team

name	team
description	Manage the installed agent team — build (apply proposal), review (audit gaps), or run (execute a task through the pipeline).
when_to_use	Use to manage the installed agent team — build/review/run. Trigger: '/team', 'audit my team', 'apply the team proposal', 'run the team on X'.
version	1.0.1
domain	workflow
phase	null
preamble	true
allowed_tools	["Read","Bash","AskUserQuestion"]
human_gate	before
pipeline_role	{"triggered_by":"human","receives":"$ARGUMENTS — mode (build | review | run <task>)","produces":"harness changes (build), audit report (review), or pipeline execution (run)"}

---

name: roster-preamble version: 1.6.1 description: Shared preamble injected into every roster skill that declares preamble true. Not a standalone command.

Roster Preamble

This preamble is injected into every roster skill that declares preamble: true. It encodes the non-negotiable principles that govern all skill runs.

---

Principles

Completeness

Do not defer tests, documentation, or robustness in the name of speed. A short-term shortcut is rarely faster than a complete solution. "We'll add tests in a follow-up" is not an acceptable decision — it is explicit debt, or it is not a decision at all.

Search Before Build

Before creating anything, verify what already exists:

1. Local (current repo, harness, KB)
2. Roster (index.json, roster GitHub)
3. Web (if webfetch available)

A false positive (checking for something that didn't exist) costs seconds. A false negative (building something that already existed) costs hours and creates debt.

Anti-Sycophancy

Do not validate a direction if you have a grounded objection. Do not say "good idea" before verifying it is a good idea. If you spot a problem, say so — clearly, factually, without softening. State your recommendation, explain why, mention what context you might be missing, and ask.

User Sovereignty

When you and a sub-agent both agree to change the user's direction: → present the recommendation → explain why you both think it is better → state what context you might be missing → ask

Never act unilaterally in this case. The decision belongs to the user.

Escalation

If you are blocked, the situation is ambiguous, or the action exceeds the declared scope: → escalate to the human — do not deviate from scope, do not guess

Asking Questions

When you need to ask the user something, use your runtime's interactive input tool if one is available — do not ask via plain text output.

Known runtime tool names:

Runtime	Tool name
Claude Code	AskUserQuestion
Copilot CLI	ask_user
Codex	request_user_input
OpenCode	question

Rules:

• One question at a time — never bundle multiple questions into one message
• Prefer multiple-choice options over open-ended when the answer space is predictable
• If no interactive tool is available, output a clearly marked plain-text question and wait for the user's reply before proceeding

Friction Log

At the end of each run, honestly record:

• frictions encountered (workarounds, long searches, ambiguities)
• methods used
• any suggestion for a tool, skill, or adaptation

This is not a performance review. It is cross-run memory. Format: see skills-meta/friction.jsonl.

Pipeline State

If your skill's phase: frontmatter field is non-null (i.e. you are one of the staged pipeline phases) and you are operating on a task with a briefs/<task>- context, append one event to briefs/<task>-state.json when you finish — this is the durable, resumable record /roster-run reads to resume and /roster-doctor status renders. Skip entirely if your phase: is null (standalone skills: doctor, audit, investigate, init, skill-health) or there is no task context. Create the file if absent; preserve every prior events entry:

{
  "task": "<slug>",
  "mode": "express|fast|full",
  "current_phase": "implement",
  "events": [
    { "phase": "implement", "outcome": "COMPLETED", "at": "<ISO-8601 or omit>", "by": "roster-implement" }
  ]
}

Rules for writing your event:

• task is the canonical slug, derived once from the task description and reused identically by every phase: lowercase, kebab-case, the ≤4 most significant words (the same rule /roster-question and /roster-intake use to name briefs/<task>-*). The first phase to run — roster-implement in Express/Fast, roster-question/roster-intake in Full — fixes the slug; every later phase, and /roster-run's resume check, MUST derive the byte-identical slug or the ledger will not be found. When in doubt, reuse the slug already present on existing briefs/<task>-* files for this task rather than re-deriving.
• phase MUST be your skill's own phase: frontmatter value, verbatim — one of the legal tokens: question, research, intake, spec, plan, implement, review, qa, ship. Never invent a synonym (implementation, code-review, …); resume matches on these exact tokens.
• outcome is per phase, from this fixed vocabulary — intake: VALIDATED; spec: VALIDATED, SKIPPED (non-spec'd task types), or BOUNCED; review/qa: GO or NO-GO; ship: COMPLETED or BLOCKED; implement: COMPLETED or PARTIAL; question/research/plan: COMPLETED. Do not invent other values — PARTIAL is legal only on implement, and BLOCKED only on ship; every other phase/outcome pairing is schema-illegal.
• Emission invariants for the two non-success terminals:
  • implement/PARTIAL — emit only when in-scope work remains after the improve-loop budget is exhausted, or a scope blocker stops the run. Never emit PARTIAL for "tests failing" — a failing gate is not a terminal state; keep iterating within the budget or escalate.
  • ship/BLOCKED — emit only when review and QA are GO but the ship action itself is impossible (permissions, remote state, human hold). A NO-GO gate is not BLOCKED.
  • Both events carry an optional reason string field in the event itself — no pointer-by-convention to an external artifact: { "phase": "ship", "outcome": "BLOCKED", "reason": "<why>", "by": "roster-ship" }.
  • Artifact writes happen BEFORE the event append. Write your phase artifacts (impl brief, ship gate/summary) to disk first — appending the ledger event is the last thing a phase does.
• Resume semantics (read by /roster-run Step 1.4): a latest event implement/PARTIAL re-routes to /roster-implement; a latest event ship/BLOCKED halts the pipeline and surfaces the event's reason to the human.
• Append-only audit trail. Always push a new event — never rewrite or delete a prior one. A re-run after a NO-GO bounce legitimately produces a second implement/review pair; that repetition is the history, not a bug. Set current_phase to your phase (the latest completed).
• mode is the task's mode (express/fast/full); set it on first write, leave it thereafter.
• Use a timestamp in at if your runtime can produce one; otherwise omit the field. by is your skill name (or human-gate for a gate decision).
• Skill hooks receive the task slug via the TASK environment variable — export it when invoking hooks manually.

Team

Manage the installed agent team. Detect the mode from $ARGUMENTS:

• team build — apply an approved team proposal to the harness
• team review — audit the installed team for gaps, staleness, and redundancy
• team run <task> — start the full pipeline on a task via tech-lead

If $ARGUMENTS is empty or not one of the above, ask once:

"Which mode? build (apply proposal), review (audit team), or run <task> (execute pipeline)"

Steps

1. Detect mode from $ARGUMENTS (see routing table above).
2. If mode is ambiguous, ask once — then execute the selected mode section below.
3. Follow the steps in the matching mode section: build, review, or run.

---

Mode: build

Apply an approved team proposal to the project harness. This is the install step that follows a validated /recruit proposal.

Prerequisites

1. A validated team proposal must exist at docs/team-proposal-<YYYY-MM-DD>.md.
   • If no proposal file is found, stop: "No approved proposal found. Run /recruit first."
2. The proposal must have passed the recruiter validation quiz — confirm before proceeding.

Steps

1. Locate the proposal — find the most recent docs/team-proposal-*.md. If multiple exist, list and ask the user to confirm which to apply.

2. Spawn harness-builder — output a spawn request:

SPAWN REQUEST
Mode: B — human-mediated
Agent: harness-builder
Role: apply approved team proposal to shared harness

--- PASTE THIS AS THE AGENT'S INITIAL PROMPT ---
/harness build

An approved team proposal exists at <path-to-proposal>. Apply it:
- install agents listed in the proposal into .harness/agents/
- install rules listed in the proposal into .harness/rules/
- install skills listed in the proposal into .harness/skills/
- update .harness/harness.json manifest
- run sync-harness.sh to project runtime entrypoints (Claude Code, Codex)
- run coherence checks after install
--- END ---

3. Report — after harness-builder completes, confirm what was installed and run npm test if in the roster repo.

---

Mode: review

Audit the currently installed team. Equivalent to recruiter Mode 2 (Team Audit & Upgrade) plus a harness coherence check.

Prerequisites

An installed team must exist (.harness/harness.json or .claude/agents/).

• If none found, stop: "No installed team found. Run /recruit to assemble one."

Steps

1. Read current harness state — check .harness/harness.json. Note installed agents, versions, and last-modified dates.

2. Spawn recruiter Mode 2 — output a spawn request:

SPAWN REQUEST
Mode: B — human-mediated
Agent: recruiter
Role: Team Audit & Upgrade (Mode 2)

--- PASTE THIS AS THE AGENT'S INITIAL PROMPT ---
/recruit

Existing harness found at .harness/. Run Mode 2: Team Audit & Upgrade.

Audit the current team against the roster index and current project state. Report:
- agents that are stale (> 365 days or newer version available)
- role gaps not covered by the current team
- redundant agents (two agents for the same role)
- pipeline_role coherence (missing input/output contracts)
- any agent missing from the installed team that the project now needs

Propose an upgrade set and run the validation quiz before making any changes.
--- END ---

3. Harness coherence check — separately run npm run check:agents in the roster repo if available.

4. Report — summarize stale agents, gaps, and recommended next step (team build to apply, or no action needed).

---

Mode: run <task>

Start the agent pipeline on a task via tech-lead.

Prerequisites

1. Confirm a team is installed: check .harness/harness.json for an installed lead agent.
   • If none, stop: "No team found. Run /recruit first."
2. Confirm tech-lead is in the installed team. If missing, stop and report.

Steps

1. Intake check — if the task is fuzzy or high-stakes, run the diagnostic interview (per rules/governance/diagnostic-interview.md) before proceeding.

2. Spawn tech-lead — output a ready-to-use spawn request:

SPAWN REQUEST
Mode: B — human-mediated sequential
Agent: tech-lead
Role: research, plan, and coordinate delivery of the task

--- PASTE THIS AS THE AGENT'S INITIAL PROMPT ---
Task: <task from $ARGUMENTS>

Run the research phase, produce a brief, validate it with the user, then spawn the planner.
--- END ---

3. State the pipeline — tell the user:

   • tech-lead produces a research brief and runs a validation quiz before anything is built
   • after the quiz, they spawn the planner with the brief content
   • implementers, reviewer, and QA follow after the planner produces sub-briefs
   • each handoff requires the user to relay output to the next agent

4. Stay available — remain available for merge decisions, escalations, and context routing at each pipeline stage.

Rules

• Never proceed without a confirmed lead agent
• Never imply autonomous agent-to-agent handoff
• If task is blank, ask once; if still blank, stop

When to Go Back

Condition	Action
No approved team proposal exists (build mode)	Stop — run /recruit first
No team installed (review or run mode)	Stop — run /recruit to assemble one
tech-lead missing from installed team (run mode)	Stop — flag to human, re-run /recruit to add it

What Next

• build → run /team review to verify the installed team, then start tasks with /team run <task>
• review → run /team build to apply proposed upgrades, or no action if team is healthy
• run → follow the pipeline handoffs as instructed by tech-lead