cross-squad-communication

name	cross-squad-communication
description	Protocol for sending queries, delegating tasks, and sharing context between independent Squad instances across different repositories
domain	multi-repo coordination
confidence	medium
source	designed + validated against BasePlatformRP (Star Trek) and Provisioning Wizard (Matrix) squads, 2026-07-11

Context

When multiple repositories each have their own Squad (AI team), they need to exchange information: knowledge queries, PR reviews, task delegation, and dependency analysis. Each squad has its own agents, MCP tools, and issue tracker — there is no shared runtime.

When this skill applies:

• A squad agent needs information from another squad-enabled repo
• A task needs to be delegated to another squad
• Cross-repo dependency analysis is needed
• PR review requests span repo boundaries

Key constraint: Each squad has its own runtime, MCP tools, and issue tracker. Cross-squad communication can be synchronous (via CLI session targeting the other repo) or asynchronous (file-based or issue-based). The coordinator decides which approach fits.

---

Patterns

Decision Tree: Choosing the Right Pattern

Is the target repo cloned locally?
├─ NO → Use Pattern 3 (Issue-Based) or Pattern 2 (Git-Based Async)
└─ YES
    ├─ Is this a quick query / knowledge lookup?
    │   └─ YES → Use Pattern 0 (Synchronous CLI) — fastest
    ├─ Does the work need to persist as artifacts?
    │   └─ YES → Use Pattern 2 (Git-Based Async)
    ├─ Is it a long-running analysis or multi-cycle task?
    │   └─ YES → Use Pattern 2 (Git-Based Async)
    └─ Is the target squad's Ralph running?
        ├─ YES → Pattern 2 or 3 (async processing available)
        └─ NO → Pattern 0 (Synchronous CLI) or Pattern 1 (Read-Only)

---

Pattern 0: Synchronous CLI Session (Fastest for Interactive Queries)

For quick knowledge queries, decision lookups, or short analyses — spawn a Copilot CLI session with the working directory set to the target squad's repo. This lets you send a prompt and get a response within the same session, using the target repo's full context.

This is the same technique used by ralph-watch.ps1: write the prompt to a temp file, then invoke the CLI with that file as input. The key insight is that setting the working directory to the target repo gives the CLI session access to that squad's .squad/ metadata, codebase, and conventions.

Protocol:

1. Write prompt to a temp file (avoids argument-splitting issues, as learned in ralph-watch.ps1)
2. Invoke CLI with -p pointing to the prompt file and --working-directory set to the target repo
3. Receive response in the same session

Invocation:

# Spawn a Copilot CLI session targeting another squad's repo
$targetRepo = "C:\temp\Infra.K8s.BasePlatformRP"
$promptFile = New-TemporaryFile
@"
You are working in a Squad-enabled repository.
Read .squad/team.md and .squad/decisions.md first.

[CROSS-SQUAD REQUEST]
From: tamresearch1 (Star Trek TNG+Voyager)
Request Type: knowledge_query
Query: What is the current architecture of the ARM RP? What services does it expose?
Response Format: Brief structured summary
"@ | Out-File $promptFile -Encoding utf8

# Option A: ghcs with prompt file
ghcs -p $promptFile -- --working-directory $targetRepo

# Option B: Start-Process for non-blocking (ralph-watch.ps1 style)
Start-Process pwsh -ArgumentList "-NoProfile -Command `"cd '$targetRepo'; ghcs -p '$promptFile'`"" -Wait

# Option C: Pipe directly
"What is the ARM RP architecture?" | ghcs -- --working-directory $targetRepo

When to use synchronous vs async:

Scenario	Pattern	Why
Quick knowledge query	Synchronous CLI (Pattern 0)	Fast answer, no overhead
"What did you decide about X?"	Synchronous CLI (Pattern 0)	Read decisions.md via the target squad's context
PR review request	Either (Pattern 0 or 2/3)	Sync for quick feedback, async for thorough review
Task delegation (do work in their repo)	Async (Pattern 2 or 3)	Work needs to persist beyond the session
Long-running analysis	Async (Pattern 2)	May take multiple cycles
Target repo not locally cloned	Async (Pattern 3)	Can't set working directory to a remote repo

The coordinator decides which pattern to use based on:

1. Is the target repo cloned locally? → If yes, sync CLI is available
2. Is this a quick query or a long task? → Quick = sync, long = async
3. Does the work need to persist? → If yes, use async (creates artifacts)
4. Is the target squad's Ralph running? → Needed for async processing

Requirements:

• Target repo must be cloned locally (for --working-directory)
• Prompt file avoids argument-splitting bugs (see ralph-watch.ps1 lines 2166-2184)

Response quality: ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ — the CLI session has full context of the target repo, including code, squad metadata, and MCP tools.

Liveness Protocol for Pattern 0

The synchronous CLI session requires monitoring to avoid false timeouts. With 7+ MCP servers initializing and .squad/ metadata being read, startup can take 30-60 seconds. A hard timeout kills valid sessions before they complete. Instead, monitor the agency session's activity log directory.

Health Check Approach:

Instead of a fixed wall-clock timeout, monitor the agency session log directory for activity:

# The agency CLI creates a session log directory
# e.g., ~/.agency/logs/session_20260325_071211_57824
$logDir = Get-ChildItem "$env:USERPROFILE\.agency\logs" -Directory | Sort-Object LastWriteTime -Descending | Select-Object -First 1
$lastSize = 0
$stallCount = 0

while ($proc -and -not $proc.HasExited) {
    Start-Sleep -Seconds 15
    $currentSize = (Get-ChildItem $logDir -Recurse -File | Measure-Object -Property Length -Sum).Sum
    
    if ($currentSize -eq $lastSize) {
        $stallCount++
        if ($stallCount -ge 4) { # 60s with no progress
            Write-Warning "Session stalled — no log activity for 60s"
            break
        }
    } else {
        $stallCount = 0
        $lastSize = $currentSize
    }
}

Progress Indicators (What Counts as "Alive"):

• New files appearing in the session log directory (e.g., transcript.log, mcp-server-logs/)
• Log file size increasing (indicates active processing)
• New or modified .squad/ files in the target repo (e.g., decisions/inbox.md, identity/history.md)
• Process still running and consuming non-idle CPU time

Stall Detection (When to Intervene):

• No log activity for 60s → Issue a warning; session may be slow but not hung
• No log activity for 120s → Likely stuck; consider terminating and checking logs
• Process exited with non-zero exit code → Failed; examine transcript.log and stderr for errors
• MCP server connection timeout → Session blocked waiting for an MCP server response

Recovery Actions When Stalled:

1. Check for user input waiting: Inspect logs for prompts or dialogs (shouldn't happen with --autopilot)
2. Check MCP server health: Review mcp-server-logs/ for connection errors or timeouts
3. Retry with --no-mcp flag: For lightweight queries that don't require MCP tools

   # Retry without MCP servers — faster startup, limited capability
   ghcs -p $promptFile -- --working-directory $targetRepo --no-mcp
   

4. Increase timeout threshold: If MCP server initialization is consistently slow (>90s), raise threshold before declaring stall

---

Pattern 1: Read-Only Knowledge Query (No CLI Needed)

For questions about another squad's architecture, decisions, or current state — read their .squad/ metadata directly.

Protocol:

1. Read target repo's .squad/team.md → get stack, members, issue source
2. Read .squad/decisions.md → get architectural decisions
3. Read .squad/routing.md → understand who handles what
4. Read .squad/identity/now.md → get current focus
5. Scan code structure if needed (csproj files, directory layout)

Requirements:

• Target repo must be cloned locally or accessible via git
• No authentication needed beyond git read access

Example:

# Query another squad's architecture
$targetRepo = "C:\temp\Infra.K8s.BasePlatformRP"
Get-Content "$targetRepo\.squad\team.md"
Get-Content "$targetRepo\.squad\decisions.md"
Get-Content "$targetRepo\.squad\identity\now.md"

Response quality: ⭐⭐⭐⭐ — excellent for structural/architectural questions.

---

Pattern 2: Async Task Request (Git-Based)

For work that needs the target squad to execute (PR reviews, issue analysis, code changes).

Protocol:

1. Create request file in YOUR repo: .squad/cross-squad/requests/{timestamp}-{target}-{id}.yaml
2. Commit and push
3. Target squad's Ralph detects on next cycle
4. Target squad processes and writes response to their .squad/cross-squad/responses/
5. Your Ralph picks up the response

Request File Format:

id: req-2026-07-11-001
source_squad: tamresearch1
source_repo: tamirdresher/tamresearch1
target_squad: baseplatformrp
target_repo: mtp-microsoft/Infra.K8s.BasePlatformRP
request_type: knowledge_query | pr_review | task_delegation | dependency_check
priority: high | normal | low
created_at: 2026-07-11T10:00:00Z
query: "What is the current architecture of the ARM RP?"
routing_hint: "picard"  # optional — which agent should handle this
status: pending

Response File Format:

id: req-2026-07-11-001
responding_squad: baseplatformrp
responding_agent: picard
responded_at: 2026-07-11T10:15:00Z
status: completed | partial | rejected
response: |
  The ARM RP architecture consists of...
artifacts: []  # optional file paths

---

Pattern 3: Issue-Based Delegation (For GitHub-Hosted Repos)

For repos on GitHub, use issues with labels as the message bus.

Protocol:

1. Create issue in target repo with label squad:cross-squad
2. Include source squad identifier and routing hint in issue body
3. Target squad's Ralph picks up and routes to appropriate agent
4. Response posted as issue comment
5. Issue closed when complete

Example:

gh issue create \
  --repo mtp-microsoft/Infra.K8s.BasePlatformRP \
  --title "[Cross-Squad] Architecture query from tamresearch1" \
  --body "Source: tamresearch1\nQuery: What services does the ARM RP expose?\nRouting: picard" \
  --label "squad:cross-squad"

Limitation: Only works for repos on GitHub. ADO repos need different approach.

---

Pattern 4: Cross-Repo Dependency Scan

For discovering how two repos relate to each other.

Protocol:

1. Search both repos for mutual references:

   Select-String -Path (Get-ChildItem $repoA -Recurse -Include "*.md","*.cs","*.json","*.csproj") `
     -Pattern $repoB_name
   Select-String -Path (Get-ChildItem $repoB -Recurse -Include "*.md","*.cs","*.json","*.csproj") `
     -Pattern $repoA_name
   

2. Check shared NuGet packages / npm packages
3. Check shared ADO project or GitHub org
4. Document relationship type: code dependency, operational coupling, shared infra

---

Discovery Protocol

Before sending any cross-squad request, verify the target:

1. Does .squad/team.md exist?           → Squad is installed
2. What is the issue_source?            → GitHub Issues | ADO | Planner
3. What agents are active?              → Check member status column
4. What is the routing table?           → Read routing.md
5. What is the current focus?           → Read identity/now.md
6. Is Ralph running?                    → Check for recent commits by Ralph

If .squad/team.md doesn't exist, the repo is not squad-enabled. Fall back to standard human communication.

---

Platform Compatibility Matrix

Source Issue Tracker	Target Issue Tracker	Mechanism
GitHub Issues	GitHub Issues	Issue-based (Pattern 3)
GitHub Issues	ADO Work Items	Git-based (Pattern 2)
GitHub Issues	Planner	Git-based (Pattern 2)
ADO Work Items	GitHub Issues	Issue-based (Pattern 3) via gh CLI
ADO Work Items	ADO Work Items	ADO cross-project work items
Any	Any	Git-based (Pattern 2) — universal fallback

---

Examples

Example 1: tamresearch1 queries BasePlatformRP architecture

# Step 1: Read metadata (Pattern 1)
$target = "C:\temp\Infra.K8s.BasePlatformRP"
$team = Get-Content "$target\.squad\team.md" -Raw
$decisions = Get-Content "$target\.squad\decisions.md" -Raw

# Step 2: Extract answer from metadata
# team.md reveals: C#, .NET 10, Aspire, TypeSpec, Cosmos DB, RPaaS
# decisions.md reveals: Workspace is primary resource, 4 more pending

# Step 3: If deeper analysis needed, create async request (Pattern 2)

Example 2: Request PR review from another squad

# .squad/cross-squad/requests/2026-07-11-baseplatformrp-pr-review.yaml
id: pr-review-001
source_squad: tamresearch1
target_squad: baseplatformrp
request_type: pr_review
priority: normal
query: "Review PR #54 — package version fix. Check for correctness."
routing_hint: "picard"
status: pending

---

Anti-Patterns

⚠️ Know when synchronous CLI is NOT the right choice

# WRONG — don't use sync CLI for long-running tasks that need artifacts
ghcs -p $promptFile -- --working-directory $targetRepo
# If the task creates files, PRs, or takes multiple cycles → use async (Pattern 2 or 3)

# WRONG — don't use sync CLI when the target repo isn't cloned locally
ghcs -- --working-directory "C:\not\cloned\yet"
# If the repo isn't available locally → use issue-based delegation (Pattern 3)

Synchronous CLI sessions (Pattern 0) are valid for quick queries and knowledge lookups. Use async patterns for work that needs to persist or where the target repo isn't available locally.

❌ Don't assume shared MCP tools

Each squad has its own MCP server instances. You cannot invoke another squad's ADO tools or GitHub tools from your session.

❌ Don't skip the discovery step

Always read team.md first. The target squad may use a different issue tracker, have different agents, or be in a different state than expected.

❌ Don't send requests to squads without Ralph

If the target squad doesn't have Ralph (Work Monitor) running, async requests will never be processed. Check for recent Ralph activity first.

❌ Don't mix up repo platforms

BasePlatformRP is on GitHub; Provisioning Wizard is on ADO. Use the appropriate tools for each.

---

Validation Status

Tested 2026-07-11–2026-07-12 against:

• ✅ BasePlatformRP (GitHub, Star Trek cast, 10 agents)
• ✅ Provisioning Wizard (ADO, Matrix cast, 4 agents)
• ✅ E2E CLI Session Test (2026-07-12): Launched agency session targeting provisioning-wizard. Session successfully loaded squad agent, resolved CLI, read team.md (25 lines), demonstrated MCP server initialization. Hard 120s timeout killed valid session; liveness protocol addresses this by monitoring log activity instead.

Scenario	Result
Knowledge query (read-only)	✅ Works via Pattern 1
Step handler discovery	✅ Works via file scan
PR review (basic)	⚠️ Partial — git log only, no API
Backlog enumeration	⚠️ Partial — depends on issue platform
Dependency analysis	✅ Works via cross-reference scan
CLI invocation (sync) + Liveness Protocol	✅ Works — session launches successfully; log monitoring prevents false timeouts

Confidence: MEDIUM — Synchronous CLI pattern (Pattern 0) validated end-to-end. Liveness protocol provides operational robustness against slow MCP initialization. Git-based async (Pattern 2) and issue-based (Pattern 3) untested end-to-end. Production readiness requires Ralph integration on both sides.