بنقرة واحدة
recipe-design
Execute from codebase-scoped analysis to design document creation.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
القائمة
Execute from codebase-scoped analysis to design document creation.
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Anti-pattern detection, root-cause discipline, quality check workflow, and implementation completeness assurance. Use when: fixing bugs, reviewing code quality, refactoring, making technical decisions, or performing quality assurance.
Language-agnostic coding standards for maintainability, readability, and quality. Use when: implementing features, refactoring code, reviewing code quality, or writing functions.
Documentation creation criteria for PRD, ADR, Design Doc, UI Spec, and Work Plan with templates. Use when: creating or reviewing technical documents, determining which documents are required, or following document templates.
Implementation strategy selection framework with meta-cognitive approach. Use when: planning implementation strategy, selecting between vertical/horizontal slicing, or defining verification criteria for tasks.
Integration and E2E test design principles, value-based selection, test skeleton specification, and review criteria. Use when: designing integration tests, E2E tests, generating test skeletons, or reviewing test quality.
Guides subagent coordination through implementation workflows. Use when: orchestrating multiple agents, managing workflow phases, determining autonomous execution mode, or coordinating recipe execution.
| name | recipe-design |
| description | Execute from codebase-scoped analysis to design document creation. |
documentation-criteria — document creation rules and templatesimplementation-approach — implementation strategyllm-friendly-context — clear prompts, handoffs, and generated artifactsSpawn rule: every spawn_agent call uses fork_turns="none" so the subagent receives only the task message and explicitly provided context.
Context: Dedicated to the design phase.
Core Identity: "I am not a worker. I am an orchestrator."
Execution Protocol:
code-verifier and design-sync apply to Design Docs; skip them for ADR-only output.[Stop: ...] marker -> Present status to user for confirmation. CANNOT proceed until user explicitly confirms.CRITICAL: MUST execute document-reviewer and all stopping points. MUST execute design-sync for Design Docs. Each serves as a quality gate. ENFORCEMENT: Skipping any quality gate invalidates the design output.
Requirements -> scope bootstrap -> codebase-analyzer -> [Stop: Scope confirmation]
|
technical-designer
|
code-verifier -> document-reviewer
|
design-sync -> [Stop: Design approval]
code-verifier and design-sync are Design Doc steps. ADR-only output skips them.
Included in this skill:
Responsibility Boundary: This skill completes with design document (ADR/Design Doc) approval. Work planning and beyond are outside scope.
Requirements: $ARGUMENTS
For ADRs, clearly present design alternatives and trade-offs. For Design Docs, record only alternatives actually considered by Design Convergence; None is valid.
Execute the process below within design scope.
Build a lightweight seed for codebase-analyzer. This is a file-location pass only, with no deep reading and no design decisions.
rg -l --glob '!**/{node_modules,dist,build,coverage,.git}/**' --glob '!**/*.{lock,min.js,map}' '<keyword>'. If rg is unavailable, use grep -RIl with the same exclusions where possible.source, test, docs, and generated_or_vendor. Exclude generated_or_vendor from the seed.affectedFiles, and keep a one-line seedRationale for each file.affectedFiles. If the user confirms no related code exists, confirm whether to proceed with a new-surface design before invoking codebase-analyzer.Construct requirement_analysis with:
affectedFiles: the Step 1 seedaffectedLayers: layers inferred from paths, or ["unknown"] when unclearscale: provisional scale from file count (small 1-2, medium 3-5, large 6+)purpose: the user requirementsconfidence: confirmed when target files are explicit or the ranked seed is focused; otherwise provisionaladrRequired: true when the request changes architecture, introduces technology or dependencies, changes data flow/storage/contract ownership, or changes shared cross-boundary contracts; otherwise falseadrReason: the specific matched ADR condition, or nullprdRequired: true when scale is large and no existing PRD covers the scope; otherwise falsescopeDependencies: questions whose answers can change the target files, scale, or document typequestions: user-facing questions needed before designdocumentTypeRationale: why ADR, Design Doc, or both are needed from the provisional seedseedRationale: one-line reason for each file in affectedFilestechnicalConsiderations: include any obvious user-stated constraints, risks, and dependencies; use empty lists only when none are statedSpawn codebase-analyzer agent: "Analyze the existing codebase to provide evidence for Design Doc creation. requirement_analysis: [Step 1 requirement_analysis]. requirements: $ARGUMENTS. target_paths: [Step 1 affectedFiles]."
After codebase-analyzer returns, present the design scope to the user before design work:
analysisScope.filesAnalyzed and directly relevant modulesanalysisScope.categoriesDetected, focusAreas, and pathsdocumentTypeRationale, adrRequired, and adrReasonprdRequired is true, whether an existing PRD path is available, and what decision is needed before designlimitations and unresolved risksAsk the user to choose one:
prdRequired is trueprdRequired is true and no PRD will be providedIf prdRequired is true and the user neither provides a PRD path nor explicitly approves proceeding without a PRD, stop. This recipe does not create PRDs.
After confirmation, set the final scale from the confirmed target file count (small 1-2, medium 3-5, large 6+), recompute adrRequired, adrReason, prdRequired, confidence, and documentTypeRationale, then carry the complete confirmed requirement context, including confirmed scope and user answers, into design creation.
[STOP — BLOCKING] Wait for user confirmation before proceeding.
Create documents according to documentTypeRationale:
document_to_create for this invocation; documentTypeRationale describes the overall confirmed path. Include architecture decisions and clear alternatives with trade-offs."document_to_create for this invocation; documentTypeRationale describes the overall confirmed path. Include component design, acceptance criteria, and Design Convergence results."document_to_create: ADR. After the ADR path is available, spawn technical-designer again with document_to_create: DesignDoc, adr_path: [ADR path], the original user requirements as requirements_verbatim, the same confirmed_requirement_context, and the same codebase analysis output. The Design Doc must reference the ADR decision.For Design Docs only, spawn code-verifier agent: "Verify the Design Doc against the current codebase. document_path: [Design Doc path from Step 4]. doc_type: design-doc."
Skip this step for ADR-only output.
Review each created document:
For Design Docs only, spawn design-sync agent: "Verify consistency of the design document with other existing design documents and project constraints."
Skip this step for ADR-only output.
Note: design-sync returns sync_status: "SKIPPED" when only 1 Design Doc exists. This is distinct from NO_CONFLICTS and MUST be reported as such to the user.
documentTypeRationale via technical-designer[Stop: ...] markers honored with user confirmationDesign phase completed.