Agents & OrchestrationSûr100100/100
Orch Pipeline
Shared orchestration engine for the orch-* skill family. Defines the gated Research-Plan-TDD-Review-Commit pipeline, the size classifier, the agent map, and the two human gates that the orch-* operation skills delegate to. Not usually invoked directly.
ou envoie-le directement à ton agent.
Installer dans ton projet
$ npx arboris-cli@latest install orch-pipelineaffaan-m
affaan-m/ECC
Contenu à copier
--- name: orch-pipeline description: Shared orchestration engine for the orch-* skill family. Defines the gated Research-Plan-TDD-Review-Commit pipeline, the size classifier, the agent map, and the two human gates that the orch-* operation skills delegate to. Not usually invoked directly. metadata: origin: ECC --- # Orchestrator Pipeline (shared engine) The `orch-*` skills are thin wrappers. They do not re-implement any work — they classify the request, choose which phases of *this* pipeline run, and delegate each phase to an existing ECC agent or command. This file is that pipeline. > Invoke an operation skill (`orch-add-feature`, `orch-fix-defect`, …) rather > than this engine directly. This file is the reference they point at. ## When to Use - Loaded indirectly whenever an `orch-*` operation skill runs. - Read directly only when adding a new operation to the family or tuning the shared phases, gates, or agent map. ## The operation family | Skill | Operation | Trigger | First move | |-------|-----------|---------|------------| | `orch-add-feature` | feature | capability does not exist yet | research + plan a new slice | | `orch-change-feature` | tweak | works, but desired behavior differs | amend existing behavior *and its tests* | | `orch-fix-defect` | fix | broken; behavior is wrong | reproduce as a failing test, then fix | | `orch-refine-code` | refactor | behavior stays, structure improves | restructure while keeping tests green | | `orch-build-mvp` | mvp | bootstrap from a design/spec doc | ingest doc → vertical slices | > These wrappers **compose** existing ECC commands rather than replace them: > `/feature-dev`, `/plan`, `/code-review`, `/build-fix`, `/refactor-clean`, and > `/gan-build`, plus the `tdd-workflow` skill. The orch-* family adds the shared > size classifier and the two gates > on top of them, so one umbrella covers all five operations consistently. ## Step 0 — Classify size (right-sizing) Ceremony scales to blast radius. Score the request on three signals, take the **highest** tier any signal reaches, and state the result in one line so the user can override: | Tier | Files touched | New dependency / contract | Design ambiguity | Phases that run | |------|---------------|---------------------------|------------------|-----------------| | trivial | 1, a few lines | none | none — the change is obvious | 4 → 5 → 6 | | small | 1 file / 1 function | none | clear once you read the code | (1 light) → 4 → 5 → 6 | | standard | 2–5 files | maybe a new internal module | one real choice to make | 1 → 2 → 4 → 5 → 6 | | large | many / cross-cutting | new external dep, public API, or a spec doc | multiple open questions | 1 → 2 → (3) → 4 → 5 → 6 | Phase 0 (Intake) always runs and is omitted from the mask column above. The tie-breaker: anything touching a security trigger (below) or a public API / contract is **at least** standard, regardless of file count. ## The phases Each phase delegates — it does not do the work inline. - **0. Intake** — restate the request. For `orch-build-mvp`, read the spec/design doc and extract scope, locked decisions, and a feature list. - **1. Research & Reuse** — per `rules/common/development-workflow.md`: `gh search repos` / `gh search code`, then Context7 / vendor docs, then package registries, then Exa. Prefer adopting a proven implementation over net-new code. - **2. Plan** — delegate to the `planner` agent (or `architect` / `code-architect` for structural decisions). Output a `task_list` ordered as thin vertical slices. → **GATE 1.** - **3. Scaffold** — `orch-build-mvp` only: stand up the first end-to-end slice. - **4. Implement (TDD)** — drive each task through the `tdd-guide` agent (or the `tdd-workflow` skill): red → green → refactor. Honor the operation's first-move rule. - **5. Review** — `code-reviewer` agent / `/code-review`. Add `security-reviewer` whenever the diff touches a security trigger (below). - **6. Commit** — conventional commits (`feat:` / `fix:` / `refactor:` / …), one per logical chunk. → **GATE 2.** ## The two gates This family is **gated, not autonomous**: 1. **GATE 1 — after Plan.** Present the `task_list`; do not write implementation code until the user approves. 2. **GATE 2 — before Commit.** Present the diff summary and proposed messages; do not commit until the user confirms. Everything between the gates flows without stopping. ## Agent / command map | Phase | Primary | Fallback / escalation | |-------|---------|----------------------| | Intake / understand | `code-explorer` | trace existing paths before a tweak, fix, or refactor | | Plan | `planner` | `architect`, `code-architect` for structural calls | | Implement | `tdd-guide` (or `tdd-workflow` skill) | `build-error-resolver` / `/build-fix` on build breaks | | Review | `code-reviewer` / `/code-review` | language reviewer (`python-reviewer`, `typescript-reviewer`, …) | | Security | `security-reviewer` | — | | MVP inner loop | `/gan-build "<brief>" --skip-planner` | drives `gan-generator` → `gan-evaluator`; tune `--max-iterations` / `--pass-threshold` | Match the language reviewer to the repo (see the repo's own `CLAUDE.md`). ## Security-review trigger Pull in `security-reviewer` when the diff touches any of: authentication or authorization, user-input handling, database queries, file-system paths, external API calls, cryptography, or secrets / credentials. (Per `rules/common/security.md`.) ## Handoff artifacts The pipeline carries no hidden state — the planning docs *are* the handoff: - `task_list` (from Plan) drives the Implement loop. - Larger work may also emit PRD / architecture / system_design under the repo's `docs/` per `rules/common/development-workflow.md`. - Review findings (CRITICAL / HIGH) must be resolved before Gate 2. ## Verification - size tier was stated and matched the work - Gate 1 (plan) and Gate 2 (commit) were both honored - `security-reviewer` ran iff a security trigger was touched - commits are conventional and scoped to one logical change - new / changed behavior has tests; coverage ≥ 80% per `rules/common/testing.md`
Colle ce Markdown dans ton agent ou utilise les boutons ci-dessus pour l’écrire dans ton projet.
Ce que fait Orch Pipeline
Loaded indirectly whenever an `orch-*` operation skill runs.
Read directly only when adding a new operation to the family or tuning the
**0. Intake** — restate the request. For `orch-build-mvp`, read the spec/design
**1. Research & Reuse** — per `rules/common/development-workflow.md`: `gh search repos` /
Comment utiliser Orch Pipeline
1
Copie le prompt
Un clic copie le prompt packagé (ou l'envoie à ton agent).
2
L'agent installe le skill
Il ajoute le SKILL.md et ses ressources à ton projet.
3
Activation automatique
Le skill s'active dès que le contexte correspond.
Déclencheurs pour Orch Pipeline
Dis simplement à ton agent quelque chose comme :
Applique le skill orch-pipeline à cette tâche
Utilise orch-pipeline pour améliorer cette implémentation
Passe en revue ce sujet avec orch-pipeline
Skills liés à Orch Pipeline
Acceleration (Microsoft)
Compare synthetic acceleration options and clearly separate scenario value from forecast commitments.Account Overview (Microsoft)
Create a synthetic Acme account overview and identify evidence that merits seller attention.Acroform Writer (Microsoft)
Use this skill whenever the user wants values written INTO an existing PDF form that lives in the connected SharePoint knowledge source — filling out, completing, populating, or submitting a fillable PDF (application, intake sheet, contract, government form) from data they supply, a spreadsheet row, or the conversation. Triggers include "fill out the job application form", "complete the intake form for [person]", "populate our standard NDA template", and "make this ready to send / non-editable" (flatten). The source form should be found via knowledge search; only ask the user to upload it if knowledge search turns up nothing plausible. different task), and do NOT use it on scanned/image-only PDFs that have no real fillable fields — those need OCR or manual overlay instead, which this skill explicitly detects and reports rather than silently failing.