Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

iterative-retrieval

Gather relevant code and background for subagents, agents assigned part of a larger task. Search broadly, assess each file, identify missing information, and refine the search for up to three cycles to assemble context for bug fixes or feature work.

OriginalShow the original description

Pattern for progressively refining context retrieval to solve the subagent context problem. Use when a subagent lacks the context it needs and retrieval must be refined across passes.

See how to install

Good for

  • Finding relevant files for a subagent assigned a bug fix
  • Gathering code patterns before implementing a feature
  • Refining searches to match terminology used in a project
  • Selecting context when agent input is missing or too large

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md6.6 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Iterative Retrieval Pattern

Solves the "context problem" in multi-agent workflows where subagents don't know what context they need until they start working.

When to Activate

  • Spawning subagents that need codebase context they cannot predict upfront
  • Building multi-agent workflows where context is progressively refined
  • Encountering "context too large" or "missing context" failures in agent tasks
  • Designing RAG-like retrieval pipelines for code exploration
  • Optimizing token usage in agent orchestration

The Problem

Subagents are spawned with limited context. They don't know:

  • Which files contain relevant code
  • What patterns exist in the codebase
  • What terminology the project uses

Standard approaches fail:

  • Send everything: Exceeds context limits
  • Send nothing: Agent lacks critical information
  • Guess what's needed: Often wrong

The Solution: Iterative Retrieval

A 4-phase loop that progressively refines context:

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                                             │
│   ┌──────────┐      ┌──────────┐            │
│   │ DISPATCH │─────│ EVALUATE │            │
│   └──────────┘      └──────────┘            │
│        ▲                  │                 │
│        │                  ▼                 │
│   ┌──────────┐      ┌──────────┐            │
│   │   LOOP   │─────│  REFINE  │            │
│   └──────────┘      └──────────┘            │
│                                             │
│        Max 3 cycles, then proceed           │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Phase 1: DISPATCH

Initial broad query to gather candidate files:

// Start with high-level intent
const initialQuery = {
  patterns: ['src/**/*.ts', 'lib/**/*.ts'],
  keywords: ['authentication', 'user', 'session'],
  excludes: ['*.test.ts', '*.spec.ts']
};

// Dispatch to retrieval agent
const candidates = await retrieveFiles(initialQuery);

Phase 2: EVALUATE

Assess retrieved content for relevance:

function evaluateRelevance(files, task) {
  return files.map(file => ({
    path: file.path,
    relevance: scoreRelevance(file.content, task),
    reason: explainRelevance(file.content, task),
    missingContext: identifyGaps(file.content, task)
  }));
}

Scoring criteria:

  • High (0.8-1.0): Directly implements target functionality
  • Medium (0.5-0.7): Contains related patterns or types
  • Low (0.2-0.4): Tangentially related
  • None (0-0.2): Not relevant, exclude

Phase 3: REFINE

Update search criteria based on evaluation:

function refineQuery(evaluation, previousQuery) {
  return {
    // Add new patterns discovered in high-relevance files
    patterns: [...previousQuery.patterns, ...extractPatterns(evaluation)],

    // Add terminology found in codebase
    keywords: [...previousQuery.keywords, ...extractKeywords(evaluation)],

    // Exclude confirmed irrelevant paths
    excludes: [...previousQuery.excludes, ...evaluation
      .filter(e => e.relevance < 0.2)
      .map(e => e.path)
    ],

    // Target specific gaps
    focusAreas: evaluation
      .flatMap(e => e.missingContext)
      .filter(unique)
  };
}

Phase 4: LOOP

Repeat with refined criteria (max 3 cycles):

async function iterativeRetrieve(task, maxCycles = 3) {
  let query = createInitialQuery(task);
  let bestContext = [];

  for (let cycle = 0; cycle < maxCycles; cycle++) {
    const candidates = await retrieveFiles(query);
    const evaluation = evaluateRelevance(candidates, task);

    // Check if we have sufficient context
    const highRelevance = evaluation.filter(e => e.relevance >= 0.7);
    if (highRelevance.length >= 3 && !hasCriticalGaps(evaluation)) {
      return highRelevance;
    }

    // Refine and continue
    query = refineQuery(evaluation, query);
    bestContext = mergeContext(bestContext, highRelevance);
  }

  return bestContext;
}

Practical Examples

Example 1: Bug Fix Context

Task: "Fix the authentication token expiry bug"

Cycle 1:
  DISPATCH: Search for "token", "auth", "expiry" in src/**
  EVALUATE: Found auth.ts (0.9), tokens.ts (0.8), user.ts (0.3)
  REFINE: Add "refresh", "jwt" keywords; exclude user.ts

Cycle 2:
  DISPATCH: Search refined terms
  EVALUATE: Found session-manager.ts (0.95), jwt-utils.ts (0.85)
  REFINE: Sufficient context (2 high-relevance files)

Result: auth.ts, tokens.ts, session-manager.ts, jwt-utils.ts

Example 2: Feature Implementation

Task: "Add rate limiting to API endpoints"

Cycle 1:
  DISPATCH: Search "rate", "limit", "api" in routes/**
  EVALUATE: No matches - codebase uses "throttle" terminology
  REFINE: Add "throttle", "middleware" keywords

Cycle 2:
  DISPATCH: Search refined terms
  EVALUATE: Found throttle.ts (0.9), middleware/index.ts (0.7)
  REFINE: Need router patterns

Cycle 3:
  DISPATCH: Search "router", "express" patterns
  EVALUATE: Found router-setup.ts (0.8)
  REFINE: Sufficient context

Result: throttle.ts, middleware/index.ts, router-setup.ts

Integration with Agents

Use in agent prompts:

When retrieving context for this task:
1. Start with broad keyword search
2. Evaluate each file's relevance (0-1 scale)
3. Identify what context is still missing
4. Refine search criteria and repeat (max 3 cycles)
5. Return files with relevance >= 0.7

Best Practices

  1. Start broad, narrow progressively - Don't over-specify initial queries
  2. Learn codebase terminology - First cycle often reveals naming conventions
  3. Track what's missing - Explicit gap identification drives refinement
  4. Stop at "good enough" - 3 high-relevance files beats 10 mediocre ones
  5. Exclude confidently - Low-relevance files won't become relevant

Related

  • The Longform Guide - Subagent orchestration section
  • continuous-learning skill - For patterns that improve over time
  • Agent definitions bundled with ECC (manual install path: agents/)

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

accessibility

FreeSummary

Design and audit interfaces for Web, iOS, and Android using WCAG 2.2 accessibility guidance. Check screen-reader labels, keyboard navigation, contrast, and control sizes to identify barriers and guide implementation for people using assistive technology.

  • Adding descriptive labels to icon-only buttons
  • Reviewing keyboard navigation and modal focus
  • Checking contrast and control sizes
affaan-m/ECC283.2KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Investigate unreliable AI agents across 12 layers, including instructions, memory, tool execution, and display. Use code and logs to trace failures, rank findings by severity, and produce an ordered repair plan that prioritizes code changes.

  • Investigating failures that appear only inside an agent application
  • Tracing old conversation content leaking into new sessions
  • Checking skipped or falsely claimed tool execution
affaan-m/ECC283.2KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

agent-eval

FreeSummary

Compare coding agents on tasks from your own codebase. Define success checks, run agents in separate Git working directories, and report pass rates, available API costs, completion time, and consistency across repeated trials.

  • Comparing coding agents on real development tasks
  • Evaluating a new tool or model before adoption
  • Checking performance after agent updates
affaan-m/ECC283.2KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Design and refine an AI agent’s available actions, tool inputs, and result formats. Define recovery steps for errors, manage the information kept in context, and evaluate changes through completion rates, retries, and cost per successful task.

  • Define an AI agent’s tool set and input formats
  • Make tool results and next steps easier to interpret
  • Specify safe retries and stopping conditions
affaan-m/ECC283.2KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Diagnose failed AI agent runs by capturing errors, checking likely causes, and choosing small, reversible recovery actions. The workflow produces a structured report of the failure, recovery steps, and evidence, helping explain repeated retries or stalled progress.

  • Diagnosing repeated tool calls with no progress
  • Investigating quality loss as context grows
  • Checking file paths and environment mismatches
affaan-m/ECC283.2KUpdated Oct 16, 2026

Diagnose AI agent runs that fail repeatedly, loop through tools, or lose track of the task. Capture errors and environment details, test a focused recovery action, and produce a report explaining the evidence and outcome.

  • Diagnosing repeated failures in an agent run
  • Investigating loops through the same tool calls
  • Reviewing output degradation as context grows
affaan-m/ECC283.2KUpdated Oct 5, 2026

See all skills by affaan-m

Report a problem with this skill