/subagent-development
Executes plans via fresh subagents per task with two-stage review (spec → quality). Triggers: subagent execution, execute plan, fresh agent per task, spec compliance review.
$ npx -y skills add softspark/ai-toolkit --skill subagent-development --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
- Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
- You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
- Slash command
/subagent-development
Context preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Executes plans via fresh subagents per task with two-stage review (spec → quality). Triggers: subagent execution, execute plan, fresh agent per task, spec compliance review.
SKILL.md
subagent-development.SKILL.mdname: subagent-development
description: "Executes plans via fresh subagents per task with two-stage review (spec → quality). Triggers: subagent execution, execute plan, fresh agent per task, spec compliance review."
user-invocable: true
effort: high
argument-hint: "[plan file or task description]"
allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Grep, Glob, Bash, Agent, TaskCreate, TaskList, TaskUpdate, TaskGet
Subagent Development
$ARGUMENTS
Execute implementation plans by dispatching fresh subagents per task, then running a two-stage review gate: spec compliance first, code quality second. Fresh context per subagent prevents accumulated confusion. Two-stage review catches different failure modes: spec review catches wrong behavior, quality review catches bad structure.
Usage
/subagent-development [plan file or task description]
Why This Works
| Property | Benefit | |----------|---------| | Fresh subagent per task | No accumulated context drift or confusion | | Spec review first | Catches wrong behavior before quality review wastes time on wrong code | | Quality review second | Catches structural issues after behavior is confirmed correct | | Sequential tasks | No merge conflicts, each task builds on verified previous work |
Process Flow
Read plan
|
v
Extract ordered task list
|
v
For each task:
|
+---> [1] Dispatch IMPLEMENTER subagent
| |
| v
| Handle status (see Status Protocol)
| |
| v
+---> [2] Dispatch SPEC REVIEWER subagent
| |
| v
| APPROVED? --no--> fix issues, re-review
| |
| yes
| |
| v
+---> [3] Dispatch QUALITY REVIEWER subagent
| |
| v
| Critical issues? --yes--> fix, re-review
| |
| no
| v
| Mark task complete
|
v
Next task (or done)Step 1 -- Read and Parse Plan
Read the plan file. Extract:
1. **Ordered task list** -- each task with description, acceptance criteria, file scope 2. **Global constraints** -- what must NOT change, architecture rules, shared conventions 3. **Dependencies** -- which tasks depend on which (execute in dependency order)
Present the task list to the user. Wait for approval before proceeding.
Step 2 -- Execute Tasks Sequentially
For each task in order:
2a. Gather Context
Before dispatching the implementer, gather:
- Relevant source files the task will read or modify
- Related test files
- Any output/artifacts from previously completed tasks
- Global constraints from the plan
2b. Dispatch Implementer
Use the `Agent` tool with the [implementer prompt template](reference/implementer-prompt.md).
Select model based on task complexity:
| Task Type | Model | Examples | |-----------|-------|---------| | Mechanical | Cheapest available | Rename, move, config change, 1-2 files with clear spec | | Integration | Standard | Wire up existing components, add endpoint using established patterns | | Design/Complex | Most capable | New architecture, complex algorithms, cross-cutting concerns |
2c. Handle Implementer Status
The implementer reports one of four statuses:
| Status | Handling | |--------|----------| | **DONE** | Proceed to spec review | | **DONE_WITH_CONCERNS** | Read concerns. If they relate to correctness or scope violations, address them before review. If observational only (style preference, future improvement), note them and proceed to spec review | | **NEEDS_CONTEXT** | Provide the missing context the implementer identified. Re-dispatch with the same task plus the additional context | | **BLOCKED** | Assess the blocker. Context problem: re-dispatch with better context. Task too complex for selected model: re-dispatch with more capable model. Plan is wrong or ambiguous: escalate to user for clarification |
2d. Spec Review (Stage 1)
Use the `Agent` tool with the [spec reviewer prompt template](reference/spec-reviewer-prompt.md).
The spec reviewer checks:
- All requirements from the task are implemented
- Nothing extra was added beyond the spec
- Nothing is missing
- Behavior matches acceptance criteria
If **APPROVED**: proceed to quality review.
If **issues found**: fix the issues (re-dispatch implementer with specific fix instructions or fix inline if trivial), then re-run spec review. Do not proceed to quality review until spec review passes.
2e. Quality Review (Stage 2)
Use the `Agent` tool with the [quality reviewer prompt template](reference/code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md).
The quality reviewer categorizes findings:
| Category | Action | |----------|--------| | **Critical** | Must fix before proceeding. Re-dispatch implementer or fix inline | | **Important** | Should fix. Fix now unless time-boxed, then document for follow-up | | **Suggestions** | Nice to have. Note for future improvement, do not block progress |
After fixing any Critical issues, re-run quality review to confirm.
2f. Mark Task Complete
Record:
- Task ID and description
- Files modified
- Commit SHA (if commits were made)
- Any concerns or suggestions deferred for later
Step 3 -- Summary Report
After all tasks complete, produce:
## Subagent Development Report
### Plan
[Plan file or description]
### Tasks Completed
| # | Task | Files Modified | Status | Notes |
|---|------|---------------|--------|-------|
| 1 | ... | ... | Done | ... |
| 2 | ... | ... | Done | ... |
### Deferred Items
- [Any "Important" or "Suggestion" issues not addressed]
### Verification
- [ ] All tasks implemented
- [ ] All spec reviews passed
- [ ] All quality reviews passed (no Critical issues remaining)
- [ ] Tests pass
Model Selection Guidance
Before dispatching each subagent, assess the task:
Is the task mechanical (rename, config, boilerplate)?
--> Use cheapest model
Does the task integrate existing patterns (1-3 files)?
-->Read more
name: subagent-development description: "Executes plans via fresh subagents per task with two-stage review (spec → quality). Triggers: subagent execution, execute plan, fresh agent per task, spec compliance review." user-invocable: true effort: high argument-hint: "[plan file or task description]" allowed-tools: Read, Write, Edit, Grep, Glob, Bash, Agent, TaskCreate, TaskList, TaskUpdate, TaskGet
Subagent Development
$ARGUMENTS
Execute implementation plans by dispatching fresh subagents per task, then running a two-stage review gate: spec compliance first, code quality second. Fresh context per subagent prevents accumulated confusion. Two-stage review catches different failure modes: spec review catches wrong behavior, quality review catches bad structure.
Usage
/subagent-development [plan file or task description]
Why This Works
| Property | Benefit | |----------|---------| | Fresh subagent per task | No accumulated context drift or confusion | | Spec review first | Catches wrong behavior before quality review wastes time on wrong code | | Quality review second | Catches structural issues after behavior is confirmed correct | | Sequential tasks | No merge conflicts, each task builds on verified previous work |
Process Flow
Read plan
|
v
Extract ordered task list
|
v
For each task:
|
+---> [1] Dispatch IMPLEMENTER subagent
| |
| v
| Handle status (see Status Protocol)
| |
| v
+---> [2] Dispatch SPEC REVIEWER subagent
| |
| v
| APPROVED? --no--> fix issues, re-review
| |
| yes
| |
| v
+---> [3] Dispatch QUALITY REVIEWER subagent
| |
| v
| Critical issues? --yes--> fix, re-review
| |
| no
| v
| Mark task complete
|
v
Next task (or done)Step 1 -- Read and Parse Plan
Read the plan file. Extract:
1. **Ordered task list** -- each task with description, acceptance criteria, file scope 2. **Global constraints** -- what must NOT change, architecture rules, shared conventions 3. **Dependencies** -- which tasks depend on which (execute in dependency order)
Present the task list to the user. Wait for approval before proceeding.
Step 2 -- Execute Tasks Sequentially
For each task in order:
2a. Gather Context
Before dispatching the implementer, gather:
- Relevant source files the task will read or modify
- Related test files
- Any output/artifacts from previously completed tasks
- Global constraints from the plan
2b. Dispatch Implementer
Use the `Agent` tool with the [implementer prompt template](reference/implementer-prompt.md).
Select model based on task complexity:
| Task Type | Model | Examples | |-----------|-------|---------| | Mechanical | Cheapest available | Rename, move, config change, 1-2 files with clear spec | | Integration | Standard | Wire up existing components, add endpoint using established patterns | | Design/Complex | Most capable | New architecture, complex algorithms, cross-cutting concerns |
2c. Handle Implementer Status
The implementer reports one of four statuses:
| Status | Handling | |--------|----------| | **DONE** | Proceed to spec review | | **DONE_WITH_CONCERNS** | Read concerns. If they relate to correctness or scope violations, address them before review. If observational only (style preference, future improvement), note them and proceed to spec review | | **NEEDS_CONTEXT** | Provide the missing context the implementer identified. Re-dispatch with the same task plus the additional context | | **BLOCKED** | Assess the blocker. Context problem: re-dispatch with better context. Task too complex for selected model: re-dispatch with more capable model. Plan is wrong or ambiguous: escalate to user for clarification |
2d. Spec Review (Stage 1)
Use the `Agent` tool with the [spec reviewer prompt template](reference/spec-reviewer-prompt.md).
The spec reviewer checks:
- All requirements from the task are implemented
- Nothing extra was added beyond the spec
- Nothing is missing
- Behavior matches acceptance criteria
If **APPROVED**: proceed to quality review.
If **issues found**: fix the issues (re-dispatch implementer with specific fix instructions or fix inline if trivial), then re-run spec review. Do not proceed to quality review until spec review passes.
2e. Quality Review (Stage 2)
Use the `Agent` tool with the [quality reviewer prompt template](reference/code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md).
The quality reviewer categorizes findings:
| Category | Action | |----------|--------| | **Critical** | Must fix before proceeding. Re-dispatch implementer or fix inline | | **Important** | Should fix. Fix now unless time-boxed, then document for follow-up | | **Suggestions** | Nice to have. Note for future improvement, do not block progress |
After fixing any Critical issues, re-run quality review to confirm.
2f. Mark Task Complete
Record:
- Task ID and description
- Files modified
- Commit SHA (if commits were made)
- Any concerns or suggestions deferred for later
Step 3 -- Summary Report
After all tasks complete, produce:
## Subagent Development Report ### Plan [Plan file or description] ### Tasks Completed | # | Task | Files Modified | Status | Notes | |---|------|---------------|--------|-------| | 1 | ... | ... | Done | ... | | 2 | ... | ... | Done | ... | ### Deferred Items - [Any "Important" or "Suggestion" issues not addressed] ### Verification - [ ] All tasks implemented - [ ] All spec reviews passed - [ ] All quality reviews passed (no Critical issues remaining) - [ ] Tests pass
Model Selection Guidance
Before dispatching each subagent, assess the task:
Is the task mechanical (rename, config, boilerplate)?
--> Use cheapest model
Does the task integrate existing patterns (1-3 files)?
-->Professional-grade AI coding toolkit with multi-platform support. Machine-enforced safety, 109 skills, 44 agents, expanded lifecycle hooks, persona presets, experimental opt-in plugin packs, and benchmark tooling — works with Claude Code, Claude Chat/Cowork,
Repo: softspark/ai-toolkit
Other skills on ai-toolkit.
- /ai-toolkit-rules
Mandatory engineering, security, testing, git, performance, quality, and response rules. Claude MUST load this skill for every technical, coding, debugging, review, architecture, DevOps, data, or file-editing task in Chat or Cowork.
Open skill - /mem-search
Search past coding sessions using natural language. Finds relevant observations, decisions, and context from previous work.
Open skill - /a11y-validate
Accessibility validator: WCAG 2.1 AA, EN 301 549, EAA. Triggers: a11y, accessibility, WCAG, EAA, ARIA, contrast, keyboard, screen reader.
Open skill - /agent-creator
Creates new specialized agents with frontmatter, tools, delegation. Triggers: new agent, create agent, agent scaffold, specialized agent.
Open skill - /analyze
Analyzes code quality, complexity, patterns across codebase. Triggers: quality report, hotspot scan, code analysis, architecture signal.
Open skill - /api-patterns
REST/GraphQL API design: naming, versioning, pagination, idempotency, OpenAPI. Triggers: API design, REST, GraphQL, OpenAPI, Swagger, idempotency, rate limit.
Open skill

