subagent-driven-development

Execute implementation plans by dispatching a fresh subagent per task with two-stage review (spec compliance then code quality). Use when you have an implementation plan with mostly independent tasks and want high-quality, fast iteration within a single session.

7 stars

Best use case

subagent-driven-development is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.

Execute implementation plans by dispatching a fresh subagent per task with two-stage review (spec compliance then code quality). Use when you have an implementation plan with mostly independent tasks and want high-quality, fast iteration within a single session.

Teams using subagent-driven-development 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

$curl -o ~/.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md --create-dirs "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wpank/ai/main/skills/tools/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md"

Manual Installation

  1. Download SKILL.md from GitHub
  2. Place it in .claude/skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md inside your project
  3. Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill

How subagent-driven-development Compares

Feature / Agentsubagent-driven-developmentStandard Approach
Platform SupportNot specifiedLimited / Varies
Context Awareness High Baseline
Installation ComplexityUnknownN/A

Frequently Asked Questions

What does this skill do?

Execute implementation plans by dispatching a fresh subagent per task with two-stage review (spec compliance then code quality). Use when you have an implementation plan with mostly independent tasks and want high-quality, fast iteration within a single session.

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

# Subagent-Driven Development

Execute a plan by dispatching a fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after each — spec compliance first, then code quality.

**Core principle:** Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review = no context pollution, high quality, fast iteration.


## Installation

### OpenClaw / Moltbot / Clawbot

```bash
npx clawhub@latest install subagent-driven-development
```


## When to Use This Skill

- You have an implementation plan with discrete, mostly independent tasks
- You want to execute the plan within a single session (no human-in-the-loop between tasks)
- Tasks can be implemented and reviewed sequentially without tight coupling

| Condition                     | This Skill     | Alternative                         |
| ----------------------------- | -------------- | ----------------------------------- |
| Have a plan, same session     | **Yes**        | —                                   |
| Have a plan, parallel session | No             | executing-plans                     |
| No plan yet                   | No             | Write a plan first                  |
| Tasks tightly coupled         | No             | Manual execution or decompose more  |

## The Process

```
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  1. Read plan, extract ALL tasks with full text      │
│  2. Note shared context (arch, deps, conventions)    │
│  3. Create TodoWrite with all tasks                  │
└──────────────────────┬──────────────────────────────┘
                       ▼
          ┌────── Per Task ──────┐
          │                      │
          │  Dispatch Implementer (references/implementer-prompt.md)
          │       │                                │
          │       ▼                                │
          │  Questions?──yes──► Answer, re-dispatch│
          │       │no                              │
          │       ▼                                │
          │  Implement + test + commit + self-review│
          │       │                                │
          │       ▼                                │
          │  Dispatch Spec Reviewer (references/spec-reviewer-prompt.md)
          │       │                                │
          │       ▼                                │
          │  Compliant?──no──► Implementer fixes──┘
          │       │yes             then re-review
          │       ▼
          │  Dispatch Code Reviewer (references/code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md)
          │       │
          │       ▼
          │  Approved?──no──► Implementer fixes, re-review
          │       │yes
          │       ▼
          │  Mark task complete
          └───────┬──────────────┘
                  ▼
          More tasks? ──yes──► next task
                  │no
                  ▼
          Final cross-task code review
                  ▼
          Finish development branch
```

## Prompt Templates

Three reference prompts are provided for the subagent roles:

| Role               | File                                        | Purpose                                |
| ------------------ | ------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------- |
| **Implementer**    | `references/implementer-prompt.md`          | Implement, test, commit, self-review   |
| **Spec reviewer**  | `references/spec-reviewer-prompt.md`        | Verify code matches spec exactly       |
| **Code reviewer**  | `references/code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md`| Verify code is clean and maintainable  |

## Example Workflow

```
Controller: Reading plan — 5 tasks extracted, TodoWrite created.

─── Task 1: Hook installation script ───

[Dispatch implementer with full task text + context]

Implementer: "Should the hook be installed at user or system level?"
Controller:  "User level (~/.config/hooks/)"

Implementer: ✅ Implemented install-hook command
  - Added tests (5/5 passing)
  - Self-review: missed --force flag, added it
  - Committed

[Dispatch spec reviewer]
Spec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant — all requirements met

[Dispatch code reviewer with git SHAs]
Code reviewer: ✅ Approved — clean, good coverage

[Mark Task 1 complete]

─── Task 2: Recovery modes ───

[Dispatch implementer]

Implementer: ✅ Added verify/repair modes (8/8 tests passing)

[Dispatch spec reviewer]
Spec reviewer: ❌ Issues:
  - Missing: progress reporting ("report every 100 items")
  - Extra: added --json flag (not in spec)

[Implementer fixes: remove --json, add progress reporting]
Spec reviewer: ✅ Spec compliant

[Dispatch code reviewer]
Code reviewer: Important — magic number 100, extract constant

[Implementer fixes: extract PROGRESS_INTERVAL]
Code reviewer: ✅ Approved

[Mark Task 2 complete]

... (tasks 3-5) ...

[Final cross-task code review]
Final reviewer: ✅ All requirements met, ready to merge
```

## Controller Responsibilities

The controller (you) orchestrates the flow. Key duties:

| Responsibility                    | Detail                                                    |
| --------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Extract tasks upfront**         | Read plan once, extract all task text — subagents never read the plan file |
| **Provide full context**          | Give each subagent the complete task text + architectural context          |
| **Answer questions**              | Respond clearly and completely before letting subagent proceed            |
| **Enforce review order**          | Spec compliance first, code quality second — never reversed              |
| **Track progress**                | Update TodoWrite after each task completes                               |
| **Dispatch sequentially**         | One implementation subagent at a time to avoid conflicts                  |

## Quality Gates

Each task passes through three quality checks:

| Gate               | Who             | What                                              |
| ------------------ | --------------- | ------------------------------------------------- |
| **Self-review**    | Implementer     | Completeness, naming, YAGNI, test quality          |
| **Spec review**    | Spec reviewer   | Matches requirements exactly — nothing more, less  |
| **Code review**    | Code reviewer   | Clean code, maintainability, test coverage         |

## Advantages

**vs. manual execution:**
- Fresh context per task (no confusion from accumulated state)
- Subagents follow TDD naturally
- Questions surfaced before work begins, not after

**vs. parallel-session plans:**
- No handoff overhead
- Continuous progress
- Review checkpoints are automatic

**Cost trade-off:** More subagent invocations (implementer + 2 reviewers per task), but catches issues early — cheaper than debugging later.

## NEVER Do

- **Skip either review** — both spec compliance and code quality are mandatory
- **Start code review before spec review passes** — wrong order wastes effort on code that doesn't meet spec
- **Dispatch multiple implementers in parallel** — causes merge conflicts and context corruption
- **Make subagents read the plan file** — provide full task text directly
- **Skip scene-setting context** — subagent needs to understand where the task fits architecturally
- **Ignore subagent questions** — answer fully before they proceed
- **Accept "close enough" on spec compliance** — if the reviewer found issues, it's not done
- **Skip re-review after fixes** — reviewer found issues → implementer fixes → reviewer reviews again
- **Let self-review replace actual review** — self-review is a first pass, not a substitute
- **Move to next task with open review issues** — current task must be fully approved first
- **Fix issues manually instead of through a subagent** — manual fixes pollute controller context

## Handling Failures

| Situation                    | Response                                              |
| ---------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------- |
| Subagent asks questions      | Answer clearly, provide additional context if needed  |
| Reviewer finds issues        | Same implementer subagent fixes, reviewer re-reviews  |
| Subagent fails task entirely | Dispatch a new fix subagent with specific instructions |
| Task blocked by dependency   | Reorder remaining tasks or resolve dependency first    |

Related Skills

context-driven-development

7
from wpank/ai

Treat project context as a managed artifact alongside code. Use structured context documents (product.md, tech-stack.md, workflow.md) to enable consistent AI interactions and team alignment. Essential for projects using AI-assisted development.

api-development

7
from wpank/ai

Meta-skill that orchestrates the full API development lifecycle — from design through documentation — by coordinating specialized skills, agents, and commands into a seamless build workflow.

schema-markup

7
from wpank/ai

Add, fix, or optimize schema markup and structured data. Use when the user mentions schema markup, structured data, JSON-LD, rich snippets, schema.org, FAQ schema, product schema, review schema, or breadcrumb schema.

prompt-engineering

7
from wpank/ai

Master advanced prompt engineering techniques to maximize LLM performance, reliability, and controllability in production. Use when optimizing prompts, improving LLM outputs, designing production prompt templates, or building AI-powered features.

professional-communication

7
from wpank/ai

Write effective professional messages for software teams. Use when drafting emails, Slack/Teams messages, meeting agendas, status updates, or translating technical concepts for non-technical audiences. Triggers on email, slack, teams, message, meeting agenda, status update, stakeholder communication, escalation, jargon translation.

persona-docs

7
from wpank/ai

Create persona documentation for a product or codebase. Use when asked to create persona docs, document target users, define user journeys, document onboarding flows, or when starting a new product and needing to define its audience. Persona docs should be the first documentation created for any product.

mermaid-diagrams

7
from wpank/ai

Create software diagrams using Mermaid syntax. Use when users need to create, visualize, or document software through diagrams including class diagrams, sequence diagrams, flowcharts, ERDs, C4 architecture diagrams, state diagrams, git graphs, and other diagram types. Triggers include requests to diagram, visualize, model, map out, or show the flow of a system.

game-changing-features

7
from wpank/ai

Find 10x product opportunities and high-leverage improvements. Use when the user wants strategic product thinking, mentions 10x, wants to find high-impact features, or asks what would make a product dramatically more valuable.

clear-writing

7
from wpank/ai

Write clear, concise prose for humans — documentation, READMEs, API docs, commit messages, error messages, UI text, reports, and explanations. Combines Strunk's rules for clearer prose with technical documentation patterns, structure templates, and review checklists.

brainstorming

7
from wpank/ai

Explore ideas before implementation through collaborative dialogue. Use before any creative work — creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Turns ideas into fully formed designs and specs through structured conversation.

Article Illustrator

7
from wpank/ai

When the user wants to add illustrations to an article or blog post. Triggers on: "illustrate article", "add images to article", "generate illustrations", "article images", or requests to visually enhance written content. Analyzes article structure, identifies positions for visual aids, and generates illustrations using a Type x Style two-dimension approach.

skill-judge

7
from wpank/ai

Evaluate Agent Skill quality against official specifications. Use when reviewing SKILL.md files, auditing skill packages, improving skill design, or checking if a skill follows best practices. Provides 8-dimension scoring (120 points) with actionable improvements. Triggers on review skill, evaluate skill, audit skill, improve skill, skill quality, SKILL.md review.