subagent-driven-writing

name	subagent-driven-writing
description	Fast iterative writing using fresh subagent per section with two-stage review. Alternative to batch execution.

Subagent-Driven Writing

Overview

Dispatch a fresh subagent for each article section, review their output, iterate if needed, then continue. Faster than batch execution when you want tight feedback loops.

Announce at start: "I'm using subagent-driven-writing for fast iterative writing."

Context: Should follow an approved plan from writing-article-plan.

Two-stage review per section:

1. Spec compliance - Does it follow the plan?
2. Content quality - Is the writing good?

When to Use This

Use subagent-driven-writing when:

• You want tight control over each section
• The article is complex or high-stakes
• You want to iterate quickly on feedback
• Sections are interdependent (later sections depend on earlier ones)

Use executing-article-plan instead when:

• You want to write in focused batches
• The article is straightforward
• Sections are largely independent
• You prefer fewer but longer review sessions

The Process

digraph subagent {
    "Read plan" [shape=box];
    "Spawn subagent for section N" [shape=box];
    "Subagent writes section" [shape=box];
    "Review 1: Spec compliance" [shape=diamond];
    "Review 2: Content quality" [shape=diamond];
    "Save section" [shape=box];
    "More sections?" [shape=diamond];
    "Merge into full draft" [shape=box];
    "Invoke reviewing-article" [shape=doublecircle];

    "Read plan" -> "Spawn subagent for section N";
    "Spawn subagent for section N" -> "Subagent writes section";
    "Subagent writes section" -> "Review 1: Spec compliance";
    "Review 1: Spec compliance" -> "Spawn subagent for section N" [label="fail, retry"];
    "Review 1: Spec compliance" -> "Review 2: Content quality" [label="pass"];
    "Review 2: Content quality" -> "Spawn subagent for section N" [label="needs revision"];
    "Review 2: Content quality" -> "Save section" [label="pass"];
    "Save section" -> "More sections?";
    "More sections?" -> "Spawn subagent for section N" [label="yes"];
    "More sections?" -> "Merge into full draft" [label="no"];
    "Merge into full draft" -> "Invoke reviewing-article";
}

Spawning Subagents

For each section in the plan:

**Spawning subagent for Section N: [Title]**

Task brief:
- Read plan from: docs/writing/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-plan.md
- Focus on: Section N ([Title])
- Write section following plan specifications
- Target word count: XXX
- Maintain tone: [from plan]
- Include all key points
- Save to: docs/writing/drafts/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>/section-N-<title>.md

Use sessions_spawn:

Write Section N ([Title]) for article [Topic].
Read the plan from docs/writing/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-plan.md.
Follow the specifications for Section N exactly:
- Purpose: [from plan]
- Key points: [list]
- Target word count: XXX
- Tone: [style]
Include smooth transition from Section N-1.
Save output to docs/writing/drafts/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>/section-N-<title>.md with metadata header.

Review Stage 1: Spec Compliance

Check against plan:

• All key points covered?
• Word count within range (±10%)?
• Supporting evidence included?
• Tone matches guidelines?
• Transition from previous section present?
• Transition to next section present?

If fails:

• Identify specific gaps
• Spawn new subagent with clarified requirements
• Include what was missing in new task brief

Example failure:

**Review failed: Spec compliance**

**Missing:**
- Key point 2 (example of enterprise use case)
- Transition to next section

**Retrying with updated brief...**

Review Stage 2: Content Quality

Check writing quality:

• Logic clear and sound?
• Evidence supports claims?
• Paragraphs well-structured (2-4 sentences)?
• Sentence variety (not all same length/structure)?
• Active voice used where appropriate?
• No jargon without explanation?
• Smooth reading experience?

If needs revision:

• Identify specific issues
• Spawn new subagent with feedback
• Include what needs improvement

Example revision:

**Review: Content quality needs improvement**

**Issues:**
1. Paragraph 2 uses passive voice heavily
2. Example in paragraph 3 doesn't clearly support the point
3. Transition to next section is abrupt

**Revising...**

If passes:

• Save section with approval note
• Continue to next section

Section Approval Format

## Section N Review: ✅ APPROVED

**Spec Compliance:** PASS
- All key points covered ✓
- Word count: XXX (target: XXX, within range) ✓
- Evidence included ✓
- Tone matches ✓
- Transitions present ✓

**Content Quality:** PASS
- Logic clear ✓
- Evidence strong ✓
- Well-structured ✓
- Smooth reading ✓

**Saved to:** docs/writing/drafts/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>/section-N-<title>.md

**Continuing to Section N+1...**

Handling Interdependencies

When sections depend on each other:

**Note:** Section 4 references the example from Section 2.

**Subagent task includes:**
- Read Section 2 draft before writing
- Reference the [specific example] when discussing [topic]
- Maintain consistency with terminology used in Section 2

Context passing:

• Each subagent gets the plan + all completed sections
• Explicitly note dependencies in task brief
• Include specific cross-references needed

Progress Tracking

After each section:

## Progress: Section N/M Complete

**Completed:**
- ✅ Section 1: Introduction (152 words)
- ✅ Section 2: First Argument (298 words)
- ✅ Section 3: Second Argument (305 words)

**Current:**
- 🔄 Section 4: Third Argument (in progress)

**Remaining:**
- ⏳ Section 5: Conclusion

**Stats:**
- Current word count: 755
- Target word count: 1200
- Progress: 63%

After All Sections

Merge and transition:

**All sections complete! 🎉**

**Section Summary:**
- Section 1: ✅ (152 words)
- Section 2: ✅ (298 words)
- Section 3: ✅ (305 words)
- Section 4: ✅ (289 words)
- Section 5: ✅ (163 words)

**Total:** 1207 words (target: 1200)

**Merging into full draft...**

Saved to: docs/writing/YYYY-MM-DD-<topic>-draft.md

**Next:** Invoke reviewing-article for systematic review

Then:

• REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use document-superpowers:reviewing-article

Key Differences from Batch Execution

Subagent-Driven	Batch Execution
Fresh subagent per section	One agent writes all sections
Review after each section	Review every 2-3 sections
Tight feedback loop	Fewer interruptions
Better for complex articles	Better for simple articles
More overhead (spawning)	Less overhead
Easier to course-correct	More focused flow state

Troubleshooting

If subagent consistently fails spec compliance:

• Plan may be unclear - revise plan
• Requirements may be contradictory - clarify plan
• Word count may be unrealistic - adjust target

If subagent produces low-quality content:

• Add more specific tone/style examples
• Include writing samples in task brief
• Specify common pitfalls to avoid

If reviews take too long:

• Create review checklist template
• Focus on critical issues only
• Consider switching to batch execution

Key Principles

• Fresh subagent = fresh perspective - Each section gets unbiased writing
• Two-stage review = quality control - Spec first, then quality
• Pass context explicitly - Don't assume subagent knows prior sections
• Iterate quickly - Fast feedback beats batch-and-hope
• Track progress visibly - Know where you are in the process
• Don't over-review - Good enough to move forward is good enough