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