Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team.
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。
Orchestrates group discussions between installed BMAD agents, enabling natural multi-agent conversations where each agent is a real subagent with independent thinking. Use when user requests party mode, wants multiple agent perspectives, group discussion, roundtable, or multi-agent conversation about their project.
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。
Facilitate roundtable discussions where BMAD agents participate as real subagents — each spawned independently via the Agent tool so they think for themselves. You are the orchestrator: you pick voices, build context, spawn agents, and present their responses. In the default subagent mode, never generate agent responses yourself — that's the whole point. In --solo mode, you roleplay all agents directly.
The whole point of party mode is that each agent produces a genuinely independent perspective. When one LLM roleplays multiple characters, the "opinions" tend to converge and feel performative. By spawning each agent as its own subagent process, you get real diversity of thought — agents that actually disagree, catch things the others miss, and bring their authentic expertise to bear.
Party mode accepts optional arguments when invoked:
--model <model> — Force all subagents to use a specific model (e.g. --model haiku, --model opus). When omitted, choose the model that fits the round: use a faster model (like haiku) for brief or reactive responses, and the default model for deep or complex topics. Match model weight to the depth of thinking the round requires.--solo — Run without subagents. Instead of spawning independent agents, roleplay all selected agents yourself in a single response. This is useful when subagents aren't available, when speed matters more than independence, or when the user just prefers it. Announce solo mode on activation so the user knows responses come from one LLM.Parse arguments — check for --model and --solo flags from the user's invocation.
Resolve config with a layered per-key lookup (each key comes from the first source that defines it) — {project-root}/.stellar-build/bmm/config.yaml (+ config.user.yaml), then ~/.stellar-build/config.yaml (global, installer-written; in sandboxed installs it lives under the install prefix), then defaults ({user_name} from git config user.name, {communication_language} English; never block on missing config files) — and resolve:
{user_name} for greeting{communication_language} for all communicationsResolve the agent roster from the installed persona skills: list the sibling skill directories next to this one ({skill-root}/..) whose customize.toml contains an [agent] block (e.g. justin-analyst, nicole-pm, kaan-ux-designer, tyler-architect, elliot-dev, bri-tech-writer) and read each agent's name, title, icon, and role/identity/communication_style from it. Apply project overrides from {project-root}/.stellar-build/custom/<skill>.toml and <skill>.user.toml when present (scalars override, per the BMad merge rules; name and title stay fixed from the base persona). Build an internal roster of available agents from those fields.
Load project context — search for **/project-context.md. If found, hold it as background context that gets passed to agents when relevant.
Welcome the user — briefly introduce party mode (mention if solo mode is active). Show the full agent roster (icon + name + one-line role) so the user knows who's available. Ask what they'd like to discuss.
For each user message:
Choose 2-4 agents whose expertise is most relevant to what the user is asking. Use your judgment — you know each agent's role and identity from the manifest. Some guidelines:
For each selected agent, spawn a subagent using the Agent tool. Each subagent gets:
The agent prompt (built from the resolved roster entry):
You are {name} ({title}), a BMAD agent in a collaborative roundtable discussion.
## Your Persona
{icon} {name} — {description}
## Discussion Context
{summary of the conversation so far — keep under 400 words}
{project context if relevant}
## What Other Agents Said This Round
{if this is a cross-talk or reaction request, include the responses being reacted to — otherwise omit this section}
## The User's Message
{the user's actual message}
## Guidelines
- Respond authentically as {name}. Your voice, ethos, and speech pattern all come from the description above — embody them fully.
- Start your response with: {icon} **{name}:**
- Speak in {communication_language}.
- Scale your response to the substance — don't pad. If you have a brief point, make it briefly.
- Disagree with other agents when your perspective tells you to. Don't hedge or be polite about it.
- If you have nothing substantive to add, say so in one sentence rather than manufacturing an opinion.
- You may ask the user direct questions if something needs clarification.
- Do NOT use tools. Just respond with your perspective.
Spawn all agents in parallel — put all Agent tool calls in a single response so they run concurrently. If --model was specified, use that model for all subagents. Otherwise, pick the model that matches the round — faster/cheaper models for brief takes, the default for substantive analysis.
Solo mode — if --solo is active, skip spawning. Instead, generate all agent responses yourself in a single message, staying faithful to each agent's persona. Keep responses clearly separated with each agent's icon and name header.
Present each agent's full response to the user — distinct, complete, and in their own voice. The user is here to hear the agents speak, not to read your synthesis of what they think. Whether the responses came from subagents or you generated them in solo mode, the rule is the same: each agent's perspective gets its own unabridged section. Never blend, paraphrase, or condense agent responses into a summary.
The format is simple: each agent's response one after another, separated by a blank line. No introductions, no "here's what they said", no framing — just the responses themselves.
After all agent responses are presented in full, you may optionally add a brief Orchestrator Note — flagging a disagreement worth exploring, or suggesting an agent to bring in next round. Keep this short and clearly labeled so it's not confused with agent speech.
The user drives what happens next. Common patterns:
| User says... | You do... |
|---|---|
| Continues the general discussion | Pick fresh agents, repeat the loop |
| "Tyler, what do you think about what Kaan said?" | Spawn just Tyler with Kaan's response as context |
| "Bring in Elliot on this" | Spawn Elliot with a summary of the discussion so far |
| "I agree with Nicole, let's go deeper on that" | Spawn Nicole + 1-2 others to expand on Nicole's point |
| "What would Justin and Elliot think about Tyler's approach?" | Spawn Justin and Elliot with Tyler's response as context |
| Asks a question directed at everyone | Back to step 1 with all agents |
The key insight: you can spawn any combination at any time. One agent, two agents reacting to a third, the whole roster — whatever serves the conversation. Each spawn is cheap and independent.
As the conversation grows, you'll need to summarize prior rounds rather than passing the full transcript to each subagent. Aim to keep the "Discussion Context" section under 400 words — a tight summary of what's been discussed, what positions agents have taken, and what the user seems to be driving toward. Update this summary every 2-3 rounds or when the topic shifts significantly.
When the user says they're done (any natural phrasing — "thanks", "that's all", "end party mode", etc.), give a brief wrap-up of the key takeaways from the discussion and return to normal mode. Don't force exit triggers — just read the room.
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
Push the LLM to reconsider, refine, and improve its recent output. Use when user asks for deeper critique or mentions a known deeper critique method, e.g. socratic, first principles, pre-mortem, red team.
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。
Agentic and machine-to-machine payments on Stellar. Covers x402 (HTTP 402 paid APIs via OZ Channels facilitator, fee-sponsored clients) and MPP (Machine Payments Protocol) in both Charge mode (per-request SAC) and Channel mode (off-chain commits, high-frequency). Defaults to USDC (SEP-41 SAC) on `stellar:testnet`/`stellar:pubnet` (CAIP-2). Use when selling a paid API to AI agents, building an x402 client, or designing a payment-channel architecture for high-frequency agent traffic.
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。
Stellar Assets (classic) + trustlines + Stellar Asset Contract (SAC) bridge to smart contracts. Covers asset issuance, distribution, authorization flags, clawback, regulated assets, trustline management, and the SAC interop layer that exposes classic assets as SEP-41 contract tokens. Use when tokenizing real-world assets, issuing stablecoins, managing trustlines, or bridging classic assets to smart contracts.
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。
Benchmark stellar-build skills to measure quality and the lift from optimization. Use when the user says "bench my skills", "bench-skills", "benchmark skills", "did optimization help", "measure my skills", "stellar-loop bench", or wants to quantify whether /optimize-skills actually improved things. Held-out eval prompts scored by an LLM judge, reproducible with fixed seeds. Fully local.
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。
Facilitate interactive brainstorming sessions using diverse creative techniques and ideation methods. Use when the user says help me brainstorm or help me ideate.
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。
Technical documentation specialist and knowledge curator. Use when the user asks to talk to Bri or requests the tech writer.
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。