": "..." },
  "fix_constraints": { "must_preserve": [], "safe_to_change": [], "existing_tests": [] },
  "recommended_approach": { "strategy": "...", "estimated_complexity": "..." }
}

code-review-*.json

{
  "status": "approved|needs_changes|needs_clarification|rejected",
  "needs_clarification": false,
  "clarification_questions": [],
  "summary": "...",
  "acceptance_criteria_verification": {
    "total": 4,
    "verified": 4,
    "missing": [],
    "details": [
      { "ac_id": "AC1", "status": "IMPLEMENTED", "evidence": "...", "notes": "" }
    ]
  }
}

impl-result.json

{
  "status": "complete|partial|failed",
  "files_changed": [],
  "blocked_reason": "..."
}

---

Terminal States

State	Meaning	Action
complete	All reviews approved	Report success
max_iterations_reached	10+ fix iterations	Escalate to user
code_rejected	Codex rejected code	User decision needed
implementation_failed	Implementation blocked	User decision needed

---

Pipeline Completion

When all reviews are approved (or a terminal state is reached):

1. Report results to the user
2. Read team_name from .task/pipeline-tasks.json and use TeamDelete to clean up
3. Pipeline team cleanup is best-effort — if TeamDelete fails, the next pipeline run's idempotent Step 1.5 will handle it

---

Important Rules

1. Pipeline team first, then task chain — After reset, create the pipeline team (Step 1.5), verify task tools (Step 1.6), then create the full 7-task chain. No agents are spawned before the task chain exists.
2. Tasks are primary — Create tasks with blockedBy for structural enforcement
3. Parallel RCA — T1 and T2 have no blockedBy — spawn both simultaneously
4. Orchestrator consolidation — The orchestrator (main thread) reads both RCA outputs, consolidates, and writes user-story.json + plan-refined.json directly. This is NOT a task.
5. No pipeline-tasks.json for task IDs beyond tracking — This pipeline does NOT use pipeline-tasks.json for phase detection. Task IDs are tracked via TaskList().
6. SubagentStop enforces — Hook validates reviewer outputs and can block
7. AC verification required — All code reviews MUST verify acceptance criteria from user-story.json
8. Same-reviewer re-review — After fix/rework, SAME reviewer validates before next
9. Codex is mandatory — Pipeline NOT complete without Codex approval (both RCA validation and code review)
10. Max 10 iterations — Per reviewer, then escalate to user
11. Accept all feedback — No debate with reviewers, just fix
12. User can interrupt — Handle additional input, offer restart/kick back
13. Task descriptions are execution context — Every TaskCreate includes AGENT, MODEL, INPUT, OUTPUT. Main loop calls TaskGet() before spawning. Never derive execution context from hardcoded prose.
14. Progressive enrichment before completion — Before marking a task completed, read output, extract key context (≤ 500 chars), and TaskUpdate the next task. Best-effort.
15. Minimal fix principle — The fix should be the smallest possible change that addresses the root cause. No refactoring, no improvements, no cleanup beyond the fix.

---

Emergency Controls

If stuck:

1. Check task state: TaskList() to see blocked tasks (requires pipeline team to be active)
2. Check artifacts: Read .task/*.json files to understand progress
3. Reset pipeline: bun "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/orchestrator.ts" reset
4. Check pipeline team: Read team_name from .task/pipeline-tasks.json, verify team exists