Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
前端设计敏感数据github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

subagent-driven-development子 Agent 驱动开发

Agent Skill

subagent-driven-development 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

710

周安装

29

GitHub Stars

1

下载量

230
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:subagent-driven-development(子 Agent 驱动开发)
来源仓库:https://github.com/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents
仓库路径:skills/subagent-driven-development
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents --skill subagent-driven-development
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents --skill subagent-driven-development

简介

subagent-driven-development 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合围绕仓库状态和代码变更进行整理。

  • 适用于子 Agent 驱动开发相关的协作信息管理,可结合代码变更事项使用。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,需确认权限范围和维护状态。
  • 安装前建议确认是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写等操作边界。
  • 适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

SKILL.md

Subagent-Driven Development

Overview

This skill orchestrates implementation through dedicated subagents with built-in quality gates. Each task is implemented by an implementer subagent, then reviewed by two specialized reviewer agents (spec compliance and code quality) before acceptance. Failed reviews trigger iterative fix cycles with a maximum of 3 retries before escalation. This ensures consistent quality at scale while maximizing parallel throughput.

Announce at start: "I'm using the subagent-driven-development skill to dispatch implementation tasks with two-stage review gates."

Trigger Conditions

  • Plan has 3+ tasks that can be implemented independently
  • Tasks have well-specified acceptance criteria suitable for delegation
  • Speed of execution is a priority
  • Tasks have few interdependencies
  • Quality gates are needed for delegated work

Phase 1: Task Preparation

Goal: Ensure every task is fully specified before dispatching to any subagent.

Task Specification Requirements (7 Sections)

Every task dispatched to a subagent MUST include ALL of these:

SectionContentExample
1. Task descriptionClear, unambiguous statement"Implement JWT token generation with RS256 signing"
2. Files to create/modifyExplicit listsrc/auth/jwt.ts, tests/auth/jwt.test.ts
3. Acceptance criteriaSpecific, testable conditions"Tokens expire after 1 hour", "Invalid keys throw AuthError"
4. TDD requirementsTests to write, behaviors to cover"Test: valid token generation, expired token rejection, invalid key handling"
5. Quality standardsCode style, patterns, conventions"Follow existing service pattern in src/services/, use Result type for errors"
6. ContextRelevant code, interfaces, deps"Logger API: logger.info(msg, meta). Import from../utils/logger"
7. ConstraintsWhat NOT to do"Do NOT modify existing auth middleware. Do NOT add new dependencies."

Pre-Dispatch Checklist

  • Task spec has all 7 sections filled
  • Task is independent (no unresolved dependencies on in-progress tasks)
  • Acceptance criteria are specific and testable
  • Files to modify are identified and accessible
  • Relevant context has been gathered and included in the spec

Task Independence Decision Table

Dependency TypeCan Dispatch?Action
No dependenciesYesDispatch immediately
Depends on completed taskYesInclude completed task's output as context
Depends on in-progress taskNoWait for dependency to complete
Shared file with another taskNoSerialize — one task at a time for that file
Shared interface onlyYesInclude interface definition as context

STOP — Do NOT dispatch until:

  • All 7 spec sections are complete
  • Independence is verified
  • Acceptance criteria are testable

Phase 2: Implementation Dispatch

Goal: Send the task to an implementer subagent with full context.

  1. Prepare the implementer prompt using implementer-prompt.md template
  2. Include the full task specification (all 7 sections)
  3. Include relevant code context (existing files, interfaces, types)
  4. Dispatch the implementer subagent
  5. Collect the implementation output
Dispatch mechanism: Use the Agent tool with subagent_type="general-purpose" and include the implementer prompt (from implementer-prompt.md) in the prompt parameter. Set description to a short task label.

Implementer Expectations

The implementer subagent MUST:

  • Follow the TDD cycle (RED-GREEN-REFACTOR)
  • Write tests before production code
  • Only modify files listed in the task spec
  • Follow the quality standards specified
  • Report any questions or blockers encountered
  • Document all assumptions made

Question Handling Protocol

Question TypeDuring ImplementationAction
Non-blockingCan proceed with reasonable assumptionNote assumption, continue, flag in output
BlockingCannot proceed without answerSTOP immediately, escalate to orchestrator
Scope questionAsks about work outside assigned taskReport it, do NOT fix it

STOP — Do NOT proceed to review until:

  • Implementer has returned complete output
  • All listed files have been created/modified
  • Tests exist for every acceptance criterion
  • Any assumptions are documented

Phase 3: Spec Review Gate

Goal: Verify the implementation matches the original task specification.

  1. Prepare the spec reviewer prompt using spec-reviewer-prompt.md template
  2. Provide the original task specification AND the implementer's output
  3. Dispatch the spec-reviewer subagent
  4. Collect the review result
Dispatch mechanism: Use the Agent tool with the spec-reviewer prompt (from spec-reviewer-prompt.md) in the prompt parameter.

Spec Review Criteria

CriterionAssessmentWhat to Check
All acceptance criteria metPASS / FAIL per criterionEach criterion individually verified
Tests cover specified behaviorsPASS / FAILTest file contains tests for all behaviors
Files modified match specPASS / FAILNo unauthorized file modifications
No out-of-scope changesPASS / FAILOnly listed files touched
Implementation matches intentPASS / FAILBehavior is correct, not just syntactically valid
All constraints respectedPASS / FAILNone of the "do NOT" items violated

Gate Decision

ResultAction
All PASSProceed to Phase 4 (quality review)
Any FAILReturn to implementer with specific failure details

STOP — Do NOT proceed to quality review if any spec criterion fails.


Phase 4: Quality Review Gate

Goal: Verify code meets quality standards independent of spec compliance.

  1. Prepare the quality reviewer prompt using code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md template
  2. Provide the implementation code, test code, and project quality standards
  3. Dispatch the quality-reviewer subagent
  4. Collect the review result
Dispatch mechanism: Use the Agent tool with the quality-reviewer prompt (from code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md) in the prompt parameter.

Quality Review Areas

AreaWhat to Check
Code qualityReadability, naming, structure, complexity
Pattern complianceFollows project patterns and conventions
SecurityNo injection vulnerabilities, proper validation, safe defaults
PerformanceNo unnecessary allocations, efficient algorithms, no N+1 queries
Error handlingAll error paths handled, meaningful error messages
Test qualityTests are meaningful, not testing implementation details

Issue Severity Classification

SeverityDefinitionAction Required
CriticalSecurity vulnerability, data loss risk, incorrect behaviorMUST fix before acceptance
ImportantPerformance issue, maintainability concern, missing error handlingSHOULD fix (escalate to user for decision)
SuggestionStyle improvement, alternative approach, documentationMAY fix, at developer's discretion

Gate Decision

ResultAction
No Critical or Important issuesPASS — proceed to acceptance
Any Critical issuesFAIL — must fix and re-review
Only Important issuesConditional — escalate to user for decision

Phase 5: Fix and Re-Review Cycle

Goal: Iteratively fix review failures with a bounded retry limit.

Fix Cycle Process

1. Collect all failure details from the failing review gate
2. Send failures back to implementer subagent with specific instructions
3. Implementer fixes the specific issues (not a full rewrite)
4. Re-run ONLY the failing review gate
5. If still failing: repeat (max 3 cycles)
6. After 3 failed cycles: escalate to user

Retry Decision Table

AttemptSpec ReviewQuality ReviewAction
1FAILReturn to implementer with failure details
2FAILReturn with additional context/examples
3FAILEscalate to user
1PASSFAILReturn to implementer with quality issues
2PASSFAILReturn with project patterns as reference
3PASSFAILEscalate to user

Escalation Report Format

ESCALATION: REPEATED REVIEW FAILURE
====================================
Task: [task description]
Review Gate: [spec / quality]
Attempts: 3

Failure Pattern:
  Attempt 1: [what failed and why]
  Attempt 2: [what failed and why]
  Attempt 3: [what failed and why]

Root Cause Assessment: [why the implementer cannot resolve this]

Options:
  A. Simplify the task specification
  B. Provide additional context/examples
  C. Break into smaller sub-tasks
  D. Implement manually (skip subagent)

Awaiting direction.

Phase 6: Acceptance and Integration

Goal: After both gates pass, integrate the work and verify no regressions.

  1. Run the full project test suite (not just the new tests)
  2. Run all verification commands (lint, type-check, build)
  3. Confirm no regressions were introduced
  4. Mark the task as complete
  5. Proceed to next task or report completion

Multi-Task Orchestration

1. Identify independent tasks (no dependencies on each other)
2. For each independent task: run Phases 2-6
3. After all independent tasks complete:
   a. Run full test suite
   b. Run all verification commands
   c. Checkpoint review
4. Identify next set of tasks (now that dependencies are met)
5. Repeat until all tasks complete

Anti-Patterns / Common Mistakes

Anti-PatternWhy It FailsCorrect Approach
Dispatching without complete task specImplementer makes wrong assumptionsFill out all 7 spec sections first
Skipping spec review ("code looks right")Spec deviations accumulateAlways run both review gates
Accepting despite Critical issuesSecurity/correctness compromisedCritical issues must be fixed
Letting implementer review its own codeBias, blind spotsSeparate agents for implementation and review
Dispatching dependent tasks in parallelRace conditions, integration failuresOnly parallelize independent tasks
Ignoring questions from implementerWrong assumptions baked into codeAddress all questions before proceeding
More than 3 fix cycles without escalatingDiminishing returns, same mistakesEscalate to user for direction
Skipping verification after acceptanceRegressions go unnoticedAlways run full verification
Vague acceptance criteriaReviewer cannot assess objectivelySpecific, testable criteria only
Not including constraintsImplementer touches files it should notExplicit "do NOT" list in every spec

Anti-Rationalization Guards

If you catch yourself thinking:

  • "The implementation looks good enough..." — Run both review gates. Always.
  • "The spec review is just a formality..." — Spec deviations cause integration failures. Run it.
  • "Three retries is too many, just accept it..." — If it fails 3 times, escalate. Do not lower the bar.

Integration Points

SkillRelationshipWhen
planningUpstream — provides approved plan with tasksTask source
executing-plansUpstream — may delegate to this skillFor independent tasks in plan
test-driven-developmentPer-task — implementer follows TDDPhase 2 implementation
verification-before-completionPost-acceptance — final verificationPhase 6 integration
code-reviewComplementary — quality review gatePhase 4 quality review
dispatching-parallel-agentsComplementary — parallelization strategyWhen dispatching independent tasks
resilient-executionOn failure — retry strategiesWhen fix cycles exhaust
task-managementTracking — task status managementProgress tracking
Agent toolDispatch mechanism for all subagent phases

Concrete Examples

Example: Task Spec for Subagent

TASK SPECIFICATION
==================
1. Description: Implement user registration endpoint with email validation

2. Files:
   - Create: src/routes/auth/register.ts
   - Create: tests/routes/auth/register.test.ts
   - Modify: src/routes/index.ts (add route import)

3. Acceptance Criteria:
   - POST /api/auth/register accepts { email, password, name }
   - Returns 201 with user object (no password) on success
   - Returns 400 if email format is invalid
   - Returns 409 if email already exists
   - Password is hashed before storage

4. TDD Requirements:
   - Test: valid registration returns 201
   - Test: invalid email returns 400
   - Test: duplicate email returns 409
   - Test: password is not in response body
   - Test: password is hashed in database

5. Quality Standards:
   - Follow route pattern in src/routes/auth/login.ts
   - Use Zod for input validation (existing pattern)
   - Use Result<T, E> type for service errors

6. Context:
   - Auth service: src/services/auth.ts (has hashPassword method)
   - Route pattern: see src/routes/auth/login.ts
   - Zod schemas: see src/schemas/auth.ts

7. Constraints:
   - Do NOT modify auth service
   - Do NOT add new dependencies
   - Do NOT create migration files

Prompt Templates

This skill uses three prompt templates:

TemplatePurposeFile
Implementer PromptDispatches implementation workimplementer-prompt.md
Spec Reviewer PromptReviews against task specificationspec-reviewer-prompt.md
Quality Reviewer PromptReviews code qualitycode-quality-reviewer-prompt.md

Each template provides a structured format for the subagent interaction. See the individual files for details.


Skill Type

RIGID — Follow this process exactly. All 7 spec sections are mandatory. Both review gates are mandatory. The 3-retry escalation limit is mandatory. No shortcuts.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

33.25%
按下载量换算76

Claude

30.25%
按下载量换算70

Cursor

19.62%
按下载量换算45

Gemini CLI

9.84%
按下载量换算23

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills