Universal guardrails loaded by every agent. Defines Verify Before Reporting (VBR), Write-Ahead Log (WAL), and the security baseline. Always-on, role-independent.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use when: planner mode, planning mode, proposal, scope definition, estimate, timeline, how hard, feasibility, effort, how long, how big, client message, external communication, pricing, delivery confidence, commercial risk, or project delivery planning.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
See how to installReview the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
Use this mode when work touches external promises, client wording, scope, price, timeline, commercial assumptions, delivery confidence, proposal support, or project sequencing.
Architect remains accountable for the internal draft. The team lead remains the external gate.
Load this skill when:
Architect should also load this skill automatically when a task involves external messaging, pricing, bid support, or anything that could become a client-facing commitment.
Classify the request:
Extract:
## Planner Draft
**Purpose:** [why this draft exists]
**Audience:** [team-lead internal | client-ready draft for team lead review]
**Commitment Status:** Draft only. Team lead approval required before external use.
### Scope Summary
[what is included]
### Exclusions
[what is not included]
### Assumptions
- [assumption and verification need]
### Delivery Risks
| Risk | Impact | Mitigation | Owner |
| ---- | ------ | ---------- | ----- |
| ... | ... | ... | ... |
### Confidence
[High | Medium | Low] - [short reason]
### Team Lead Decisions Needed
- [decision]
### Draft Wording
[client-safe wording, if requested]
If the BD/delivery question depends on unsettled technical architecture, load architecture-mode first. Do not draft confident scope, timeline, or client wording while the technical basis is unresolved.
## Planner Draft
**Purpose:** Scope and effort estimate for an AI agent workflow build
**Audience:** Team-lead internal
**Commitment Status:** Draft only. Team lead approval required before external use.
### Scope Summary
Build and deploy three AI agents (Architect, Builder, Tester) using the agistra agent framework into the client's existing VS Code + GitHub workflow. Includes: agent definitions, skill configuration, memory scaffold, deploy CLI setup, and one end-to-end test run of the ticket lifecycle.
### Exclusions
- CI/CD pipeline changes
- Custom skill authoring beyond the standard library
- Ongoing maintenance or hosted infrastructure
### Assumptions
- Client has an existing Node.js/npm environment — **verify before commit**
- Client uses GitHub for issue tracking — **verify before commit**
- One-week timeline assumes availability of a technical contact for 2 hrs/day
### Delivery Risks
| Risk | Impact | Mitigation | Owner |
| ---- | ------ | ---------- | ----- |
| Client environment incompatible with deploy CLI | Blocks setup | Pre-qualify environment in discovery call | Team lead |
| Scope creep into custom skill authoring | +2–3 days | Explicitly exclude in engagement letter | Team lead |
| No existing ticket workflow | Delays lifecycle test | Agree on a minimal GitHub Projects board | Consultant |
### Confidence
Medium — timeline estimate assumes smooth environment setup. Add 2-day buffer if environment has not been pre-qualified.
### Team Lead Decisions Needed
- Approve or adjust the exclusions list before sharing with client
- Confirm whether custom skill authoring is in scope (affects price)
- Sign off on the confidence level before committing to a delivery date
### Draft Wording
"We will set up your AI agent workflow — including agent definitions, skill configuration, and an end-to-end test of the ticket lifecycle — within one week, assuming your team can provide 2 hours of availability per day for environment access and feedback."
Planner mode is complete when Architect has produced an internal team-lead-reviewable draft, surfaced assumptions and risks, and made clear what the team lead must approve before anything external happens.
No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
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.
Universal guardrails loaded by every agent. Defines Verify Before Reporting (VBR), Write-Ahead Log (WAL), and the security baseline. Always-on, role-independent.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use when: architecture mode, architect this, ADR, C4, PlantUML, system boundary, design decision, PRD gap, high ambiguity, multiple technical approaches, security architecture, data architecture, integration risk, implementability gap, story ticket, or epic ticket.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use when: assumptions audit, audit assumptions, check for hidden assumptions, plan/ticket has ambiguous scope edges, pre-flight before finalizing a ticket, unstated assumptions, or 'what am I assuming'. Surfaces unstated assumptions, ambiguous scope edges, and untested preconditions in a finished plan/ticket/ADR before it is handed to Builder. Optional pass — Architect judges when to apply it; not a mandatory gate on every ticket.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use when: Tester needs UI state evidence for VBR, or Builder needs to verify an integration wire is observable end-to-end. Powered by agent-browser MCP — token-efficient browser automation (200–400 tokens/page).
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Use when drafting a bug or defect ticket, reviewing one someone else wrote, or deciding whether a reported problem is ready to file. Keeps what the reporter actually saw separate from what the agent later found out, so a reader can tell which lines are testimony and which are collected proof. Trigger phrases: 'file a bug', 'write up this defect', 'triage this report', 'is this ticket ready to file', 'what did the reporter actually see'.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.
Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch.
The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.