write-flow

name	write-flow
description	This skill should be used when the user asks to 'write a flow', 'create a flow', 'design a flow', 'make a flow for', 'I need a flow', or wants to create a prompt-language flow for a task. Decides whether a flow is needed at all — most tasks don't need one.
allowed-tools	Read, Grep, Glob
model	inherit
argument-hint	<task description>

Write a Flow

Given a task description, decide whether a prompt-language flow adds value. Most tasks don't need one. Claude Code already retries on failure, checks if files exist, and follows multi-step instructions. The DSL's narrow but powerful value: mechanically enforcing completion criteria via real command execution, so Claude can't stop early.

Step 1: Do You Need a Flow?

Ask one question: "Is there a command that must exit 0 before this task is done?"

Task --> Has verifiable completion command (test/lint/build)?
  Yes --> Could Claude skip or shortcut verification?
    Yes --> USE A FLOW WITH GATE
    No  --> Plain prompt is fine
  No --> PLAIN PROMPT

No flow needed (just write a plain prompt):

• "Rename the User class to Account" — no verification command
• "Add a docstring to every public method" — no pass/fail gate
• "Explain how the auth module works" — informational
• "Create a new React component for the sidebar" — Claude does this fine without scaffolding

Flow adds value:

• "Fix the auth tests so they pass" — gate: tests_pass
• "Make the build pipeline green" — gate: tests_pass + lint_pass
• "Migrate the database and verify it works" — gate: tests or a custom command
• "Apply this refactoring to 8 files without breaking tests" — gate: tests_pass, loop: foreach

If the task doesn't need a flow, write a clear plain-language prompt and stop. Don't add DSL overhead for tasks that don't benefit from it.

Step 2: Pick Your Gate(s)

Gates are the entire reason to use a flow. Always write done when: first.

Available predicates:

JavaScript/TypeScript:

• tests_pass — npm test exits 0
• lint_pass — npm run lint exits 0
• tests_fail — passes when tests exit non-zero (for "break this" tasks)
• lint_fail — passes when lint exits non-zero

Python:

• pytest_pass — pytest exits 0
• pytest_fail — passes when pytest exits non-zero

Go:

• go_test_pass — go test ./... exits 0
• go_test_fail — passes when go test exits non-zero

Rust:

• cargo_test_pass — cargo test exits 0
• cargo_test_fail — passes when cargo test exits non-zero

General:

• diff_nonempty — passes when git diff has output
• file_exists <path> — passes when the file exists

Compound gates catch more issues:

done when:
  tests_pass
  lint_pass

Step 3: Choose Your Loop Pattern

The Ralph Loop (the core pattern)

This is prompt-language as an advanced custom Ralph Loop — the same concept (keep iterating until done) but with mechanical verification. Gates run actual commands; Claude can't declare victory until they pass.

flow:
  retry max 5
    run: npm test
    if command_failed
      prompt: Fix the failing tests. Read the errors carefully.
    end
  end

done when:
  tests_pass

Why this works: Claude already retries when asked — but without a gate, it can decide "close enough" and stop. The gate forces every iteration to prove the fix worked. Eval data shows this pattern consistently outperforms both plain prompts (on verification-heavy tasks) and over-engineered multi-phase flows.

Variations:

• retry max N for bounded retries (prefer this — it has a clear limit)
• while command_failed for condition-based loops
• until command_succeeded for inverted condition loops

Foreach (batch operations)

For applying the same operation across a list of items:

flow:
  foreach file in "src/auth.ts src/db.ts src/api.ts"
    prompt: Add error handling to ${file}
    run: npm test
  end

done when:
  tests_pass

Single prompt + gate (simplest)

When Claude just needs to do the work and a gate verifies it:

flow:
  prompt: Fix the failing tests

done when:
  tests_pass

Step 4: Stop — Check for Over-engineering

Before outputting the flow, check for these anti-patterns.

For the full anti-pattern catalog and deeper examples, see:

• references/anti-patterns.md
• references/advanced.md

Anti-pattern: Sequential prompts

BAD — 3 prompts that could be 1:

flow:
  prompt: Read the codebase and understand the architecture
  prompt: Write a plan for the migration
  prompt: Execute the migration

BETTER — one prompt, one gate:

flow:
  prompt: Migrate the database schema. Read the codebase first, plan your approach, then execute.

done when:
  tests_pass

Claude follows multi-step instructions naturally. Sequential prompts add latency without improving quality.

Anti-pattern: file_exists gates for things Claude already does

BAD — Claude always creates the file when asked:

done when:
  file_exists src/components/Sidebar.tsx

BETTER — plain prompt, no flow:

Create a Sidebar component at src/components/Sidebar.tsx

Only use file_exists when the file is a build artifact or side effect that proves a pipeline worked.

Anti-pattern: Variables at short distances

BAD — variable used 2 lines later:

flow:
  let version = run "node -v"
  prompt: Check compatibility with Node ${version}

BETTER — Claude can just run the command itself:

flow:
  prompt: Check the Node version and ensure the code is compatible

done when:
  tests_pass

Only use let when the value must span many steps or feed into a foreach.

Anti-pattern: Control flow for "organization"

BAD — phased structure that adds latency:

flow:
  run: npm run lint
  if command_failed
    retry max 3
      prompt: Fix lint errors
      run: npm run lint
    end
  end
  run: npm test
  if command_failed
    retry max 3
      prompt: Fix test failures
      run: npm test
    end
  end

BETTER — single loop, let Claude figure out the order:

flow:
  retry max 5
    run: npm run lint && npm test
    if command_failed
      prompt: The pipeline failed. Read the errors, fix the issues, and try again.
    end
  end

done when:
  tests_pass
  lint_pass

Anti-pattern: Flows longer than 10 lines

If your flow block exceeds 10 lines, you're almost certainly over-engineering. Simplify. Combine prompts. Remove unnecessary variables. Trust Claude to handle sequencing.

Output

Write the flow in a fenced code block, or say "no flow needed" and write a plain prompt instead.

Always explain:

• What the gate enforces and why mechanical verification matters for this task
• Why a plain prompt wouldn't be sufficient (if you chose a flow)

Advanced (available but rarely needed)

These features exist but should be the exception, not the default:

• Try/catch — try/catch blocks for when a specific command might fail and needs distinct recovery. Most errors are handled fine by the Ralph Loop's if command_failed branch.
• If/else branching — if/else for conditional paths. Usually indicates the flow is trying to do too much. Consider splitting into separate tasks.
• Variable capture — let x = run "cmd" or let x = prompt "text" for storing values. Only useful when a value must cross many steps or drive a foreach loop.
• While/until loops — while condition/until condition for open-ended loops. retry max N is preferred for bounded iteration.

Additional advanced guidance and tradeoffs:

• references/advanced.md