bug-investigator
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior during spec-superflow execution, before proposing fixes.…
Execute an active direct request or approved planned change. Native continuous implementation is the default; existing legacy changes retain their recorded contract obligations.
Claude Code
$ npx -y skills add MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow --skill build-executor --agent claude-code
Codex
$ npx skills add MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow --skill build-executor -a codex -y
Cursor
$ npx skills add MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow --skill build-executor -a cursor -y
Gemini CLI
$ npx skills add MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow --skill build-executor -a gemini-cli -y
GitHub Copilot
$ npx skills add MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow --skill build-executor -a github-copilot -y
OpenCode
$ npx skills add MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow --skill build-executor -a opencode -y
Windsurf
$ npx skills add MageByte-Zero/spec-superflow --skill build-executor -a windsurf -y
name: build-executor description: Execute an active direct request or approved planned change. Native continuous implementation is the default; existing legacy changes retain their recorded contract obligations.
Before executing a CLI line below, replace its leading `SSF` with `node "<plugin-root>/scripts/spec-superflow.mjs"`; `<plugin-root>` is the absolute directory two levels above this file. Never run `SSF` literally or call an `ssf` from `PATH`.
A new request follows this file without loading legacy instructions. For an existing change, inspect the recorded state and receipt/plan (available through `SSF workflow show <change-dir> --json` and `SSF execution show <dir> --json` when needed). Current paths are `workflow_variant: direct` with a valid workflow-selection receipt `schema_version: 3`, or `workflow_variant: planned` with an execution plan `schema_version: 2`. Older receipts (schema 1/2), legacy plans and other recorded variants use the matching section of `SSF runtime asset read docs/legacy-workflow.md`; follow that section for this change. A direct variant alone is insufficient: legacy Quick/Hotfix/Lightweight can also record it. The internal `workflow: full` value alone is not a legacy signal. Missing or corrupt state, receipt or a required plan is a recovery problem; preserve evidence rather than reinitialize or downgrade the change.
For planned execution, read the generated execution plan and current task; approval is already in the plan. Run `SSF isolate <change-dir>` before code edits, defaulting to a feature branch, and use its returned checkout path. Preserve existing isolation; diagnose failures before editing a protected branch. Create a worktree only when explicitly selected. Direct execution reads its bounded request receipt and does not require a plan or isolation.
Native means the current agent implements continuously; persisted mode is `inline`. Task count, file count and number of waves do not justify delegation. `batch-inline` remains compatible serial execution. Select SDD only when the user explicitly chooses delegation for this change and independently scoped work has a concrete benefit. Tool availability, many tasks, a long context, or generic implementation approval never authorize subagents. This includes reviewer and exploratory subagents.
Reuse the user's existing mode choice. New Native plans default to `final` review; SDD defaults to `wave`. `--review-policy wave` is available for explicit risk boundaries. Mode and review granularity are separate.
Use `SSF execution show <dir> --json` to resolve uncertainty, interruptions and repair status, not as a ritual before every edit. A Native wave's dependencies are completed tasks; checked tasks never substitute for the final whole-range review.
Before the first edit, inspect only shared producer/consumer interfaces and the test entry points the approved tasks depend on. Check that named symbols, payload fields and acceptance tests can be located. Record mismatches in the existing progress entry; resolve implementation details within approved behavior. Ask only when resolving a mismatch changes behavior, scope, permissions or external effects. Do not dispatch an exploration agent or create another planning pack for this check.
1. Implement tasks in dependency order. Use a failing behavioral regression for behavior changes, confirm RED, make the minimal fix, then confirm GREEN. Documentation changes use format/link/build checks instead of invented unit tests. 2. Run affected tests per task, integration tests at meaningful boundaries, and the required complete checks once at the final code snapshot. Reuse a result only when code, environment and command match; changes invalidate affected evidence. 3. Mark completed tasks and append a brief progress entry: outcome, files/commit, verification, next action, unresolved risk. Do not create a task book, delivery report and checkpoint for every small task. Save `SSF checkpoint save` when interruption or long-running work needs recovery. 4. Continue without requesting permission between authorized tasks. A pending task or review is not a reason to end the controller turn. Reuse existing authorizations; never ask “continue?” for the next authorized task. Give concise progress commentary; do not promise autonomous background execution.
For new direct/planned changes, diagnose an ordinary defect in executing: reproduce, trace the cause, repair and verify. Do not create another state transition, task report or debug ledger. Escalate only when the same issue remains unresolved without a new useful approach. Expected RED is test evidence, not an unexpected defect. Scope changes update the plan and require approval of the changed scope through workflow-start; ordinary repair stays in executing.
Read `SSF runtime asset read skills/build-executor/writing-good-tests.md` when selecting uncertain test evidence.
Direct changes use their receipt's bounded checks and proceed to release-archivist without a plan or review receipt. The review policies below apply to planned execution.
For Native `final`, the current executor performs one whole-range review after implementation and required tests, covering spec compliance and code quality. Do not start a reviewer subagent. Commit the code and bind the report to its actual Git range. Record through:
SSF execution review <dir> --wave final --base <base-sha> --head <head-sha> --report .superpowers/sdd/reviews/final.md --verdict <pass|fail>
For `wave`, review once per planned wave, using its ID instead of `final`; dependencies require a current passing receipt. SDD may use one reviewer subagent per wave because the user authorized delegation. Do not add per-task and final duplicates. Critical/Important findings require fail → focused repair → one focused re-review → pas
源码级融合 OpenSpec 规划引擎 + Superpowers 执行纪律的 AI 编程工作流插件。17 平台支持,9 skills,Spec-first,契约驱动。
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior during spec-superflow execution, before proposing fixes.…
Review completed implementation batches for spec compliance and code quality. Invoke after execution batches complete, before…
Maintain an execution contract only for an existing legacy change that requires one. New direct/planned changes do not invoke…
Clarify intent, scope, constraints, and success criteria before artifact creation. Invoke when the request is fuzzy, the user is…
Close out a spec-superflow change with verification, summary, and archive readiness. Invoke when implementation is complete,…
Sync delta specs to main specs before closure. Invoke while an executing change has delta specs to merge into the main spec base,…
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, modifying behavior, or…
Ask which skill or flow fits your situation. A router over the skills in this repo.