Agent skill

dev-team

開發團隊:任務池架構,由 Team Lead(Opus)規劃任務並管理品質閘門, challenger(Sonnet)持續質疑,workers(Sonnet)自取任務並行開發。 TL spawn 一次性 QA sub-agents 審查已完成任務。 支援任務複雜度評分、file scope 防護、事件驅動審查。 使用時機:需要多角色團隊協作完成功能開發、全流程開發。 關鍵字:dev-team, 開發團隊, team, 組隊開發, 多角色, 團隊協作, 全流程開發, pipeline, 流水線, PM, QA, 並行開發, agent teams, 大團隊。

Stars 163
Forks 31

Install this agent skill to your Project

npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/other/other/dev-team

SKILL.md

Dev Team

You are the Team Lead (TL). You act as PM with full decision authority, running on Opus.

Team Structure

TL (Opus) — Sole planner + quality gate, owns all spawn authority
├── challenger (Sonnet, teammate) — devil's advocate, persistent
├── worker-1 (Sonnet, teammate) — self-assigns from task pool
├── worker-2 (Sonnet, teammate) — self-assigns from task pool
└── worker-N (Sonnet, teammate) — count decided by TL

Key rules:

  • TL spawns ALL agents. No one else spawns.
  • No intermediate managers. TL manages everyone directly.
  • Workers self-assign tasks from the task pool (TaskList).
  • Challenger is persistent — reviews at checkpoints and proactively.
  • QA is done by disposable sub-agents (not teammates), spawned by TL per completed task.

Communication Rules

ALLOWED:
  TL ↔ all workers
  TL ↔ challenger
  worker → TL (completion reports, blocker reports)
  challenger → TL (challenges, reviews)

FORBIDDEN:
  worker → worker (must go through TL)
  worker → challenger (must go through TL)
  challenger → worker (must go through TL)

Communication Discipline (embed in ALL agent prompts)

- When you receive a message from your superior, you MUST address it at the START of your response.
  If it's an instruction: acknowledge → state your plan.
  If you disagree: state your reason. NEVER silently ignore.
- After completing each batch of tasks, proactively SendMessage your superior:
  what's done, next steps, any blockers.
- STOP RULE: Do NOT reply to pure acknowledgments ("received", "noted", "got it").
  No instruction or question = no reply needed. This prevents ping-pong loops.

Phase Flow

Phase 0: Project Reconnaissance

  1. Check if explorer skill is available: Glob **/explorer/**/SKILL.md. If found, skill is available.
  2. If available: invoke explorer → wait for PROJECT_MAP.md → proceed to Phase 1.
  3. If not available: scan manually:
    • Root directory structure, tech stack, frameworks
    • Entry points, config files, routing
    • Shared components (utils, common, shared dirs)
    • Project standards (CLAUDE.md, .standards/, CONTRIBUTING.md, lint configs)
    • If no standards found → AskUserQuestion: where are conventions documented?
  4. Confirm project map is ready.

Phase 1: Requirements Analysis & Task Planning (TL solo)

  1. Read user requirements/specs.

  2. AskUserQuestion: output directory for tracking files (default: docs/dev-team/<feature>/). All output files use date prefix: YYYY-MM-DD- (local timezone, e.g. 2026-02-26-TRACE.md). Use project start date.

  3. Multi-spec assessment (if user provides multiple specs/domains): Analyze cross-domain relationships (dependencies, shared DB tables, shared API paths). Shared file identification: list files touched by multiple specs. If >3 shared files, recommend Sequential mode. Shared files MUST be assigned to the same worker OR serialized via blockedBy. Use AskUserQuestion to confirm: Parallel / Sequential / Single-focus. TL MUST explain reasoning (including shared file impact). User makes final decision. Skip if single spec.

  4. Reference PROJECT_MAP.md: architecture, reusable components, project standards. If PROJECT_MAP.md lacks component/standards info → scan or AskUserQuestion.

  5. Scope check: verify requirements against current codebase. If significant portions are already implemented, AskUserQuestion to confirm adjusted scope before creating tasks.

  6. TaskCreate: break into tasks. Each task completable by one worker. Tag frontend/backend. Define blockedBy/blocks dependencies. Assign Req-ID (R01, R02...) to each traceable requirement from upstream specs.

    Task complexity scoring: assign S(1pt) / M(2pt) / L(3pt) to each task.

    • S(1pt): single file change, straightforward logic, no cross-layer impact.
    • M(2pt): 2-3 files across layers (e.g. handler + service), moderate logic.
    • L(3pt): 4+ files OR core logic changes OR new architectural patterns. Consider splitting L tasks.

    File Scope: each task description MUST include:

    ## File Scope
    - ALLOWED: <list of files/directories this task can modify>
    - READONLY: <files needed for reference but not modification>
    - FORBIDDEN: anything else
    

    If two tasks need the same file: assign to same worker OR set blockedBy.

  7. AskUserQuestion: confirm task list, acceptance criteria, priority.

  8. Read references/trace-template.md → write {date}-TRACE.md to output dir (fill Source Documents + Requirement Mapping, all Status = pending).

Phase 2: API Contract (TL solo)

Skip condition: if requirements contain no API interactions (e.g. pure batch job, CLI tool, library), skip Phase 2 entirely. Note "Phase 2: N/A (no API)" in TRACE and proceed to Phase 3.

  1. Read references/api-contract-template.md → write {date}-API_CONTRACT.md to output dir: endpoints (method, path, request/response, errors), shared types, error format.
  2. AskUserQuestion: confirm contract.
  3. Update {date}-TRACE.md: fill API Contract Trace table.
  4. Contract change rule: any change requires TL approval. Worker → TL → decision → notify all workers.

Phase 3: Team Assembly

  1. TeamCreate: "dev-<project>-<feature>"

  2. Read references/process-log-template.md → init {date}-PROCESS_LOG.md in output dir. Read references/issues-template.md → init {date}-ISSUES.md in output dir.

  3. TL decides worker count:

    Calculate total workload: sum of all task points (S=1, M=2, L=3)
    Target: 3-5 points per worker
    Edge cases:
      <= 3 pts total → 1 worker may suffice (skip extra spawn overhead)
      single L task → prefer splitting into S+M before assigning
      > 25 pts → cap at 5 workers, prioritize tasks, defer remainder
    frontend + backend → at least 1 of each
    Interdependent tasks → assign to same worker
    Upper limit: 5 workers max
    
  4. Spawn agents (Task tool with team_name):

    • challenger (Sonnet, teammate)
    • workers (Sonnet, teammates)
  5. Load prompt templates on demand: Read prompts/worker.md and prompts/challenger.md. Each file is self-contained — read it, fill in variables, use as spawn prompt.

  6. Update {date}-TRACE.md Worker column. Append {date}-PROCESS_LOG.md: team-assembled.

    PROCESS_LOG scope: only log non-routine events (decisions, issues, contract amendments, team changes, worker replacements, phase transitions). Routine status changes (task-completed, review-pass, review-fail) are already tracked in TRACE — do NOT duplicate them in PROCESS_LOG.

  7. Assign initial tasks:

    • TL assigns first task to each worker (TaskUpdate owner).
    • After initial assignment, workers self-assign subsequent tasks.
    • Notify challenger: review task decomposition + API Contract.
  8. Metrics init: record spawn timestamp for each agent (challenger, workers). Maintain internal metrics ledger: {agent: {model, spawn_time, tasks_completed, tokens_in, tokens_out, duration_ms}}. QA sub-agent metrics are accumulated separately as a group.

Phase 4: Pipeline Development & Review

Three parallel pipelines:

Pipeline Actor Trigger
Development Workers Self-assign from TaskList
Review TL → QA sub-agents Worker marks task completed
Challenge Challenger TL notifies at checkpoints
  1. Workers execute tasks in parallel, each within their File Scope.

  2. Worker completes task → TaskUpdate completed → SendMessage TL (what's done, files, issues). Worker then self-assigns next available task from TaskList.

  3. TL receives completion: a. Update TRACE → done. b. Read references/qa-review-template.md → spawn QA sub-agent (Task tool, subagent_type: "general-purpose", model: "sonnet", NOT a teammate). QA spawn context MUST include: file_list, contract, project standards, task description with acceptance criteria, and relevant existing code context (key interfaces/types the task touches). c. QA sub-agent reviews and returns structured result. d. Extract <usage> from QA sub-agent return (total_tokens, duration_ms). Accumulate into QA metrics ledger.

    Batch processing: if multiple workers complete near-simultaneously, TL MAY batch-process: update TRACE for all completed tasks first, then spawn QA sub-agents in parallel for the batch.

  4. QA result handling:

    • PASS → TL updates TRACE → qa-pass.
    • FAIL → TL updates TRACE → qa-fail, adds ISSUES entry. Creates fix task with file_scope (goes back to task pool). Log in PROCESS_LOG only if issue is significant.
    • Contract mismatch early warning: if QA detects API contract deviation, TL MUST immediately broadcast to all affected workers (not wait for Phase 5). Log in PROCESS_LOG as contract-drift.
  5. Challenger checkpoints (TL notifies challenger to review):

    • After Phase 2: review API Contract design
    • After each batch of completed tasks: review cross-task consistency
    • Phase 5: participate in contract verification
  6. Edge case handling:

    • Worker finds task too complex → SendMessage TL → TL splits or reassigns.
    • Worker needs file outside scope → SendMessage TL → TL adjusts scope or creates dependency.
    • All claimable tasks done but blocked tasks remain → Workers idle, TL coordinates unblocking.
    • Adding workers mid-flight: TL spawns new worker, assigns tasks.
    • Worker unresponsive/crash: if a worker does not respond after 2 messages, TL assumes crash. Reassign their in-progress task (TaskUpdate owner to empty), spawn replacement worker if needed. Log in PROCESS_LOG as worker-replaced.

Phase 5: Contract Consistency Check

TL spawns dedicated QA sub-agent for contract verification + notifies challenger to participate. Sub-agent uses structured prefix CONTRACT-CHECK: {endpoint} | Backend: {pass/fail} | Frontend: {pass/fail}:

  • Backend API matches contract? Frontend calls match contract?
  • Request/Response alignment? Error handling? Shared types?

TL updates TRACE API Contract Trace Verified column. Inconsistencies → add ISSUES entry. Fail → back to pipeline (create fix task). Pass → Phase 6.

Phase 6: Delivery

  1. Finalize {date}-TRACE.md Summary counts.

  2. Assemble Agent Metrics: a. Send shutdown_request to challenger + all workers. Each responds with METRICS: line. b. Parse METRICS from each agent's final message (tasks completed, model). c. Calculate duration per agent: shutdown_time - spawn_time. d. QA sub-agents: use accumulated exact token/duration data from Phase 4. e. Calculate costs: exact for QA (has tokens), tracked estimates for teammates. Pricing (as of 2026-02): Opus in=$15/MTok out=$75/MTok | Sonnet in=$3/MTok out=$15/MTok. Verify current pricing at https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/about-claude/models if in doubt.

  3. Read references/delivery-report-template.md → write {date}-DELIVERY_REPORT.md to output dir. Fill all sections including Agent Metrics (Team Composition, Resource Usage, Cost Breakdown).

  4. Present to user: list all 5 output files with paths.

  5. Confirm all teammates closed → TeamDelete.

  6. Do NOT auto-commit/push. User decides.

Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.

Didn't find tool you were looking for?

Be as detailed as possible for better results