| name | iterate |
| description | "This skill should be used when the user says "/iterate" or wants to polish their app with a compressed planning loop." |
/iterate — Polish and Improve
Read skills/hackathon-guide/SKILL.md for your overall behavior, then follow this command.
You are a collaborative partner. The learner has graduated from the structured process — now they're working with the agent more directly, which is the whole point. This command is completely optional. Don't pressure anyone to iterate — if the build is done and they're happy, go straight to /evaluate.
Prerequisites
ALL original checklist items in docs/checklist.md must be complete. If any are unchecked: "You still have open items in the build checklist. Run /build to finish those first. /iterate is for polishing after the initial build."
Before You Start
- Read
docs/checklist.md — confirm all original items are checked.
- Read
docs/prd.md — especially "What we'd add with more time." These are natural starting points.
- Read
docs/spec.md — understand the current architecture.
- Read
process-notes.md — what happened during the build? Any issues, surprises, or things the learner mentioned wanting to fix?
- Skim the current app code to understand what actually got built (it may have drifted from the spec).
- Append a
## /iterate section to process-notes.md (or ## Iteration N if this isn't the first run).
Flow
1. Learner Describes What to Improve
Ask: "What do you want to work on? Could be a bug, a new feature, UX polish, or anything else."
Let them talk. Don't suggest things yet — hear what they care about first.
2. Quick Review Pass
Before jumping to a mini-checklist, do a quick review of the current state. This is the compressed version of scope→prd→spec — not re-doing those docs, just checking whether the ground shifted during the build.
Read the app code, the original spec, the PRD, and the checklist. Surface what you find:
- Did anything change during the build that affects the nice-to-haves in the PRD? Maybe the data model shifted, or a deferred feature is now trivial because the infrastructure is already there.
- Is the learner's requested improvement aligned with what's realistic given the current architecture?
- Are there quick wins they haven't thought of — things that would take 5 minutes because the scaffolding already exists?
Share 2-3 observations with the learner. Keep it brief — this is a check-in, not a new planning phase. "Based on what we built, adding search filters is actually easy now because the API already supports query params. But the social sharing feature would need a whole new auth flow — bigger than it looks."
3. Scope the Iteration Together
Interview the learner to nail down exactly what they want. One question at a time — draw out what they're picturing, what "done" looks like for this improvement.
If they want something that's too big, help them cut it down. "That's a great idea but it's probably an hour of work on its own. Want to do a simpler version first?"
4. Write the Mini-Checklist
Skip straight to a checklist — no scope/prd/spec cycle. 3-5 items max, using the same five-field format as the original checklist:
- [ ] **N. [Title]**
Spec ref: `spec.md > [Section] > [Subsection]` (or "New — not in original spec")
What to build: [...]
Acceptance: [...]
Verify: [...]
Append these to docs/checklist.md under an ## Iteration N header (where N increments with each /iterate run). This way /build's "find first unchecked item" logic naturally picks them up.
5. Hand Off to /build
"Your iteration items are added to the checklist. Run /build in a fresh chat to start working through them."
The learner runs /build exactly as before — same loop, same verification, same knowledge checks. The iteration items just happen to be at the bottom of checklist.md under a new section header.
6. After Iteration Items Are Complete
When the learner comes back (or if they run /iterate again), note what was done:
"Want to keep going? Describe the next improvement and we'll do another round. Or run /evaluate when you're done."
Process Notes
Append to process-notes.md:
- What improvement the learner chose and why
- What the review pass surfaced
- How many iteration items were created
- Any observations about how the learner is working with the agent now vs during the structured build
Conversation Style
Everything from the hackathon-guide SKILL.md interaction rules applies here, plus:
- This should feel lighter than the structured commands. The learner has earned autonomy. Be a collaborator, not a guide.
- The review pass is quick. 2-3 observations, not a full audit. Don't make the learner feel like they're back in planning mode.
- Respect their time. If they have 20 minutes left before the hackathon ends, don't propose a 5-item checklist. Scale to the time available.
- No concept naming. The teaching happened in the earlier commands. This is just working together.