122 lines
3.4 KiB
Markdown
122 lines
3.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: subagent-driven-development
|
|
description: Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# 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
|
|
|
|
**Use when:**
|
|
|
|
- Have implementation plan
|
|
- Tasks are mostly independent
|
|
- Want to stay in current session
|
|
- Want fast iteration with review checkpoints
|
|
|
|
**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
|
|
|
|
### Setup
|
|
|
|
1. **Read plan, extract all tasks** with full text and context
|
|
2. **Create TodoWrite** with all tasks
|
|
|
|
### Per Task
|
|
|
|
1. **Dispatch implementer subagent** with full task text + context
|
|
2. **If subagent asks questions** - Answer, provide context
|
|
3. **Implementer implements, tests, commits, self-reviews**
|
|
4. **Dispatch spec reviewer subagent** - Verify code matches spec
|
|
5. **If spec issues** - Implementer fixes, reviewer re-reviews
|
|
6. **Dispatch code quality reviewer subagent** - Review for quality
|
|
7. **If quality issues** - Implementer fixes, reviewer re-reviews
|
|
8. **Mark task complete in TodoWrite**
|
|
|
|
### After All Tasks
|
|
|
|
1. **Dispatch final code reviewer** for entire implementation
|
|
2. **Use ltk:finishing-a-development-branch** to complete
|
|
|
|
## Two-Stage Review
|
|
|
|
**Stage 1: Spec Compliance**
|
|
|
|
- Does implementation match spec EXACTLY?
|
|
- Nothing missing?
|
|
- Nothing extra (over-building)?
|
|
|
|
**Stage 2: Code Quality** (only after spec passes)
|
|
|
|
- Clean code?
|
|
- Good test coverage?
|
|
- Maintainable?
|
|
|
|
## 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)
|
|
|
|
**Quality gates:**
|
|
|
|
- Self-review catches issues before handoff
|
|
- Two-stage review: spec compliance, then code quality
|
|
- Review loops ensure fixes actually work
|
|
|
|
## 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
|
|
- Ignore subagent questions
|
|
- Accept "close enough" on spec compliance
|
|
- Skip review loops
|
|
- **Start code quality review before spec compliance passes**
|
|
- 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
|
|
|
|
## Integration
|
|
|
|
**Required workflow skills:**
|
|
|
|
- **ltk:writing-plans** - Creates the plan this skill executes
|
|
- **ltk:requesting-code-review** - Code review template for reviewer subagents
|
|
- **ltk:finishing-a-development-branch** - Complete development after all tasks
|
|
|
|
**Subagents should use:**
|
|
|
|
- **ltk:test-driven-development** - Subagents follow TDD for each task
|
|
|
|
**Alternative workflow:**
|
|
|
|
- **ltk:executing-plans** - Use for parallel session instead of same-session execution
|