Claude-skill-registry aico-subagent-driven

install
source · Clone the upstream repo
git clone https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry
Claude Code · Install into ~/.claude/skills/
T=$(mktemp -d) && git clone --depth=1 https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry "$T" && mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cp -r "$T/skills/data/aico-subagent-driven" ~/.claude/skills/majiayu000-claude-skill-registry-aico-subagent-driven && rm -rf "$T"
manifest: skills/data/aico-subagent-driven/SKILL.md
source content

Subagent-Driven Development

Process

1. Read plan, extract all tasks
      ↓
2. Create TodoWrite with all tasks
      ↓
3. For each task:
   a. Dispatch Implementer Subagent
   b. Implementer: implement, test, commit
   c. Dispatch Spec Reviewer (matches spec?)
   d. Spec issues? → Implementer fixes → re-review
   e. Dispatch Quality Reviewer (code quality?)
   f. Quality issues? → Implementer fixes → re-review
   g. Mark task complete
      ↓
4. All tasks complete → Final review → Done

Review Order is Critical

Spec Compliance Review FIRST
        ↓
    ✅ Passes
        ↓
Code Quality Review SECOND

Why: No point reviewing code quality if it doesn't meet spec.

Subagent Prompts

Implementer

  • Provide FULL task text (don't make subagent read file)
  • Provide context (where task fits in plan)
  • Require TDD and self-review

Spec Reviewer

  • Check: Does implementation match spec exactly?
  • Missing anything? Added anything extra?

Quality Reviewer

  • Check: Tests, readability, error handling, performance, security
  • Rate issues as Critical/Important/Minor

Key Rules

  • ALWAYS run both reviews (spec AND quality)
  • MUST fix issues before proceeding to next task
  • NEVER dispatch multiple implementers in parallel
  • ALWAYS provide full task text to subagent
  • Spec review FIRST, then quality review

Red Flags

Never:

  • Skip any review
  • Proceed with unfixed issues
  • Start quality review before spec passes
  • Move to next task with open issues

If issues found:

  • Same implementer fixes them
  • Reviewer reviews again
  • Repeat until approved

Common Mistakes

  • ❌ Skip spec review → ✅ Always verify spec first
  • ❌ Skip quality review → ✅ Always check quality
  • ❌ Wrong review order → ✅ Spec first, then quality
  • ❌ Provide partial task text → ✅ Give full text