research-driven-planning
Loop 1 of the Three-Loop Integrated Development System. Research-driven requirements analysis with iterative risk mitigation through 5x pre-mortem cycles using multi-agent consensus. Feeds validated, risk-mitigated plans to parallel-swarm-implementation. Use when starting new features or projects requiring comprehensive planning with <3% failure confidence and evidence-based technology selection.
Best use case
research-driven-planning is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Loop 1 of the Three-Loop Integrated Development System. Research-driven requirements analysis with iterative risk mitigation through 5x pre-mortem cycles using multi-agent consensus. Feeds validated, risk-mitigated plans to parallel-swarm-implementation. Use when starting new features or projects requiring comprehensive planning with <3% failure confidence and evidence-based technology selection.
Teams using research-driven-planning should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/research-driven-planning/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How research-driven-planning Compares
| Feature / Agent | research-driven-planning | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Loop 1 of the Three-Loop Integrated Development System. Research-driven requirements analysis with iterative risk mitigation through 5x pre-mortem cycles using multi-agent consensus. Feeds validated, risk-mitigated plans to parallel-swarm-implementation. Use when starting new features or projects requiring comprehensive planning with <3% failure confidence and evidence-based technology selection.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
Related Guides
SKILL.md Source
# Research-Driven Planning (Loop 1)
## Purpose
Comprehensive planning with research-backed solutions and iterative risk mitigation that prevents 85-95% of problems before coding begins.
## Specialist Agent Coordination
I coordinate multi-agent research and planning swarms using **explicit agent SOPs** from Claude-Flow's 86-agent ecosystem.
**Methodology** (SOP: Specification → Research → Planning → Execution → Knowledge):
1. **Specification Phase**: Requirements capture with structured SPEC.md
2. **Research Phase**: 6-agent parallel research with self-consistency validation
3. **Planning Phase**: MECE task decomposition with research integration
4. **Execution Phase**: 8-agent Byzantine consensus pre-mortem (5 iterations)
5. **Knowledge Phase**: Planning package generation for Loop 2 integration
**Integration**: Loop 1 of 3. Feeds → `parallel-swarm-implementation` (Loop 2), Receives ← `cicd-intelligent-recovery` (Loop 3) failure patterns.
---
## When to Use This Skill
Activate this skill when:
- Starting a new feature or project requiring comprehensive planning
- Need to prevent problems before coding begins (85-95% failure prevention)
- Want research-backed solutions instead of assumptions (30-60% time savings)
- Require risk analysis with <3% failure confidence
- Building something complex with multiple failure modes
- Need evidence-based planning that feeds into implementation
**DO NOT** use this skill for:
- Quick fixes or trivial changes (use direct implementation)
- Well-understood repetitive tasks (use existing patterns)
- Emergency hotfixes (skip to Loop 2)
---
## Input Contract
```yaml
input:
project_description: string (required)
# High-level description of what needs to be built
requirements:
functional: array[string] (required)
# Core features and capabilities
non_functional: object (optional)
performance: string
security: string
scalability: string
constraints:
technical: array[string] (stack, framework, dependencies)
timeline: string (deadlines, milestones)
resources: object (team, budget, infrastructure)
options:
research_depth: enum[quick, standard, comprehensive] (default: standard)
premortem_iterations: number (default: 5, range: 3-10)
failure_threshold: number (default: 3, target: <3%)
```
## Output Contract
```yaml
output:
specification:
spec_file: path # SPEC.md location
requirements_complete: boolean
success_criteria: array[string]
research:
evidence_sources: number # Total research sources
recommendations: array[object]
solution: string
confidence: number (0-100)
evidence: array[url]
risk_landscape: array[object]
risk: string
severity: enum[low, medium, high, critical]
mitigation: string
planning:
enhanced_plan: path # plan-enhanced.json location
total_tasks: number
task_dependencies: object
estimated_complexity: string
risk_analysis:
premortem_iterations: number
final_failure_confidence: number # Target: <3%
critical_risks_mitigated: number
defense_strategies: array[string]
integration:
planning_package: path # loop1-planning-package.json
memory_namespace: string # integration/loop1-to-loop2
ready_for_loop2: boolean
```
---
## SOP Phase 1: Specification
**Objective**: Define initial requirements with clarity and structure.
### Create SPEC.md
Generate a comprehensive specification document in the project root:
```markdown
# Project Specification
## Overview
[High-level description of what needs to be built]
## Requirements
### Functional Requirements
1. [Core feature 1]
2. [Core feature 2]
...
### Non-Functional Requirements
- Performance: [metrics]
- Security: [requirements]
- Scalability: [targets]
- Compliance: [standards]
## Constraints
- Technical: [language, framework, dependencies]
- Timeline: [deadlines, milestones]
- Resources: [team size, budget, infrastructure]
## Success Criteria
1. [Measurable outcome 1]
2. [Measurable outcome 2]
...
## Out of Scope
- [Explicitly excluded features]
```
### Store Initial Context
```bash
npx claude-flow@alpha memory store \
"project_spec" \
"$(cat SPEC.md)" \
--namespace "loop1/specification"
```
**Output**: Structured SPEC.md file and memory-stored specification
---
## SOP Phase 2: Research (Multi-Agent Evidence Collection)
**Objective**: Comprehensive solution discovery using evidence-based research with **self-consistency validation**.
### Execute 6-Agent Parallel Research SOP
**Agent Coordination Pattern** (Claude Code Task tool - Single Message):
```javascript
// RESEARCH PHASE: 6-Agent Parallel Evidence Collection
// Self-Consistency: Multiple research perspectives + cross-validation
[Single Message - All 6 Research Agents]:
// Web Research Agents (3 perspectives for self-consistency)
Task("Web Research Specialist 1",
"Research [primary_technology] best practices 2024. Focus on: security patterns, industry standards, implementation approaches. Provide evidence with source URLs. Store findings in .claude/.artifacts/web-research-1.json. Use hooks: npx claude-flow@alpha hooks pre-task --description 'web research 1' && npx claude-flow@alpha hooks post-task --task-id 'web-research-1'",
"researcher")
Task("Web Research Specialist 2",
"Research [technology] libraries comparison. Focus on: developer experience, community support, production reliability, security track record. Cross-validate findings from Specialist 1. Store in .claude/.artifacts/web-research-2.json. Use hooks for coordination.",
"researcher")
Task("Academic Research Agent",
"Research [domain] security research papers and compliance requirements. Focus on: recent vulnerabilities, mitigation strategies, industry standards, regulatory requirements. Store in .claude/.artifacts/academic-research.json.",
"researcher")
// GitHub Analysis Agents (code quality perspective)
Task("GitHub Quality Analyst",
"Analyze top [technology] libraries on GitHub. Focus on: code quality metrics (test coverage, cyclomatic complexity), issue resolution time, commit frequency, maintainer responsiveness. Generate quality rankings. Store in .claude/.artifacts/github-quality.json.",
"code-analyzer")
Task("GitHub Security Auditor",
"Audit [technology] library security. Focus on: vulnerability history, security advisories, patch response time, dependency security. Flag high-risk libraries. Store in .claude/.artifacts/github-security.json.",
"security-review")
// Synthesis Coordinator (Plan-and-Solve pattern)
Task("Research Synthesis Coordinator",
"Wait for all 5 research agents to complete. Synthesize findings using self-consistency validation: 1) Aggregate all evidence, 2) Cross-validate conflicting recommendations, 3) Calculate confidence scores based on source agreement, 4) Flag any contradictory evidence, 5) Generate ranked recommendations with evidence. Use Byzantine consensus for critical technology decisions (require 3/5 agent agreement). Store final synthesis in .claude/.artifacts/research-synthesis.json. Memory store: npx claude-flow@alpha memory store 'research_findings' \"$(cat .claude/.artifacts/research-synthesis.json)\" --namespace 'loop1/research'",
"analyst")
```
**Evidence-Based Techniques Applied**:
- **Self-Consistency**: 3 web research agents + cross-validation
- **Plan-and-Solve**: Synthesis coordinator waits, then validates systematically
- **Program-of-Thought**: Explicit step-by-step synthesis workflow
- **Byzantine Consensus**: 3/5 agreement required for critical decisions
### Research Output
This produces:
- **Solution Rankings**: Best approaches with evidence and confidence scores
- **Pattern Library**: Proven implementation patterns from real codebases
- **Risk Identification**: Known pitfalls from real implementations
- **Technology Recommendations**: Evidence-based stack selection with justifications
**Validation Checkpoint**: Research synthesis must include ≥3 sources per major decision.
**Output**: Evidence-based solution landscape with ranked options and risk data
---
## SOP Phase 3: Planning
**Objective**: Generate structured implementation plans with comprehensive context.
### Step 1: Convert SPEC.md to Structured Plan
Use the spec-to-plan transformation:
```bash
/spec:plan
```
This auto-generates `plan.json` with:
- **Task Breakdown**: Hierarchical task decomposition (MECE: Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive)
- **Dependencies**: Task ordering and prerequisites
- **Resource Estimates**: Time, complexity, agent assignments
- **Risk Flags**: Tasks identified as high-risk
### Step 2: Enhance Plan with Research Context
Enrich the plan with research findings:
```bash
# Integration script
node <<'EOF'
const plan = require('./plan.json');
const research = require('./.claude/.artifacts/research-synthesis.json');
// Merge research recommendations into plan tasks
plan.tasks.forEach(task => {
const relevantPatterns = research.patterns.filter(p =>
p.relevance.includes(task.domain)
);
task.recommendedApproaches = relevantPatterns;
task.knownRisks = research.risks.filter(r => r.applies_to.includes(task.type));
task.evidenceSources = relevantPatterns.flatMap(p => p.sources);
});
require('fs').writeFileSync('plan-enhanced.json', JSON.stringify(plan, null, 2));
console.log('✅ Plan enhanced with research context');
EOF
```
### Step 3: Store Enhanced Plan
```bash
npx claude-flow@alpha memory store \
"enhanced_plan" \
"$(cat plan-enhanced.json)" \
--namespace "loop1/planning"
```
**Validation Checkpoint**: Enhanced plan must cover all SPEC.md requirements with research-backed approaches.
**Output**: Structured, research-backed implementation plan
---
## SOP Phase 4: Execution (5-Iteration Byzantine Consensus Pre-mortem)
**Objective**: Identify and mitigate failure modes until <3% failure confidence is achieved using **multi-agent Byzantine consensus**.
### 8-Agent Pre-mortem SOP (5 Iterations)
**Agent Coordination Pattern** (Iterative with Consensus):
```bash
#!/bin/bash
# PRE-MORTEM EXECUTION: 5 Iterations with Byzantine Consensus
for ITERATION in {1..5}; do
echo "=== Pre-mortem Iteration $ITERATION/5 ==="
# PARALLEL 8-AGENT RISK ANALYSIS (Single Message)
# Byzantine Consensus: Require 2/3 agreement on risk severity
Task("Failure Mode Analyst (Optimistic)",
"Identify failure modes assuming best-case scenarios. What could still go wrong? Consider: integration failures, performance issues, security vulnerabilities, user experience problems. Store in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-optimistic.json",
"analyst")
Task("Failure Mode Analyst (Pessimistic)",
"Identify failure modes assuming worst-case scenarios. What disasters lurk? Consider: cascade failures, data corruption, security breaches, scalability collapse. Store in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-pessimistic.json",
"analyst")
Task("Failure Mode Analyst (Realistic)",
"Identify failure modes based on historical data from Loop 3 feedback (if available). What actually fails in practice? Load historical failures: npx claude-flow@alpha memory query 'loop3_failure_patterns' --namespace 'integration/loop3-feedback'. Store in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-realistic.json",
"analyst")
Task("Root Cause Detective 1",
"For each identified failure, trace back to root causes using 5-Whys methodology. Distinguish symptoms from actual causes. Store causal chains in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-causes-1.json",
"researcher")
Task("Root Cause Detective 2",
"Cross-validate root causes using fishbone analysis. Identify systemic vs isolated causes. Compare with Detective 1 findings. Store in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-causes-2.json",
"analyst")
Task("Defense Architect",
"Design defense-in-depth mitigation strategies. Multiple layers of protection per risk. Prioritize by impact: 1) Prevent failure, 2) Detect early, 3) Recover gracefully. Store in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-mitigations.json",
"system-architect")
Task("Cost-Benefit Analyzer",
"Evaluate mitigation strategies by cost/benefit ratio. Consider: implementation cost, maintenance cost, risk reduction, performance impact. Generate ROI rankings. Store in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-cba.json",
"analyst")
# BYZANTINE CONSENSUS COORDINATOR (waits for all 7 agents)
Task("Byzantine Consensus Coordinator",
"Wait for all 7 agents. Apply Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus: 1) Aggregate all identified risks, 2) Require 2/3 agreement (5/7 agents) on risk severity classification, 3) Cross-validate root causes (both detectives must agree), 4) Select mitigations with positive ROI, 5) Calculate overall failure confidence score. Generate consolidated risk registry. Store in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-consensus.json. Memory store: npx claude-flow@alpha memory store 'premortem_iteration_$ITERATION' \"$(cat .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-consensus.json)\" --namespace 'loop1/execution'",
"byzantine-coordinator")
# Calculate iteration confidence
CONFIDENCE=$(jq '.consensus.failure_confidence' .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-consensus.json)
AGREEMENT=$(jq '.consensus.agreement_rate' .claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-$ITERATION-consensus.json)
echo "Iteration $ITERATION: Failure Confidence = $CONFIDENCE%, Agreement Rate = $AGREEMENT%"
# Convergence criteria
if (( $(echo "$CONFIDENCE < 3" | bc -l) )) && (( $(echo "$AGREEMENT > 66" | bc -l) )); then
echo "✅ <3% failure confidence achieved with 2/3+ Byzantine consensus at iteration $ITERATION"
break
fi
if [ $ITERATION -eq 5 ] && (( $(echo "$CONFIDENCE >= 3" | bc -l) )); then
echo "⚠️ Warning: Failed to reach <3% confidence after 5 iterations"
echo "Consider: 1) Breaking down tasks further, 2) Adding constraints to SPEC.md, 3) Running additional iterations"
fi
done
# Generate final pre-mortem report
node <<'EOF'
const fs = require('fs');
const iterations = [];
for (let i = 1; i <= 5; i++) {
try {
iterations.push(JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync(`.claude/.artifacts/premortem-iter-${i}-consensus.json`, 'utf8')));
} catch {}
}
const finalReport = {
iterations_completed: iterations.length,
final_failure_confidence: iterations[iterations.length - 1].consensus.failure_confidence,
final_agreement_rate: iterations[iterations.length - 1].consensus.agreement_rate,
total_risks_identified: iterations.reduce((sum, iter) => sum + iter.risks.length, 0),
critical_risks_mitigated: iterations[iterations.length - 1].mitigations.filter(m => m.priority === 'critical').length,
convergence_achieved: iterations[iterations.length - 1].consensus.failure_confidence < 3
};
fs.writeFileSync('.claude/.artifacts/premortem-final.json', JSON.stringify(finalReport, null, 2));
console.log('✅ Pre-mortem complete:', JSON.stringify(finalReport, null, 2));
EOF
```
**Evidence-Based Techniques Applied**:
- **Self-Consistency**: 3 failure mode analysts with different perspectives (optimistic/pessimistic/realistic)
- **Byzantine Consensus**: Fault-tolerant agreement on risk severity (2/3 required)
- **Program-of-Thought**: Explicit 5-Whys + fishbone analysis methodology
- **Iterative Refinement**: 5 cycles with convergence criteria
**Convergence Criteria**:
- Failure confidence < 3%
- Byzantine consensus agreement > 66% (2/3+ agents agree)
- No new high-severity risks identified
- All critical risks have mitigation strategies with positive ROI
**Validation Checkpoint**: Pre-mortem must achieve <3% failure confidence or explain why not.
**Output**: Risk-mitigated plan with <3% failure confidence and comprehensive defense-in-depth strategies
---
## SOP Phase 5: Knowledge (Planning Package Generation)
**Objective**: Package and persist validated planning data for Loop 2 and future iterations.
### Step 1: Generate Planning Package
Create comprehensive planning artifact for Loop 2 integration:
```bash
node <<'EOF'
const fs = require('fs');
const planningPackage = {
metadata: {
loop: 1,
phase: 'research-driven-planning',
timestamp: new Date().toISOString(),
nextLoop: 'parallel-swarm-implementation',
version: '1.0.0'
},
specification: {
file: 'SPEC.md',
content: fs.readFileSync('SPEC.md', 'utf8'),
requirements_count: (fs.readFileSync('SPEC.md', 'utf8').match(/^###/gm) || []).length
},
research: {
synthesis: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('.claude/.artifacts/research-synthesis.json', 'utf8')),
evidence_sources: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('.claude/.artifacts/research-synthesis.json', 'utf8')).total_sources,
confidence_score: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('.claude/.artifacts/research-synthesis.json', 'utf8')).overall_confidence
},
planning: {
enhanced_plan: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('plan-enhanced.json', 'utf8')),
total_tasks: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('plan-enhanced.json', 'utf8')).tasks.length,
estimated_complexity: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('plan-enhanced.json', 'utf8')).metadata.complexity
},
risk_analysis: {
premortem: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('.claude/.artifacts/premortem-final.json', 'utf8')),
final_failure_confidence: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('.claude/.artifacts/premortem-final.json', 'utf8')).final_failure_confidence,
critical_risks_mitigated: JSON.parse(fs.readFileSync('.claude/.artifacts/premortem-final.json', 'utf8')).critical_risks_mitigated
},
integrationPoints: {
feedsTo: 'parallel-swarm-implementation',
receivesFrom: 'cicd-intelligent-recovery',
memoryNamespaces: {
specification: 'loop1/specification',
research: 'loop1/research',
planning: 'loop1/planning',
execution: 'loop1/execution',
output: 'integration/loop1-to-loop2',
feedback: 'integration/loop3-feedback'
}
}
};
fs.writeFileSync(
'.claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json',
JSON.stringify(planningPackage, null, 2)
);
console.log('✅ Planning package created for Loop 2 integration');
console.log(` Location: .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json`);
console.log(` Research sources: ${planningPackage.research.evidence_sources}`);
console.log(` Tasks: ${planningPackage.planning.total_tasks}`);
console.log(` Failure confidence: ${planningPackage.risk_analysis.final_failure_confidence}%`);
EOF
```
### Step 2: Store in Cross-Loop Memory
```bash
# Store for Loop 2 consumption
npx claude-flow@alpha memory store \
"loop1_complete" \
"$(cat .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json)" \
--namespace "integration/loop1-to-loop2"
# Tag for Loop 3 feedback integration
npx claude-flow@alpha memory store \
"loop1_baseline" \
"$(cat .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json)" \
--namespace "integration/loop3-feedback"
echo "✅ Planning package stored in cross-loop memory"
echo " Namespace: integration/loop1-to-loop2"
```
### Step 3: Generate Loop 1 Report
Create human-readable summary:
```bash
cat > docs/loop1-report.md <<'EOF'
# Loop 1: Research-Driven Planning - Complete
## Specification Summary
$(head -20 SPEC.md | tail -15)
## Research Findings
- **Evidence Sources**: $(jq '.research.evidence_sources' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json) sources
- **Top Solution**: $(jq -r '.research.synthesis.recommendations[0].solution' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json)
- **Confidence Score**: $(jq '.research.confidence_score' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json)%
## Enhanced Plan
- **Total Tasks**: $(jq '.planning.total_tasks' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json) tasks
- **Estimated Complexity**: $(jq -r '.planning.estimated_complexity' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json)
## Risk Mitigation
- **Pre-mortem Iterations**: $(jq '.risk_analysis.premortem.iterations_completed' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json)
- **Final Failure Confidence**: $(jq '.risk_analysis.final_failure_confidence' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json)% (Target: <3%)
- **Critical Risks Mitigated**: $(jq '.risk_analysis.critical_risks_mitigated' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json)
## Ready for Loop 2
✅ Planning package: .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json
✅ Memory namespace: integration/loop1-to-loop2
✅ Next: Execute parallel-swarm-implementation skill
EOF
echo "✅ Loop 1 report generated: docs/loop1-report.md"
```
**Validation Checkpoint**: Planning package must include all required fields and pass schema validation.
**Output**: Complete planning package ready for Loop 2 integration, stored in both filesystem and persistent memory
---
## Integration with Loop 2 (Development)
After Loop 1 completes, **automatically transition to Loop 2**:
```bash
# Tell Claude Code to proceed to next loop
"Execute parallel-swarm-implementation skill using the planning package from Loop 1.
Load planning data from: .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json
Memory namespace: integration/loop1-to-loop2"
```
Loop 2 will:
1. Load Loop 1 planning package from memory
2. Use research findings for MECE task division
3. Apply risk mitigations during implementation
4. Validate theater-free execution against pre-mortem predictions
---
## Integration with Loop 3 (Feedback)
Loop 3 (CI/CD Intelligent Recovery) feeds failure analysis **back to Loop 1** for next iteration:
### Receiving Loop 3 Feedback
When Loop 3 completes, retrieve failure patterns:
```bash
npx claude-flow@alpha memory query "loop3_failure_patterns" \
--namespace "integration/loop3-feedback"
```
### Incorporate into Next Pre-mortem
Use failure data to enhance future risk analysis:
```bash
# Next project's pre-mortem receives historical data
# The Realistic Failure Mode Analyst will automatically load this data
```
This creates **continuous improvement** where:
- Real failures inform future risk analysis
- Pre-mortem becomes more accurate over time
- Planning improves with each project cycle
---
## Performance Benchmarks
**Time Investment**: 6-11 hours (20-30% of total project time)
**Time Savings**: 30-60% reduction in rework and debugging
**Failure Prevention**: 85-95% of potential issues caught pre-implementation
**ROI**: 2-3x return through prevented failures and reduced rework
**Typical Timeline**:
- Specification: 1-2 hours
- Research (6-agent parallel): 2-4 hours (30-60% faster than manual)
- Planning: 1-2 hours
- Pre-mortem (8-agent × 5 iterations): 2-3 hours
- **Total**: 6-11 hours for comprehensive planning
**Comparison**:
| Metric | Traditional Planning | Loop 1 (Research-Driven) |
|--------|---------------------|--------------------------|
| Time | 2-4 hours | 6-11 hours |
| Research Sources | 0-2 | 10-30+ (6-agent parallel) |
| Risk Analysis | Ad-hoc | 5-iteration Byzantine consensus |
| Failure Prevention | 30-50% | 85-95% |
| ROI | 1x | 2-3x |
---
## Troubleshooting
### Research Returns Low-Quality Results
**Symptom**: Generic or outdated solutions, low confidence scores
**Diagnosis**: Check `.claude/.artifacts/research-synthesis.json` for evidence quality
**Fix**:
```bash
# Refine search queries with specific constraints
# Re-run with more targeted research agents
Task("Web Research Specialist 1",
"Research [technology] [use-case] 2024 production security best-practices enterprise-grade",
"researcher")
```
### Pre-mortem Not Converging
**Symptom**: Failure confidence stays >3% after 5 iterations, low Byzantine consensus
**Diagnosis**: Check agreement rates in premortem iteration files
**Fix**:
1. Break down plan into smaller, more manageable tasks
2. Add more specific constraints to SPEC.md
3. Run additional pre-mortem cycles (up to 10):
```bash
# Extend iterations
for ITERATION in {6..10}; do
# ... (same 8-agent SOP)
done
```
4. Consult domain experts for known failure modes
### Loop 2 Integration Failure
**Symptom**: Loop 2 can't load planning package
**Diagnosis**: Memory namespace or file access issue
**Fix**:
```bash
# Verify memory storage
npx claude-flow@alpha memory query "loop1_complete" \
--namespace "integration/loop1-to-loop2"
# Verify file exists
ls -lh .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json
# Regenerate package if needed
node scripts/generate-planning-package.js
```
---
## Success Criteria
Loop 1 is successful when:
- ✅ SPEC.md captures all requirements completely
- ✅ Research provides evidence-based recommendations (≥3 sources per major decision)
- ✅ Research confidence score ≥70%
- ✅ Plan covers all SPEC.md requirements with task breakdown
- ✅ Pre-mortem achieves <3% failure confidence
- ✅ Byzantine consensus ≥66% agreement on all critical risks
- ✅ All critical risks have documented mitigation strategies with positive ROI
- ✅ Planning package successfully loads in Loop 2
- ✅ Memory namespaces populated with complete data
**Validation Command**:
```bash
npx claude-flow@alpha memory query "loop1_complete" \
--namespace "integration/loop1-to-loop2" \
--validate-schema
```
---
## Memory Namespaces
Loop 1 uses these memory locations:
| Namespace | Purpose | Producers | Consumers |
|-----------|---------|-----------|-----------|
| `loop1/specification` | SPEC.md and requirements | Specification phase | Loop 1, Loop 2 |
| `loop1/research` | Research findings and evidence | 6-agent research swarm | Loop 1, Loop 2 |
| `loop1/planning` | Enhanced plans and task breakdowns | Planning phase | Loop 2 |
| `loop1/execution` | Pre-mortem results and risk analysis | 8-agent pre-mortem swarm | Loop 2, Loop 3 |
| `integration/loop1-to-loop2` | Planning package for Loop 2 | Knowledge phase | Loop 2 |
| `integration/loop3-feedback` | Failure patterns from Loop 3 | Loop 3 | Loop 1 (next iteration) |
---
## Related Skills
- **parallel-swarm-implementation** - Loop 2: Implementation (receives Loop 1 output)
- **cicd-intelligent-recovery** - Loop 3: Quality & Debugging (provides feedback to Loop 1)
- **intent-analyzer** - Deep intent understanding for requirement clarification
- **skill-forge** - Skill creation methodology used to build this skill
---
## Example: Complete Loop 1 Execution
### User Authentication System
```bash
# ===== PHASE 1: SPECIFICATION =====
cat > SPEC.md <<'EOF'
# User Authentication System
## Requirements
### Functional
- JWT-based authentication with refresh tokens
- Role-based access control (RBAC)
- Password reset functionality
- Two-factor authentication (TOTP)
### Non-Functional
- Performance: <100ms auth check
- Security: OWASP Top 10 compliance
- Scalability: 10,000 concurrent users
## Constraints
- Must integrate with existing Express.js API
- PostgreSQL database
- Deploy to AWS Lambda
## Success Criteria
1. 100% auth endpoint coverage
2. Zero critical vulnerabilities
3. <100ms 99th percentile latency
EOF
npx claude-flow@alpha memory store "project_spec" "$(cat SPEC.md)" --namespace "loop1/specification"
# ===== PHASE 2: RESEARCH (6-Agent Parallel) =====
# (Execute 6-agent research SOP as documented above)
# Results in .claude/.artifacts/research-synthesis.json
# ===== PHASE 3: PLANNING =====
/spec:plan
node scripts/enhance-plan-with-research.js
# ===== PHASE 4: EXECUTION (8-Agent × 5 Iterations Pre-mortem) =====
# (Execute 8-agent Byzantine consensus pre-mortem as documented above)
# Results in .claude/.artifacts/premortem-final.json
# ===== PHASE 5: KNOWLEDGE =====
node scripts/generate-planning-package.js
# ===== VERIFY SUCCESS =====
echo "✅ Loop 1 Complete"
echo "📊 Results:"
jq '{
research_sources: .research.evidence_sources,
tasks: .planning.total_tasks,
failure_confidence: .risk_analysis.final_failure_confidence,
ready: true
}' .claude/.artifacts/loop1-planning-package.json
echo ""
echo "➡️ Next: Execute parallel-swarm-implementation skill"
```
---
**Status**: Production-Ready with Explicit Agent SOPs
**Version**: 2.0.0 (Optimized with Prompt-Architect Principles)
**Loop Position**: 1 of 3 (Planning)
**Integration**: Feeds Loop 2, Receives from Loop 3
**Agent Coordination**: 6-agent research + 8-agent pre-mortem with Byzantine consensusRelated Skills
Research Proposal Generator
Generate high-quality academic research proposals for PhD applications following Nature Reviews-style academic writing conventions.
yt-research
Research competitor YouTube channels, niches, and trending topics for your content strategy. Use this skill whenever the user says "research channels", "analyze competitors", "find trending topics", "niche analysis", "competitive research", "what are other creators doing", "scrape YouTube channels", or wants to understand the competitive landscape for a specific tool or topic area. Use when working with yt research. Trigger with 'yt', 'research'.
creating-github-issues-from-web-research
This skill enhances Claude's ability to conduct web research and translate findings into actionable GitHub issues. It automates the process of extracting key information from web search results and formatting it into a well-structured issue, ready for team action. Use this skill when you need to research a topic and create a corresponding GitHub issue for tracking, collaboration, and task management. Trigger this skill by requesting Claude to "research [topic] and create a ticket" or "find [information] and generate a GitHub issue".
sprint-planning-helper
Sprint Planning Helper - Auto-activating skill for Enterprise Workflows. Triggers on: sprint planning helper, sprint planning helper Part of the Enterprise Workflows skill category.
planning-disaster-recovery
Execute use when you need to work with backup and recovery. This skill provides backup automation and disaster recovery with comprehensive guidance and automation. Trigger with phrases like "create backups", "automate backups", or "implement disaster recovery".
analyzing-capacity-planning
This skill enables Claude to analyze capacity requirements and plan for future growth. It uses the capacity-planning-analyzer plugin to assess current utilization, forecast growth trends, and recommend scaling strategies. Use this skill when the user asks to "analyze capacity", "plan for growth", "forecast infrastructure needs", or requests a "capacity roadmap". It is also useful when the user mentions specific capacity metrics like CPU usage, memory, database storage, network bandwidth, or connection pool saturation. This skill is ideal for proactive infrastructure planning and preventing performance bottlenecks.
persona-researcher
Organize research — manage references, notes, and collaboration.
planning-oracle-to-postgres-migration-integration-testing
Creates an integration testing plan for .NET data access artifacts during Oracle-to-PostgreSQL database migrations. Analyzes a single project to identify repositories, DAOs, and service layers that interact with the database, then produces a structured testing plan. Use when planning integration test coverage for a migrated project, identifying which data access methods need tests, or preparing for Oracle-to-PostgreSQL migration validation.
gtm-enterprise-account-planning
Strategic account planning and execution for enterprise deals. Use when planning complex sales cycles, managing multiple stakeholders, applying MEDDICC qualification, tracking deal health, or building mutual action plans. Includes the "stale MAP equals dead deal" pattern.
eval-driven-dev
Add instrumentation, build golden datasets, write eval-based tests, run them, root-cause failures, and iterate — Ensure your Python LLM application works correctly. Make sure to use this skill whenever a user is developing, testing, QA-ing, evaluating, or benchmarking a Python project that calls an LLM. Use for making sure an LLM application works correctly, catching regressions after prompt changes, fixing unexpected behavior, or validating output quality before shipping.
Autoresearch
Autonomous iterative experimentation loop for any programming task. Guides the user through defining goals, measurable metrics, and scope constraints, then runs an autonomous loop of code changes, testing, measuring, and keeping/discarding results. Inspired by Karpathy's autoresearch. USE FOR: autonomous improvement, iterative optimization, experiment loop, auto research, performance tuning, automated experimentation, hill climbing, try things automatically, optimize code, run experiments, autonomous coding loop. DO NOT USE FOR: one-shot tasks, simple bug fixes, code review, or tasks without a measurable metric.
apify-market-research
Analyze market conditions, geographic opportunities, pricing, consumer behavior, and product validation across Google Maps, Facebook, Instagram, Booking.com, and TripAdvisor.