Awesome-omni-skill orchestrate

Guide a project from idea to implementation using the appropriate workflow depth

install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skill
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skill "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/tools/orchestrate" ~/.claude/skills/diegosouzapw-awesome-omni-skill-orchestrate-4e3d4e && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: skills/tools/orchestrate/SKILL.md
source content

/orchestrate - Workflow Orchestration

Guide a project through the appropriate development workflow based on complexity.

Purpose

Orchestrate the full development lifecycle by:

  • Assessing project complexity
  • Selecting appropriate workflow depth
  • Coordinating agents through the workflow
  • Consulting user at key decision points
  • Ensuring artifacts flow between phases

CRITICAL: The orchestrator NEVER edits files or runs bash directly. All implementation work is delegated to subagents via the Task tool.

Context Discipline

CRITICAL for orchestration quality: Lean context = clear signal.

What to Read (High-Level Only)

  • docs/objectives/ROADMAP.md
    - milestone/phase overview
  • docs/development/BACKLOG.md
    - task table only (not full details)
  • docs/architecture/PRD.md
    - requirements summary
  • Agent results - summary output from Task tool

What to NEVER Read Directly

  • Source code files
  • Full file contents
  • Detailed implementations
  • Test files
  • Logs

Why This Matters

Cluttered context causes:

  • Missed decision points
  • Wrong workflow depth selection
  • Failure to catch blockers
  • Lost orchestration thread

Rule: If you need details, spawn an agent to analyze and summarize.

Context Budget

  • Keep orchestrator turns focused on: assess → delegate → checkpoint → proceed
  • Each phase transition: brief status, next action
  • Avoid: debugging, code review, detailed analysis (delegate these)

Inputs

  • $ARGUMENTS
    : Project idea, goal, or feature description
  • ${PROJECT_NAME}
    : Current project context
  • Existing docs in
    docs/
    (if resuming)

Outputs

Artifacts produced by each phase:

  • PRD at
    docs/architecture/PRD.md
    (/spec)
  • Architecture at
    docs/architecture/ARCHITECTURE.md
    (/design)
  • ROADMAP/BACKLOG at
    docs/objectives/
    and
    docs/development/
    (/plan)
  • Code and tests in source files (/implement)

Workflow Depths

Full Workflow

Use when: New product, complex system, multiple components, unclear requirements

/spec → /design → /plan → /implement → /validate → /deploy → /document

Phases:

  1. Specification: Elicit requirements, define acceptance criteria
  2. Design: Architecture, components, ADRs
  3. Planning: Milestones, epics, tasks
  4. Implementation: Code and tests
  5. Validation: Testing, verification
  6. Deployment: Build, deploy, release
  7. Documentation: User docs, guides

Medium Workflow

Use when: New feature, moderate complexity, clear scope

/spec → /plan → /implement → /validate

Phases:

  1. Specification: Quick PRD with acceptance criteria
  2. Planning: Task breakdown
  3. Implementation: Code and tests
  4. Validation: Testing

Light Workflow

Use when: Simple change, bug fix, clear task

/plan → /implement

Phases:

  1. Planning: Quick task definition
  2. Implementation: Code and tests

Complexity Assessment

Assess complexity to select workflow depth:

FactorScore
New system/product+3
Multiple components+2
Integration needed+2
New API+1
UI changes+1
Simple fix-2
Documentation only-3

Scoring:

  • Score >= 4: Full workflow
  • Score 1-3: Medium workflow
  • Score <= 0: Light workflow

Orchestration Process

1. Assess Request

Read

$ARGUMENTS
and assess:

  • What is being requested?
  • Is this new or modification?
  • How many components involved?
  • Are requirements clear?

2. Select Workflow Depth

Based on complexity assessment, propose a workflow:

I've assessed this as a [complexity] project.

Recommended workflow: [Full/Medium/Light]
- Phase 1: [description]
- Phase 2: [description]
...

Proceed with this workflow?

Use

AskUserQuestion
to confirm with user.

3. Execute Phases

For each phase in the selected workflow:

Option A - Agent Delegation (Recommended): Use

Task
tool to spawn the appropriate agent:

Task(subagent_type="business-analyst", prompt="Create PRD for: ...")
Task(subagent_type="architect", prompt="Design architecture for: ...")
Task(subagent_type="project-manager", prompt="Create implementation plan for: ...")
Task(subagent_type="developer", prompt="Implement task T-001: ...")

IMPORTANT: Always use Option A. The orchestrator coordinates; subagents execute.

4. Checkpoint Between Phases

After each major phase:

  • Verify artifacts were produced
  • Check for blockers or issues
  • Consult user if decisions needed
  • Proceed to next phase

5. Handle Blockers

If a phase is blocked:

  1. Document the blocker
  2. Ask user for guidance
  3. Either resolve or skip to next feasible phase

Agent Invocation Pattern

When spawning agents via Task tool:

# Spawn Business Analyst for /spec
Task(
    subagent_type="business-analyst",
    description="Generate PRD",
    prompt=f"""
    Create a Product Requirements Document for:
    {$ARGUMENTS}

    Project context: {$PROJECT_NAME}
    Output to: docs/architecture/PRD.md

    Follow the /spec skill workflow.
    """
)

Agents have skills injected via their

skills:
frontmatter, so they will follow the skill instructions.

Decision Points

Consult user at these points:

  1. Workflow selection: Confirm depth is appropriate
  2. Scope changes: If requirements significantly different than expected
  3. Trade-offs: When design decisions have significant impact
  4. Blockers: When unable to proceed
  5. Phase completion: Before major transitions (design → implement)

Example Session

User: /orchestrate Build a CLI tool for managing todo items

Orchestrator:
I've assessed this request:
- New tool (not modification): +3
- Single component (CLI): 0
- No integration: 0
- Simple scope: -1

Total: 2 → Medium workflow

Recommended workflow:
1. /spec - Define requirements and CLI interface
2. /plan - Break into implementable tasks
3. /implement - Build the CLI
4. /validate - Test functionality

Proceed with Medium workflow?

User: Yes

Orchestrator: [Spawns business-analyst agent for /spec]
...
Orchestrator: PRD complete. Proceeding to /plan.
[Spawns project-manager agent for /plan]
...

Parallel Execution

When tasks are independent, spawn multiple agents in a single message:

  • Multiple implementation tasks → parallel developer agents
  • Multiple validation tasks → parallel validator agents
  • Independent research → parallel explore agents

Example:

Task(subagent_type="developer", prompt="Implement T-001...")
Task(subagent_type="developer", prompt="Implement T-002...")
Task(subagent_type="developer", prompt="Implement T-003...")

All three run concurrently, results collected together.

Validation Checklist

  • Workflow depth matches complexity
  • User confirmed workflow selection
  • Each phase produced expected artifacts
  • Artifacts flow correctly between phases
  • Decision points consulted user appropriately
  • Context stayed lean (no code/detail clutter)
  • Blockers documented if any