// Iteratively clarify requirements for a new task until reaching 90%+ confidence, then auto-invoke plan-loop.
| name | new-task |
| description | Iteratively clarify requirements for a new task until reaching 90%+ confidence, then auto-invoke plan-loop. |
Iterative clarification loop: refine understanding of a new task until it is precise, testable, and ready for planning.
Consider $ARGUMENTS if provided.
Each round:
Keep iterating until confidence reaches 90%+.
Once confidence reaches 90%+:
self-test).plan-loop with the finalized requirements and e2e test targets as context. Do NOT plan on your own — plan-loop uses multi-agent research, dual-model review, structured verification design, and self-test integration that ad-hoc planning skips.If plan-loop is unavailable, tell the user and stop — do not substitute your own planning.
plan-loop via the Skill tool. This defeats the entire purpose of new-task — the value is the structured handoff, not just the clarification.Use for complex or high-risk implementation work that needs plan-first execution, explicit verification design, pre-code review, and autonomous post-implementation hardening through self-test, simplify, and review-loop.
Prove the requested goal works on the highest-signal affected surface before closing. Default closing behavior for every implementation task — not just when explicitly asked. Also triggers on: 'make sure it works', 'test it yourself', 'don't just tell me it's done', 'I don't want to test this'.
Post-implementation review/fix loop. Use host-appropriate review coverage on your implementation, fix issues, iterate until highly confident, then commit.
Lightweight read-only audit. Use host-appropriate review coverage for evidence and findings. Iterate on disagreement or low confidence. No code changes.
Orchestrate complex tasks with agent teams. Clarify requirements, plan with dual-model review, implement with TeamCreate, simplify, review, and ship.
Audit agent skills in a repo against best practices — checks .claude/skills/ and .agents/skills/ for quality, structure, and coverage gaps. Use when the user wants to review, improve, or evaluate their skills, or when they mention skill quality, skill audit, or skill best practices.