camunda7

name	camunda7
description	Use this skill when a Camunda Platform 7 `.bpmn` must actually deploy and run on the engine — not just look right as a diagram. Covers the C7 engine, the CIB seven fork, and Spring Boot camunda-bpm starters. Reach for it to: assemble an executable process by wiring existing service tasks (Java delegates, external-task topics) from a catalog and stubbing steps that don't exist yet; make a plain diagram deployable; add or edit gateways, user tasks + forms, DMN, boundary/timer & escalation events, error handling, async, candidate groups, historyTimeToLive; or fix why a process won't deploy or misbehaves at runtime (historyTimeToLive cannot be null, a service task with no implementation, broken delegateExpression wiring, a gateway running everything twice after a merge). Signals: Camunda 7, camunda-bpm, CIB seven, camunda:*, JavaDelegate, external task, business rule task. Not for engine-agnostic diagrams (use bpmn) or Camunda 8 / Zeebe (zeebe:, FEEL).
compatibility	Requires Node.js >= 18 and npm. On first use, run `npm install` in the skill folder to fetch bpmn-moddle, bpmn-auto-layout, and camunda-bpmn-moddle.

Camunda 7: assemble and fix executable BPMN

What this skill is for

A Camunda 7 .bpmn is a program the engine runs. The main job here is to assemble a business process by wiring together activities that already exist — reusable service tasks implemented as Java delegates or external-task topics — and add the control flow (gateways, user tasks, DMN, timers, error handling, async) that makes it deploy and run on Camunda Platform 7 (and the API-compatible CIB seven fork).

This skill composes processes; it does not write activity implementations. Writing a new activity (a delegate bean, a worker) is a separate task. When the process needs a step that has no existing activity, you draw a deployable stub (its name and input/output contract) and record it in a follow-up spec for that separate task — you do not invent the Java/worker code here.

The four jobs people bring:

• Assemble a process (from text or a sketch) out of existing activities.
• Make a plain BPMN executable by wiring its tasks to existing activities (and stubbing the rest).
• Edit / extend a Camunda process — add steps, branches, timers, error handling — wiring existing activities and stubbing new ones.
• Validate & fix — find why it won't deploy or misbehaves, and repair it.

Division of labour:

• You decide the process shape and map each step to an existing activity from the catalog, or — if none fits — to a stub plus a spec entry.
• The bundled camunda-tool.mjs parses without losing camunda: data, regenerates layout, validates structure, and lints execution readiness.

Inputs & outputs

What you give the skill:

• The task — a process description (free text) or a path to an existing .bpmn to make executable / extend / fix.
• The project catalog — the reusable inventory + declarations to assemble from. The canonical form is one JSON document (schema + template in references/wiring-and-stubs.md and assets/catalog.template.json), but the skill is flexible: it also accepts the catalog inline in the prompt, as YAML, or as a Markdown table/list, and normalizes it to that schema. All sections are optional. If no catalog is given, say so and infer one from the repo — scan for JavaDelegate/@Component bean names, camunda:topic strings, .dmn decision ids, .form files, existing <bpmn:message>/<bpmn:error> declarations, and group names — then confirm the inferred catalog with the user before building.
• Conventions — a conventions block in the catalog, or inferred from the project, or asked (see "Establish project conventions first").

What the skill returns:

• the executable .bpmn (semantics + camunda: + regenerated DI), passing validate and lint;
• a <process>-activities-spec.md whenever anything was stubbed (activities / forms / DMN decisions);
• .form / .dmn files only if you explicitly ask the skill to build them (normally those are referenced from the catalog or stubbed).

Whatever form the catalog arrives in, treat the JSON schema as the internal model: map every entry onto it before wiring.

Reconciling the prompt with the catalog

The prompt is itself a catalog source — the user often names activities, variables, messages, errors, roles or conventions inline. Merge those with the catalog file, with two rules:

• Extra context in the prompt (something the prompt describes that the catalog doesn't list): treat it as part of the catalog and use it — wire the activity the user says exists (don't stub what they've already specified), declare the message/error, use the variable names. Note in the follow-up that it came from the prompt and suggest adding it to the catalog so it's reusable.
• Conflict (the prompt and the catalog describe the same entry differently — different implementation type/ref/topic, variable type, message or error code): do not silently pick one and move on, and never emit both. Use the catalog as the source of truth for reusable definitions (it reflects what actually exists in the project), keep the model internally consistent, and surface the conflict explicitly in the follow-up — state both values, say which you used and why, and ask the user to confirm (interactive) or flag it for them to correct (non-interactive). The exception is when the user is clearly overriding on purpose ("our X is actually a delegate now") — then prefer the prompt, but still call out that it diverges from the catalog.

Three layers, and why generic tooling breaks Camunda files

A generic .bpmn has semantics (bpmn:process) and DI (bpmndi: — the picture). A Camunda 7 file adds a third, the point of it all:

3. Execution — the camunda: attributes that bind each node to how it runs: camunda:delegateExpression / camunda:type="external"+camunda:topic, camunda:inputOutput, camunda:assignee, camunda:decisionRef, camunda:asyncBefore, camunda:historyTimeToLive.

Consequences:

• Never hand-write DI. Edit semantics + execution; let layout redraw it.
• Never round-trip a Camunda file through generic BPMN tooling. Plain bpmn-moddle / bpmn-js / bpmn-auto-layout don't know camunda: and silently delete every extension on save, turning an executable process back into a picture. The bundled tool registers camunda-bpmn-moddle and grafts fresh DI onto the extension-preserving XML, so execution data is never touched.

Setup (once per machine)

npm install --prefix "<SKILL_DIR>"

<SKILL_DIR> is the folder containing this SKILL.md. "Cannot find package" later means the install was skipped — run it and retry.

Establish project conventions first

Before authoring, pin down the conventions that shape every node — the defaults the whole process must follow. Determine them in this order, preferring inference over interrogation:

1. The catalog's conventions block, if present (form mechanism, service-task style, expression language, async/HTTL/retry defaults, naming).
2. Project config & docs — CLAUDE.md/README for house rules; Spring Boot application.yaml (camunda.bpm.*) for the engine's HTTL default and history level.
3. Existing .bpmn in the repo — run summarize on one or two and copy the house style: camunda:formRef or generated formData? delegates or external tasks? what id/topic/bean naming?

If a convention that materially changes the output still can't be inferred, ask — briefly and batched. The two that matter most:

• Form mechanism: Camunda Forms (.form via formRef, recommended on 7.15+) / embedded HTML (formKey="embedded:…") / generated formData / external form key.
• Service-task style for new/stub steps: external task / delegate / expression / connector. (Also confirm, if unclear: expression conventions, async policy, the historyTimeToLive and failedJobRetryTimeCycle defaults, naming.)

If you see a better approach than what's implied — e.g. the repo hand-writes formData but Camunda Forms .form is cleaner on a 7.15+ engine, or a delegate is simpler than an external task for in-process logic — say so in one line and recommend it; let the user decide. In a non-interactive run, state the conventions you assumed instead of blocking. State the conventions up front, then apply them consistently to every node (and to stubs).

The reliable loop

For every job: establish conventions → get the catalog → map steps to catalog entries (or stubs) → write semantics + execution → layout → validate → lint → spec → fix.

1. Understand the inputs. For an existing file, run summarize (it shows each node's implementation, async flags, forms, decisionRef, historyTTL, and which nodes are stubs):

   node "<SKILL_DIR>/scripts/camunda-tool.mjs" summarize path/to/file.bpmn
   

   Get the project catalog — the reusable inventory and declarations to build from: activities (delegates/topics), forms, variables (the data dictionary), messages/signals/errors/escalations (event declarations), decisions (DMN), roles (candidate groups/users), and conventions. The user provides it (prompt or file); if none is given, ask for it, and only as a last resort infer it from the repo. Reuse the catalog's exact names everywhere (variable names, error codes, message names, group names) so the model is consistent. The full catalog schema is in references/wiring-and-stubs.md.

2. Map each process step to an activity, then write semantics + camunda:. For each service step: if the catalog has a matching activity, wire it exactly (its delegate bean name or external topic, plus a camunda:inputOutput mapping for the data it consumes/produces). If nothing fits, make it a stub (next section). Hand-author a semantics-only document (no bpmndi:) with the extensions inline. Always set isExecutable="true" and camunda:historyTimeToLive. Get exact XML from the references — don't guess.

3. Regenerate layout (preserves camunda: extensions; non-destructive — it re-syncs existing DI and only adds/reroutes what changed). Add --rebuild to regenerate the whole diagram from scratch after big structural edits:

   node "<SKILL_DIR>/scripts/camunda-tool.mjs" layout in.bpmn [out.bpmn] [--rebuild]
   

4. Validate structure:

   node "<SKILL_DIR>/scripts/camunda-tool.mjs" validate out.bpmn
   

5. Lint execution + control flow:

   node "<SKILL_DIR>/scripts/camunda-tool.mjs" lint out.bpmn
   

   ERROR = won't deploy / will throw; WARN = deploys but misbehaves; INFO = advisory (it also lists any stub activities so you remember the spec).

6. Write the follow-up spec for every stub (next section but one).

Don't claim done until validate and lint both pass (exit 0), and every stub is in the spec.

Assemble from existing activities; stub the rest

This is the core behaviour, and the thing to get right:

• Prefer existing activities. Each service/business-rule step should reuse a catalog activity. Wire it with the catalog's exact reference — camunda:delegateExpression="${beanName}" for a delegate, or camunda:type="external" camunda:topic="the-topic" for an external task — and add a camunda:inputOutput mapping for the variables it reads and writes, taken from the catalog entry. Match the catalog's implementation style; don't convert a delegate activity into an external one or vice-versa.

• Do NOT write activity implementations. Building a delegate bean or a worker is a separate task. While assembling/fixing a process you produce the .bpmn (+ DMN/forms if asked) and, for new activities, a spec — never the .java/ worker code. If the user explicitly asks you to also implement an activity, treat that as the separate task and only then use the implementation patterns in references/wiring-and-stubs.md.

• Stub a missing activity instead of inventing it. A stub is a real, deployable node so the whole process can be laid out, validated and even deployed as a skeleton — but it is clearly marked as "to build". Represent it as a service task that is:

  • named for the business step,
  • bound as an external task with a clear camunda:topic (kebab-case of the name) — the most decoupled "awaiting a worker" placeholder; or, if the project's catalog is delegate-based, camunda:delegateExpression="${proposedBeanName}",
  • given a camunda:inputOutput contract (the inputs it will consume and the outputs it will produce — this is the interface the spec is written against),
  • marked as a stub so tooling and humans can see it:

    <bpmn:serviceTask id="SendRejection" name="Send rejection notice"
                      camunda:type="external" camunda:topic="send-rejection-notice">
      <bpmn:documentation>STUB — to implement (see activities spec). In: applicantId, reason. Out: notificationId.</bpmn:documentation>
      <bpmn:extensionElements>
        <camunda:properties><camunda:property name="stub" value="true" /></camunda:properties>
        <camunda:inputOutput>
          <camunda:inputParameter name="applicantId">${applicantId}</camunda:inputParameter>
          <camunda:inputParameter name="reason">${rejectionReason}</camunda:inputParameter>
          <camunda:outputParameter name="notificationId">${notificationId}</camunda:outputParameter>
        </camunda:inputOutput>
      </bpmn:extensionElements>
    </bpmn:serviceTask>
    

  summarize then tags it {STUB} and lint lists it under INFO. Tell the user, in plain language, which steps you wired from the catalog and which you stubbed. Be honest that a stub is a deployable skeleton, not a runnable process: the engine will wait forever at an external-task stub (no worker subscribed), and a stub formRef shows "form not found" in Tasklist. It deploys and validates; it won't run end-to-end until the stub is built. Say this in the follow-up.

• Every user task gets assignment AND a form. Forms work exactly like activities: a user task is wired to a form from the catalog's forms (set camunda:formRef="<formId>" camunda:formRefBinding="latest", or a camunda:formKey). If no catalog form fits, form-stub it — point camunda:formRef at a proposed form id, mark it <camunda:property name="formStub" value="true"> with a <bpmn:documentation>FORM STUB — fields: …</bpmn:documentation>, and add the form (its id + fields, derived from the task's decision/data) to the follow-up spec. lint warns about any user task with no form and lists form-stubs under INFO. Don't leave a user task formless.

• Reuse the catalog's declarations and variable names. Wire user-task assignment to catalog roles (candidate groups/users); business rule tasks to catalog decisions (camunda:decisionRef); and message/signal/error/escalation events to catalog declarations — creating the matching root <bpmn:message> / <bpmn:signal> / <bpmn:error errorCode> / <bpmn:escalation> from the catalog entry (these are declarations you write directly, not implementations to stub). Name process variables and every camunda:inputOutput parameter from the catalog's variables dictionary, not invented synonyms — consistent names are what make the steps actually wire together. A referenced message/error/role not in the catalog: add it and flag it. A missing DMN decision is stubbed like an activity (business rule task pointing at a proposed decisionRef + a spec entry).

The follow-up spec for new activities & forms

For every stub activity and every form-stub, write (or append to) a spec — a Markdown file beside the .bpmn, e.g. <process>-activities-spec.md. It is the handoff for the separate implementation task. Use the template assets/activity-spec.template.md. Per activity entry: name, the BPMN node id/topic, business purpose, inputs (name / type / source variable), outputs (name / type), error outcomes (BPMN error codes), and the suggested implementation type (delegate vs external worker) consistent with the catalog. Per form entry: the form id (the one you put in camunda:formRef), the user task it belongs to, and its fields (key / label / type, required?). End with a checklist. Keep it precise enough to build each activity/form from the spec alone without re-reading the diagram.

Report back: the follow-up

End every run with a short, skimmable follow-up — a handoff, not a wall of text. Three sections; omit any that are empty (except Done); keep each bullet to one line; the detail lives in the spec file, not here. Match the user's language.

Done — what you assembled/changed and that it's verified: the result file + validate/lint pass; which steps you wired from the catalog; what you added (gateways, error handling, timers, forms); the conventions applied.

Needs you — concrete asks, highest-impact first: stub activities to implement and form-stubs to create (→ <process>-activities-spec.md); data gaps (a variable a step needs that nothing upstream produces yet); conventions/assumptions to confirm; deploy steps (e.g. deploy the .form/.dmn alongside the .bpmn). If there's nothing, say "Deployable as is."

Watch out — narrow spots / risks that could bite at runtime: runtime deps (e.g. a Groovy script engine), interrupting vs non-interrupting choices, async/transaction trade-offs, anything you assumed rather than knew. Omit if none.

Aim for a handful of bullets total. If you stubbed things, the single most useful line is the pointer to the spec.

Reference files — read the one you need, don't guess XML

When you're…	Read
Wiring existing activities and forms, representing stubs/form-stubs, the catalog format, or the spec	references/wiring-and-stubs.md
Writing the exact XML for service/user/rule tasks, listeners, I/O, async, events, call activity, process attrs	references/camunda-extensions.md
Diagnosing a deploy/runtime failure, or want the anti-pattern checklist + C7-vs-C8 cheat-sheet	references/execution-checklist.md
Form mechanics (formRef/.form, formKey, formData) or DMN decision tables	references/forms-and-dmn.md
Deploying (REST / Spring Boot / Modeler) or writing JUnit 5 + camunda-bpm-assert tests	references/deployment-and-testing.md

assets/ has templates: an executable process skeleton (a wired activity + a stub), a DMN table, a Camunda Form, the catalog format, the activities spec, and — for the separate implementation task only — JavaDelegate / external-worker skeletons.

Modeling for the engine, not just the picture

• Always isExecutable="true" + camunda:historyTimeToLive (e.g. P30D) on a runnable process — since 7.20 the engine rejects deployment without TTL. DMN <decision>s need it too.
• Expressions are JUEL (${...}) in BPMN attributes; FEEL only in DMN.
• Pair and guard gateways. Give a diverging exclusive/inclusive gateway a default flow; never put conditions on a parallel gateway's outgoing flows.
• Transaction boundaries where failure must be isolated: camunda:asyncBefore="true" on external/long activities, loops, before waits; add camunda:failedJobRetryTimeCycle. Keep camunda:exclusive="true".
• Declare what you reference (message/signal/error roots; errors need an errorCode). Correlation is by name, not id.
• Camunda 7, never 8. Use camunda: (URI http://camunda.org/schema/1.0/bpmn), never zeebe:, never executionPlatform="Camunda Cloud". If the user actually wants Zeebe, say so and stop.

Layout: non-destructive by default

layout preserves camunda: extensions on every path. It is also non-destructive: if the file already has DI it re-syncs — keeps your existing geometry, drops shapes for deleted elements, auto-places new ones, and reroutes only stale edges (so hand-tuned diagrams survive an edit). Pass --rebuild to discard all DI and regenerate from scratch (use after big structural changes, or when a diagram is messy). It lays out single processes, collaborations (stacked pools + message flows), lanes (swimlane bands), and data objects / text annotations / associations; sub-processes are kept as drill-down planes. Only groups are not auto-placed. If a request leans on groups, place them in a modeler or say so.

Bundled tools

Command	Purpose
summarize <file> [--json]	Outline + per-node implementation, stub markers, async, forms, decisionRef, historyTTL
layout <in> [out] [--rebuild]	Safe layout: re-sync existing DI (or generate); always preserves camunda: extensions
validate <file>	Parse, flag missing shapes / overlaps / parse warnings (plane-aware)
lint <file>	Control-flow + structural + Camunda execution problems (ERROR/WARN/INFO); lists stubs
diff <a> <b>	Semantic + implementation diff (added/removed/renamed/retyped/rewired/impl-changed)
find <file> <term>	Find flow elements by name/type

All live in scripts/camunda-tool.mjs (engine in scripts/lib.mjs; tests: npm test).