A fixture whose description uses a YAML folded scalar, which parses with an embedded trailing newline unless normalized before use in Markdown tables.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Dispatch and supervise parallel specialist agents with durable task state. Use when automated multi-agent execution is requested.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Automatically orchestrate multi-agent execution with task decomposition, native/fallback dispatch, memory coordination, progress monitoring, verification, QA cross-review, retry, and result collection.
.agents/oma-config.yaml, .codex/agents/*.toml, .gemini/agents/*.md, or fallback oma agent spawndomain_tags by matching against the Intent signature block of each installed .agents/skills/oma-*/SKILL.md. Tasks that match no domain confidently inherit the union of their parent feature's tags.oma verify, and QA cross-review loop.partial or failed; never force completion.| Action | SSL primitive | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Read config and task context | READ | oma config, routing, request |
| Classify task into domain tags | INFER | task text vs each skill's Intent signature |
| Select task references | SELECT | confident domain matches, dependencies, and supported context controls |
| Select dispatch path | SELECT | Native vs fallback |
| Write session state | WRITE | task board and memory files |
| Spawn agents | CALL_TOOL | exposed native role-subagent tool or oma agent spawn |
| Poll progress | READ | progress/result files |
| Run verification | CALL_TOOL | oma verify, tests, QA |
| Update retry state | UPDATE_STATE | loop counters and CD metrics |
| Report final result | NOTIFY | compiled summary |
oma agent spawn <agent-type> <prompt-file> <session-id> --task-id <task.id> -w <workspace>
oma verify agent <agent-type> --workspace <workspace> --json
When native runtime dispatch is available, prefer the runtime-specific native path listed in this skill before falling back to oma agent spawn.
| Scope | Resource target |
|---|---|
LOCAL_FS | Session, task-board, progress, result, config files |
PROCESS | Agent CLI processes and verify scripts |
MEMORY | Session state and unresolved decisions |
CODEBASE | Workspaces owned by spawned agents |
target_vendor === current_runtime_vendor and the runtime has a verified native path, use native dispatch.oma agent spawn.Current native executor paths:
.claude/agents/{agent}.md definitions (multiple Agent tool calls in one message run in parallel; results return synchronously — no polling)task tool with subagent_type: {agent-id}; do not use oma agent spawn for same-session OpenCode work because it will not appear as a native child task.codex/agents/*.toml when supported; otherwise use oma agent spawn.oma agent spawn.codex exec and gemini -p start external CLI sessions. An @agent string in a prompt does not establish native dispatch or apply a custom-role contract.
| Setting | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|
| MAX_PARALLEL | 3 | Max concurrent subagents |
| MAX_RECOVERY_ATTEMPTS | 3 | Total retries and exploration hypotheses per task, including the original attempt |
| POLL_INTERVAL | 30s | Status check interval |
| Turn guidance | role-specific | Checkpoint/resume signal, not a hard stop or approval boundary |
These are workflow defaults. Resolve model/vendor, parallelism, and budget settings from project configuration. config/cli-config.yaml supplies the vendor transport registry; it does not select the active vendor or override runtime execution settings.
Memory provider and tool names are configurable via .agents/mcp.json (not the repo-root .mcp.json, which is the Claude Code MCP server config):
{
"memoryConfig": {
"provider": "file",
"basePath": ".agents/state/memories",
"tools": {
"read": "Read",
"write": "Write",
"edit": "Edit"
}
}
}
PHASE 1 - Plan: Reuse the current valid plan or decompose the request; preserve injected session/task/run IDs.
PHASE 1.5 - References: Select task references as described in Entry; record uncertainty and expansion reasons without assuming runtime enforcement.
PHASE 2 - Setup: Create session/task-board artifacts with the current IDs and selected references.
PHASE 3 - Execute: Dispatch ready tasks within MAX_PARALLEL using supported native or fallback context controls.
PHASE 4 - Monitor: Poll every POLL_INTERVAL; handle completed/failed/crashed agents
PHASE 4.5 - Verify: Run mechanical checks for every completed agent; run oma verify agent {agent-type} only for backend, frontend, mobile, qa, debug, and pm; then run QA cross-review for every completed implementation
PHASE 5 - Collect: Read claims and run-scoped reports for plan tasks whose checks passed; compile summary without deleting evidence.
| File | Owner | Others |
|---|---|---|
orchestrator-session-{sessionId}.md | orchestrator | read-only |
task-board-{sessionId}.md | orchestrator | read-only |
progress-{agentId}-{taskId}-{runId}-{sessionId}.md | that run | orchestrator reads |
result-{agentId}-{taskId}-{runId}-{sessionId}.md | that run | orchestrator reads |
After each agent completes, enter an iterative review loop, not a single-pass verification.
Agent completes work
↓
[1] Mechanical Self-Check: lint, type-check, tests, diff scope
↓
[2] Verify: For supported types, run `oma verify agent {agent-type} --workspace {workspace}`
Unsupported (`db`, `refactor`, `architecture`, `tf-infra`, `docs`) → record SKIP and continue
↓ FAIL → Agent receives feedback, fixes, back to [1]
↓ PASS
[3] Cross-Review: QA agent reviews the changes
↓ FAIL → Agent receives review feedback, fixes, back to [1]
↓ PASS
Accept result
[1] Mechanical Self-Check (formerly "Self-Review"): Before requesting external review, the implementation agent must:
Quality judgment is NOT performed in this step. Design quality, architecture alignment, and acceptance criteria satisfaction are evaluated exclusively in [3] Cross-Review by the QA agent. Reason: Self-evaluation bias causes agents to consistently overrate their own output (ref: Anthropic harness design research).
[2] Automated Verify:
oma verify agent {agent-type} --workspace {workspace} --json
backend, frontend, mobile, qa, debug, and pm.db, refactor, architecture, tf-infra, and docs, record that automated verify is unsupported and continue to QA cross-review after the mechanical checks.[3] Cross-Review: Spawn QA agent to review the changes:
docs/CODE-REVIEW.md exists, QA agent uses it as the review checklist| Counter | Max | On Exceeded |
|---|---|---|
| Self-check + fix cycles | 3 | Escalate to cross-review regardless |
| Cross-review rejections | 2 | Report to user with review history |
| Total loop iterations | 5 | Stop recovery; preserve failed checks and return partial or failed |
When feeding review results back to the implementation agent:
## Review Feedback (iteration {n}/{max})
**Reviewer**: {self / verify / qa-agent}
**Verdict**: FAIL
**Issues**:
1. {specific issue with file and line reference}
2. {specific issue}
**Fix instruction**: {what to change}
This replaces single-pass verification. Most "nitpicking" should happen agent-to-agent. Resolve relevant automated checks before handoff. Ask for approval only when the next action is outside existing authorization.
Maintain one budget per workflow lineage and logical goal: attempts_used, attempts_remaining, and any
configured cost cap. The original attempt, each ordinary retry, and each
exploration hypothesis consume one attempt. Before starting recovery, reserve
the complete next action; do not exceed the budget or start an incomplete
exploration round.
Use the plan's stable lineage_id and task goal_id from ../_shared/runtime/result-contract.md. New task/run/session IDs do not reset that budget. Freeze the full JSON plan at first dispatch; reject recursive planning/review tasks and post-dispatch plan revisions. A contract change requires an explicitly separated new session and lineage.
Classify failures before retrying: PRODUCT_FAILURE follows the remaining product recovery budget; WORKFLOW_EVIDENCE_FAILURE means current product checks passed but completion claims or bindings failed. Automatic resume stops evidence-only replay. Allow at most one metadata-only repair under the existing task and frozen plan, consuming the same budget, then stop with a partial handoff if unresolved. Do not create PM tasks, rerun product planning, or import another workflow's plan-review loop for evidence failures.
partial or failed, never completed.For material corrections or review findings, retain the cause, impact, and evidence in existing task artifacts. Use ../_shared/core/session-metrics.md when a retrospective or separate session summary is useful. Do not score clarification questions or require an RCA based on counters. Resolve the affected work and ask only for a material missing decision.
resources/subagent-prompt-template.mdresources/memory-schema.mdscripts/spawn-agent.sh, scripts/parallel-run.sh, scripts/verify.shtemplates/../_shared/core/skill-routing.mdscripts/verify.sh <agent-type>../_shared/core/session-metrics.md../_shared/core/api-contracts/template.md; read generated contracts from .agents/results/api-contracts/ (run artifact) or docs/plans/contracts/ (durable spec)../_shared/core/context-loading.md../_shared/core/difficulty-guide.md (unresolved scope or dependencies)../_shared/core/clarification-protocol.md../_shared/core/context-budget.md../_shared/core/code-intelligence.md../_shared/core/lessons-learned.md (recurring failure or requested retrospective)まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
A fixture whose description uses a YAML folded scalar, which parses with an embedded trailing newline unless normalized before use in Markdown tables.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Draft and revise academic prose against a rubric, evidence, and citation requirements. Use for essays, reports, literature reviews, or academic style audits.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Evaluate system boundaries and architectural tradeoffs. Use for architecture decisions, design reviews, and ADRs.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Architecture specialist for software/system design, module and service boundaries, tradeoff analysis, and stakeholder synthesis. Uses context-aware methods such as diagnostic routing, design-twice comparison, ATAM-style risk analysis, CBAM-style prioritization, and ADR-style decision records.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Backend specialist for APIs, databases, authentication with clean architecture (Repository/Service/Router pattern). Use for API, endpoint, REST, database, server, migration, and auth work.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Implement server APIs, authentication, and application data access. Schema modeling and query tuning use oma-db.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。