performance

name	performance
description	Orchestrates performance optimization workflows using static code analysis to identify bottlenecks (N+1 queries, missing indexes, O(n^2) algorithms, blocking I/O, memory leaks). Accepts optional user-provided profiling data. Reuses standard specification, planning, implementation, and verification phases.
user-invocable	true

Performance Orchestrator

Static-analysis-first performance optimization workflow. Identifies bottlenecks by reading code, then uses the standard specification/planning/implementation/verification pipeline to fix them.

Initialization

BEFORE executing any phase, you MUST complete these steps:

Step 0: Session-reminder conflict resolution (decide ONCE)

Before doing anything else, settle this policy now and do not re-litigate it at any gate:

→ **MANDATORY GATE** — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke ask_user now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1). / → MANDATORY GATE markers fire regardless of session-reminders, permission mode, or prior approval patterns. Auto / acceptEdits / bypassPermissions modes, reminders saying "work without stopping" / "continue without asking" / "minimize clarifying questions," and compaction summaries showing the user approving every prior gate do NOT exempt you from invoking ask_user at a gate. They apply only to your discretionary clarifications.

If you find yourself reasoning "the user has been approving everything, so I can skip this gate" or "auto-mode is on, so I should minimize questions" — that reasoning IS the failure mode. STOP and fire the gate.

Full framework rule: ../orchestrator-framework/references/orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 and § 2.1.

Step 1: Load Framework Patterns

Read the framework reference file NOW using the Read tool:

1. ../orchestrator-framework/references/orchestrator-patterns.md - Delegation rules, interactive mode, state schema, initialization, context passing, issue resolution

Step 2: Initialize Workflow

1. Capture the clock: run date -u +"%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ" via Bash NOW — you do NOT know the time from context. Every timestamp written this turn (created, updated, generated, phases[].started) uses this value. Date-only or T00:00:00Z values are the documented failure mode (orchestrator-patterns.md § 4 Timestamp Rule). Re-run date in later turns before writing timestamps.
2. Create Task Items: Use TaskCreate for all phases (see Phase Configuration), then set dependencies with TaskUpdate addBlockedBy
3. Create Task Directory: .maister/tasks/performance/YYYY-MM-DD-task-name/
4. Create Subdirectories: analysis/, analysis/user-profiling-data/, implementation/, verification/
5. Initialize State: Create orchestrator-state.yml with performance context
6. Set up Operator Dashboard (orchestrator-patterns.md § 8) — first read .maister/config.yml and set orchestrator.options.html_output (default true if the file/key is absent). When html_output is false, SKIP this entire step — no dashboard.html, no dashboard-data.js, no browser auto-open — and proceed. Otherwise: copy ../orchestrator-framework/assets/dashboard.html to the task root as dashboard.html, write the initial dashboard-data.js (all phases pending, task.type: "performance"), then auto-open it in the user's browser (open / xdg-open / start per platform, passing the plain absolute filesystem path — NEVER a hand-built file:// URL; on failure just print the path — never block). On resume: re-copy dashboard.html only if missing; regenerate dashboard-data.js from state; then auto-open it in the browser again (same opener as a new task — the OS focuses an already-open tab rather than duplicating).
7. Discover project documentation: Read .maister/docs/INDEX.md (if exists), extract ALL file paths from the "Project Documentation" section — includes predefined docs AND any user-added project docs. Store as in state.

Output:

Performance Orchestrator Started

Task: [performance issue description]
Directory: [task-path]
Dashboard: open [task-path]/dashboard.html in a browser to monitor progress

Starting Phase 1: Codebase Analysis...

---

Operator Visibility (applies to every phase)

Config gate: these rules assume options.html_output is true (read from .maister/config.yml at init, default true). When false: skip the Dashboard-upkeep rule entirely (no dashboard files, no browser open, no rewrites) and the HTML-companions rule (do NOT pass html_style_guide_path; subagents write md only). The Artifact Summary Contract (§ 7 TL;DR blocks) and phase_summaries in state stay active either way.

Cross-cutting rules from orchestrator-patterns.md (same as the development orchestrator):

1. Artifact Summary Contract (§ 7): every artifact-writing subagent prompt MUST include the contract instruction (artifacts open with TL;DR / Key Decisions / Open Questions & Risks). At context extraction, lift decisions, risks, and artifacts into phase_summaries.[phase] — verbatim, never re-summarized.
2. Dashboard upkeep (§ 8): rewrite dashboard-data.js at every phase START (mark in_progress before delegating), BEFORE firing every exit gate (register the finished phase's artifacts/summary/decisions/risks — the operator reviews them on the dashboard while answering; status stays in_progress until the gate passes), after every phase completion (including skipped phases, with reason), every gate decision, every verification cycle, and at finalization. Every rewrite starts with date -u (one call per turn). It is a terse projection of state — never duplicate artifact content into it.
3. HTML companions (§ 9): pass html_style_guide_path (absolute path to ../orchestrator-framework/references/html-report-style.md) to specification-creator, implementation-planner, and implementation-verifier. Register returned html_path values in phase_summaries.[phase].artifacts[].html so the dashboard hero cards link HTML first.
4. icon_hint values per phase: 1 analysis, 2 analysis, 3 spec, 4 verify, 5 plan, 6 code, 7 verify, 8 verify, 9 done.

---

When to Use

Use for:

• Application slow (response time issues, high latency)
• Need systematic bottleneck identification and resolution
• Want static code analysis for performance anti-patterns
• Have user-provided profiling data to act on
• Database query optimization needed
• Algorithm or I/O inefficiencies suspected

DO NOT use for: New features, bug fixes, refactoring without performance goals.

---

Core Principles

1. Static Analysis First: Read code to detect patterns. Don't try to run profiling tools.
2. User Data Welcome: Incorporate user-provided profiling data when available
3. Reuse Standard Phases: Use proven specification/planning/implementation/verification pipeline
4. Conservative Estimates: Provide improvement ranges, not false precision
5. Practical Optimizations: Focus on patterns the agent CAN detect and fix

---

Phase Configuration

Phase	content	activeForm	Agent/Skill
1	"Analyze codebase"	"Analyzing codebase"	codebase-analyzer
2	"Analyze performance bottlenecks"	"Analyzing performance bottlenecks"	bottleneck-analyzer
3	"Gather requirements & create specification"	"Gathering requirements & creating specification"	specification-creator
4	"Audit specification"	"Auditing specification"	spec-auditor (conditional)
5	"Plan implementation"	"Planning implementation"	implementation-planner
6	"Execute implementation"	"Executing implementation"	implementation-plan-executor
7	"Prompt verification options"	"Prompting verification options"	Direct
8	"Verify implementation & resolve issues"	"Verifying implementation"	implementation-verifier
9	"Finalize workflow"	"Finalizing workflow"	Direct

---

Workflow Phases

Phase 1: Codebase Analysis & Clarifications

Purpose: Comprehensive codebase exploration for performance context, followed by scope/requirements clarification Execute:

1. Skill tool - maister-codebase-analyzer
2. Update state with analysis results
3. Direct - use ask_user for max 5 critical clarifying questions about performance concerns, hotspots, and optimization goals
4. Save clarifications to analysis/clarifications.md Output: analysis/codebase-analysis.md, analysis/clarifications.md State: Update performance_context.phase_summaries.codebase_analysis, task_context.clarifications_resolved

Pass task_type="enhancement" and the performance-focused description. The codebase-analyzer adaptively selects parallel Explore agents based on task complexity. For performance tasks, the description should guide agents toward: database query patterns, hot code paths, I/O operations, caching layers, connection management, schema/migration files.

→ AUTO-CONTINUE — Do NOT end turn, do NOT prompt user. Proceed immediately to Phase 2.

---

Phase 2: Static Performance Analysis

Purpose: Identify bottlenecks through static code analysis + optional user profiling data Execute: Task tool - maister-bottleneck-analyzer subagent Output: analysis/performance-analysis.md State: Update performance_context.bottlenecks_identified, performance_context.user_data_available, performance_context.bottleneck_priorities

Process:

1. Check if analysis/user-profiling-data/ contains any files
2. If empty, use ask_user:
   • Question: "Do you have profiling data to provide (flame graphs, APM screenshots, slow query logs)?"
   • Options: "Yes, let me add files to analysis/user-profiling-data/" | "No, proceed with static analysis only"
3. If user chooses to add files, wait for them, then proceed

ANTI-PATTERN — DO NOT DO THIS:

• ❌ "Let me analyze the bottlenecks myself..." — STOP. Delegate to bottleneck-analyzer.
• ❌ "I'll grep for N+1 patterns..." — STOP. Delegate to bottleneck-analyzer.

INVOKE NOW — Task tool call:

4. Task tool - maister-bottleneck-analyzer subagent

Context to pass: task_path, description, codebase analysis summary from Phase 1, user data paths (if any)

SELF-CHECK: Did you just invoke the Task tool with maister-bottleneck-analyzer? Or did you start analyzing code yourself? If the latter, STOP and invoke the Task tool.

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke ask_user now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

ask_user - "Performance analysis complete. [N] bottlenecks identified ([P0 count] P0, [P1 count] P1). Continue to specification?"

---

Phase 3: Requirements & Specification

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the ask_user tool call from Phase 2 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding ask_user call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Gather optimization requirements and create specification Output: analysis/requirements.md, implementation/spec.md State: Update performance_context.phase_summaries.specification

Part A — Requirements Gathering (inline):

1. Present bottleneck summary from Phase 2 to user
2. Use ask_user for optimization priorities:
   • Which bottleneck priorities to address? (All P0+P1, P0 only, specific ones)
   • Any constraints? (backward compatibility, memory limits, no new dependencies)
   • Performance targets? (specific response time goals, if known)
3. Save gathered requirements to analysis/requirements.md with: performance issue description, bottleneck analysis summary, optimization priorities, constraints, targets

Part B — Specification Creation (subagent):

📋 Standards Discovery: Read .maister/docs/INDEX.md before creating spec.

ANTI-PATTERN — DO NOT DO THIS:

• ❌ "Let me create the specification..." — STOP. Delegate to specification-creator.
• ❌ "I'll write the spec based on the analysis..." — STOP. Delegate to specification-creator.

INVOKE NOW — Task tool call:

4. Task tool - maister-specification-creator subagent

Context to pass: task_path, task_type="performance", task_description, requirements_path (analysis/requirements.md), project_context_paths (INDEX.md + project_doc_paths from state — all discovered project docs), phase_summaries (codebase_analysis, bottleneck_analysis), html_style_guide_path (for the spec.html companion)

SELF-CHECK: Did you just invoke the Task tool with maister-specification-creator? Or did you start writing spec.md yourself? If the latter, STOP and invoke the Task tool.

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke ask_user now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

ask_user - Display executive summary before asking. Read implementation/spec.md and extract: optimization targets, approach chosen, number of changes planned, expected impact. Format as brief overview then "Continue to specification audit?"

---

Phase 4: Specification Audit (Conditional)

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the ask_user tool call from Phase 3 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding ask_user call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Independent review of optimization specification Execute: Task tool - maister-spec-auditor subagent Output: verification/spec-audit.md State: Update options.spec_audit_enabled

Run if: >5 optimizations planned, spec >50 lines, or user requests Skip if: Simple optimization (1-3 changes)

ask_user to decide - "Run specification audit?"

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke ask_user now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

ask_user - Display executive summary before asking. Read verification/spec-audit.md and extract: overall verdict, issue counts by severity, top findings. Format as brief overview then "Continue to implementation planning?"

---

Phase 5: Implementation Planning

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the ask_user tool call from Phase 4 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding ask_user call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Break optimization specification into implementation steps

📋 Standards Discovery: Read .maister/docs/INDEX.md before planning.

ANTI-PATTERN — DO NOT DO THIS:

• ❌ "Let me create the implementation plan..." — STOP. Delegate to implementation-planner.
• ❌ "I'll break this into optimization steps..." — STOP. Delegate to implementation-planner.

INVOKE NOW — Task tool call:

Execute: Task tool - maister-implementation-planner subagent Output: implementation/implementation-plan.md State: Update task groups and dependencies

Context to pass: task_path, task_type="performance", task_description, phase_summaries (specification, bottleneck_analysis, codebase_analysis), html_style_guide_path (for the implementation-plan.html companion)

SELF-CHECK: Did you just invoke the Task tool with maister-implementation-planner? Or did you start writing the plan yourself? If the latter, STOP and invoke the Task tool.

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke ask_user now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

ask_user - Display executive summary before asking. Read implementation/implementation-plan.md and extract: number of task groups, total steps, key dependencies, optimization sequence. Format as brief overview then "Continue to implementation?"

---

Phase 6: Implementation

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the ask_user tool call from Phase 5 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding ask_user call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Execute the optimization plan

📋 Standards Discovery: Implementation reads .maister/docs/INDEX.md continuously.

ANTI-PATTERN — DO NOT DO THIS:

• ❌ "Let me implement this directly..." — STOP. Delegate to implementation-plan-executor.
• ❌ "This is simple enough to code inline..." — STOP. Simplicity is NOT a reason to skip delegation.

INVOKE NOW — Skill tool call:

Execute: Skill tool - maister-implementation-plan-executor Output: Implemented optimizations, implementation/work-log.md State: Update implementation progress, extract phase_summaries.implementation

SELF-CHECK: Did you just invoke the Skill tool with maister-implementation-plan-executor? Or did you start writing code yourself? If the latter, STOP immediately and invoke the Skill tool instead.

⚠️ POST-IMPLEMENTATION CONTINUATION — After the skill completes and returns control:

1. HTML plan reconciliation (backstop for syncs missed during waves): if implementation/implementation-plan.html exists, for every group whose md checkboxes are all [x], run the executor's idempotent marker-flip command (sed flipping data-step="N\.[0-9]*" class="step todo" and data-group="N" class="group todo" to done). VERIFY: when all md steps are checked, grep -c 'class="step todo"' implementation/implementation-plan.html must return 0.
2. Read orchestrator-state.yml to confirm you are the orchestrator
3. Update state: add Phase 6 to completed_phases
4. Proceed to Phase 7

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke ask_user now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

ask_user - Display executive summary before asking. Extract from phase_summaries.implementation and implementation/work-log.md: optimizations applied, files changed, test results, any known issues. Format as brief overview then "Continue to verification?"

---

Phase 7: Verification Options

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the ask_user tool call from Phase 6 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding ask_user call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Determine which verification checks to run Execute: Direct - use ask_user for options Output: Updated state with verification options State: Set options.code_review_enabled, options.pragmatic_review_enabled, options.production_check_enabled, options.reality_check_enabled

Always enabled: Reality check, pragmatic review Auto-set: skip_test_suite: true (full test suite already passed during implementation phase; cleared before re-verification if fixes are applied)

ask_user with sequential single-select - "Which additional verification checks?"

• "Code review" (recommended)
• "Production readiness check"

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke ask_user now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

ask_user - "Options selected. Continue to Phase 8?"

---

Phase 8: Verification & Issue Resolution

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the ask_user tool call from Phase 7 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding ask_user call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Comprehensive implementation verification with user-driven fix cycles Output: verification/implementation-verification.md, optional review reports State: Update verification_context

Execute:

Step 1: Invoke Skill tool - maister-implementation-verifier

Step 2: Display detailed issue breakdown grouped by category and severity (critical/warning/info), listing location, description, and fixability for each.

Step 3: Gate on verification status:

• status: passed → skip to Pause
• status: passed_with_issues or failed → enter user-driven fix loop (Step 4)

Step 4: User-driven fix loop (max 3 iterations):

1. Present all critical + warning issues as a numbered list
2. ask_user — "Which issues should I fix?" with options: "Fix all fixable issues" / "Let me choose specific issues" / "Skip fixes, proceed as-is"
3. Fix selected issues
4. After fixes: set skip_test_suite: false (code changed, tests must re-run)
5. ask_user — "Re-run verification to check fixes?" with options: "Yes, re-run verification" / "No, proceed to next phase"
6. If re-run → re-invoke maister-implementation-verifier → return to Step 2

→ MANDATORY GATE — fires regardless of permission mode, session-reminders, or prior approval patterns. Invoke ask_user now. Proceeding without a user response is a protocol violation (orchestrator-patterns.md § 2 / § 2.1).

ask_user - Display executive summary: total issues found, issues fixed, issues remaining by severity. Then "Continue to finalization?"

---

Phase 9: Finalization

Phase entry self-check: Before executing this phase, locate the ask_user tool call from Phase 8 in this conversation. If you cannot point to its call ID, STOP and fire that gate now. State updates (completed_phases, TaskUpdate) without a corresponding ask_user call are protocol violations — never paper over a missed gate by updating state.

Purpose: Complete workflow and provide next steps Execute: Direct - create summary, update state, guide commit Output: Workflow summary State: Set task.status: completed

Process:

1. Create workflow summary (bottlenecks found, optimizations implemented, verification result)
2. Update task status to "completed"
3. Provide commit message template
4. Guide performance-specific next steps:
   • Run the application and verify improvements manually
   • Consider profiling with runtime tools to measure actual impact
   • Monitor production metrics after deployment
   • Address remaining P2/P3 bottlenecks if needed

→ End of workflow

---

Domain Context (State Extensions)

Performance-specific fields in orchestrator-state.yml:

performance_context:
  bottlenecks_identified: null    # count from bottleneck-analyzer
  user_data_available: false      # whether user provided profiling data
  bottleneck_priorities:
    p0: 0
    p1: 0
    p2: 0
    p3: 0
  phase_summaries:
    # Every entry also carries the shared base shape (orchestrator-patterns.md § 4):
    #   decisions: []   risks: []   artifacts: [{path, label, html}]
    codebase_analysis: {key_files: [], summary: null}
    bottleneck_analysis: {bottlenecks: [], summary: null, user_data_incorporated: false}
    specification: {summary: null}

verification_context:
  last_status: null
  issues_found: null
  fixes_applied: []
  decisions_made: []
  reverify_count: 0

options:
  html_output: true  # Seeded from .maister/config.yml at init (default true). Gates dashboard + HTML companions.
  spec_audit_enabled: null
  skip_test_suite: true
  code_review_enabled: 
   
   
   

---

Task Structure

.maister/tasks/performance/YYYY-MM-DD-task-name/
├── orchestrator-state.yml
├── dashboard.html                     # Operator dashboard (copied plugin asset — never model-generated)
├── dashboard-data.js                  # Dashboard data projection (rewritten per phase/gate)
├── analysis/
│   ├── codebase-analysis.md           # Phase 1
│   ├── performance-analysis.md        # Phase 2
│   ├── user-profiling-data/           # Optional user-provided data
│   └── requirements.md                # Phase 3
├── implementation/
│   ├── spec.md                        # Phase 3
│   ├── spec.html                      # Phase 3 (HTML companion)
│   ├── implementation-plan.md         # Phase 5
│   ├── implementation-plan.html       # Phase 5 (HTML companion)
│   └── work-log.md                    # Phase 6
└── verification/
    ├── spec-audit.md                  # Phase 4 (conditional)
    ├── implementation-verification.md # Phase 8
    └── implementation-verification.html # Phase 8 (HTML companion)

---

Auto-Recovery

Phase	Max Attempts	Strategy
1	2	Expand search scope, prompt user for hints
2	2	Re-analyze with broader patterns, ask user
3	2	Regenerate spec with adjusted requirements
5	2	Regenerate plan
6	5	Fix syntax, imports, tests
8	3	Fix-then-reverify cycles

---

Command Integration

Invoked via:

• /maister-performance [description] [--sequential] (new)
• /maister-performance [task-path] [--from=PHASE] [--sequential] (resume)

Flags:

• --from=PHASE: Resume from specific phase
• --sequential: Disable parallel wave dispatch in implementation-plan-executor; run one task group at a time. Persisted as orchestrator.options.sequential: true in orchestrator-state.yml. Defaults to off (parallel waves).

Task directory: .maister/tasks/performance/YYYY-MM-DD-task-name/