| name | oneshot |
| description | Lightweight workflow for straightforward changes — plan → implement → optional PR. Direct-commit by default; synthesize is opt-in via synthesisPolicy or a runtime request_synthesize event. Use for trivial fixes, config tweaks, single-file changes, or exploratory work that doesn't warrant subagent dispatch or two-stage review. Triggers: 'oneshot', 'quick fix', 'small change', or oneshot. |
| metadata | {"author":"exarchos","version":"1.0.0","mcp-server":"exarchos","category":"workflow","phase-affinity":"plan"} |
Oneshot Workflow Skill
VCS Provider
This skill uses VCS operations through Exarchos MCP actions (create_pr, merge_pr, etc.) when the synthesize path is taken.
These actions automatically detect and route to the correct VCS provider (GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps).
No gh/glab/az commands needed — the MCP server handles provider dispatch.
A lean, four-phase workflow type for changes that are too small to justify the
full feature flow (plan → plan-review → delegate → review → synthesize → completed)
but still deserve event-sourced auditability and a planning step. The workflow is
direct-commit by default with an opt-in PR path; the choice between the
two is resolved at the end of implementing via a pure event-sourced guard,
not a heuristic.
Read this first if you have never run a oneshot: the workflow has a
choice state at the end of implementing. Whether you land on
completed (direct commit) or transition through synthesize (PR) is
decided by two inputs: the synthesisPolicy set at init, and whether the
user emitted a synthesize.requested event during implementing. Both
inputs are persisted; the decision is replay-safe.
When to use oneshot
Reach for oneshot when all of the following are true:
- The change is bounded — typically a single file, or a tightly-coupled
cluster of 2-3 files
- No subagent dispatch is needed — the work fits comfortably in a single
in-session implement-and-verify loop
- No design document is required — the goal is obvious from the task
description, and a one-page plan is enough scaffolding
- No two-stage review is required — either the change is trivial enough
that direct-commit is acceptable, or a single PR review will suffice
Concrete examples that fit oneshot:
- Fixing a typo in a README
- Bumping a dependency version
- Adding a missing null-check in one function
- Tweaking a CI workflow YAML
- Renaming a config key everywhere it's referenced
- Adding a one-off helper script
- Exploratory spikes that may or may not be kept
When NOT to use oneshot
Do not use oneshot for any of the following — use the full feature
workflow instead (ideate):
- Cross-cutting refactors that touch many files or modules
- Multi-file features that benefit from subagent decomposition
- Anything that needs design exploration or competing approaches weighed
- Anything that needs spec-review + quality-review (two-stage)
- Anything that needs to coordinate with another agent team
- Changes that should land in stages (stacked PRs)
- Anything where you'd want a written design doc to look back at
If you start a oneshot and discover the change is bigger than expected, the
right move is cancel and restart with ideate.
Don't try to grow a oneshot into a feature workflow mid-stream; the
playbooks have different shapes and you'll fight the state machine.
Synthesis policy — three options
The synthesisPolicy field on a oneshot workflow declares the user's
intent up front about whether the change should be turned into a PR. It
takes one of three values, persisted on state.oneshot.synthesisPolicy:
| Policy | Behavior | When to use |
|---|
always | Always transition implementing → synthesize at finalize, regardless of events. A PR is always created. | The user wants a paper trail / review for every change in this workflow, even small ones. |
never | Always transition implementing → completed at finalize, regardless of events. No PR is created — commits go directly to the current branch. | The user is iterating on personal/scratch work and explicitly opts out of PRs. |
on-request (default) | Direct-commit by default. The user can opt in to a PR mid-implementing by calling request_synthesize; if any synthesize.requested event is on the stream at finalize, the workflow transitions to synthesize instead of completed. | The common case: start with the assumption of direct-commit, but leave the door open for the user to change their mind once they see the diff. |
The default is on-request because it's the least surprising: the user
gets the lightweight path until they explicitly ask for the heavy one.
Policy wins over event. If synthesisPolicy: 'never' is set and a
synthesize.requested event is somehow on the stream (e.g. the user
called the action on a workflow they thought was on-request), the
guard still routes to completed. Policy is the user's declared intent
and overrides runtime signal.
Lifecycle
plan ──────► implementing ──┬── [synthesisOptedOut] ──► completed
│
└── [synthesisOptedIn] ──► synthesize ──► completed
Four phases. The fork after implementing is a UML choice state,
implemented via two mutually-exclusive HSM transitions whose guards are
pure functions of state.oneshot.synthesisPolicy and the
synthesize.requested event count.
| Phase | What happens | Exit criteria |
|---|
plan | Lightweight one-page plan: goal, approach, files to touch, tests to add. No design doc. No subagent dispatch. | artifacts.plan set → transition to implementing |
implementing | In-session loop, verification scaled to risk. Defaults to the low tier (static analysis suffices); higher-blast changes add tests covering the changed behavior (test-after) under the check_test_adequacy kill-probe. Commit as you go. | Tests pass + typecheck clean + finalize_oneshot called |
synthesize | Reached only when synthesisOptedIn is true. Hands off to the existing synthesis flow — see @skills/synthesize/SKILL.md. PR created via exarchos_orchestrate({ action: "create_pr" }), auto-merge enabled, CI gates apply. | PR merged → completed |
completed | Terminal. For direct-commit path, commits are already on the branch — there's nothing more to do. For synthesize path, the PR merge event terminates the workflow. | — |
cancelled is also reachable from any phase via the universal cancel
transition, same as every other workflow type.
Step-by-step
Step 1 — Init
Call exarchos_workflow with action: 'init', workflowType: 'oneshot',
and an optional synthesisPolicy:
exarchos:exarchos_workflow({
action: "init",
featureId: "fix-readme-typo",
workflowType: "oneshot",
synthesisPolicy: "on-request"
})
If the user has been clear up front ("I want a PR for this"), pass
synthesisPolicy: "always". If they've been clear ("don't open a PR,
just commit it"), pass synthesisPolicy: "never". Otherwise, omit the
field and rely on the on-request default — you can always escalate
later in the implementing phase.
The init returns the new workflow state; the workflow lands in plan.
Step 2 — Plan phase
Produce a one-page plan. This is intentionally lightweight — no design
doc, no parallelization analysis, no decomposition into N tasks. The
plan should answer four questions in 5-10 lines each:
- Goal — what is the user trying to accomplish?
- Approach — what's the one-line implementation strategy?
- Files — which files will be touched? (1-5 typically)
- Tests — which test cases will be added? (named, not described)
Persist the plan and transition to implementing in a single set call.
phase is a top-level argument of set, not a field inside updates:
exarchos:exarchos_workflow({
action: "update",
featureId: "fix-readme-typo",
phase: "implementing",
updates: {
"artifacts.plan": "<plan text>",
"oneshot.planSummary": "<one-line summary>"
}
})
The plan goes on artifacts.plan for parity with the feature workflow;
the human-readable one-liner goes on oneshot.planSummary for the
pipeline view. Only artifacts.plan is enforced by the
oneshot-plan-set guard — planSummary is an optional pipeline-view
label and is not a substitute for a real plan artifact.
Step 3 — Implementing phase
Run an in-session loop, with verification scaled to the change's risk (the
ladder in @skills/_shared/references/verification.md). A oneshot defaults to
the low tier — static analysis suffices for a trivial fix. When the change
touches a higher-blast surface (schema/type/API/shared contract, or it crosses
an I/O boundary), it is a higher-tier task: cover the new/changed behavior with
tests (test-after is fine) and expect the check_test_adequacy kill-probe to
reject tests that cannot actually fail.
For each higher-tier behavior in the plan:
- Implement the behavior.
- Add the tests its tier requires (scoped tests for the change; an integration
test across the seam at high tier), named
Method_Scenario_Outcome.
- Refactor while the tests stay green.
Granular per-behavior red-green is available as an explicit opt-in, never a
requirement.
Commit each logical change as a single atomic commit. Do not batch
multiple unrelated changes into one commit — keeping commits atomic
matters even more in oneshot, where there's no separate review phase
to catch bundled changes.
There is no subagent dispatch in oneshot. The main agent does the
work directly. There is no separate review phase. Quality is
maintained by the tier-scaled verification (static analysis plus, above the
low tier, the check_test_adequacy kill-probe) and (if the user opts in)
the synthesize PR review.
Mid-workflow: opting in to a PR
If at any point during plan or implementing the user decides they
want a PR after all (policy is on-request, default), they can opt in
by calling the request_synthesize orchestrate action:
exarchos:exarchos_orchestrate({
action: "request_synthesize",
featureId: "fix-readme-typo",
reason: "user requested review of the parser changes"
})
The trigger for this is conversational, not a magic keyword. Listen
for phrases like:
- "actually, let's open a PR for this"
- "I want a review on this before it lands"
- "make this a PR"
- "let's get eyes on this"
- "synthesize this"
When you hear any of those, call request_synthesize immediately. The
handler appends a synthesize.requested event to the workflow's event
stream; the synthesisOptedIn guard reads the stream at finalize and
routes accordingly.
request_synthesize is accepted from both plan and implementing
phases — call it whenever you know you want the PR path, even before
implementing starts. Terminal phases (synthesize, completed,
cancelled) are rejected.
Duplicate calls are routing-idempotent but not event-idempotent:
each call appends a new synthesize.requested event, but the guard
treats any count >= 1 as "opted in", so the routing decision is the
same whether you call once or five times. The event stream will
contain each duplicate for audit purposes.
Calling request_synthesize does not transition the phase. The
workflow stays in its current phase. The decision is only acted on
when you call finalize_oneshot in step 4.
Step 4 — Finalize (the choice point)
When the implementing loop is done — tests pass, typecheck clean, all
commits made — call finalize_oneshot to resolve the choice state:
exarchos:exarchos_orchestrate({
action: "finalize_oneshot",
featureId: "fix-readme-typo"
})
The handler:
- Reads the current state and verifies
workflowType === 'oneshot' and
phase === 'implementing'.
- Hydrates
_events from the event store so the guard sees the same
view the HSM will see during the actual transition.
- Evaluates
guards.synthesisOptedIn against the state. The guard
inspects state.oneshot.synthesisPolicy and the _events array.
- Calls
handleSet with the resolved target phase (synthesize or
completed). The HSM re-evaluates the guard at the transition
boundary, so any race between the read and the transition is caught
safely.
Possible outcomes:
synthesisPolicy | synthesize.requested event present? | Resolved target | Path |
|---|
always | (any) | synthesize | PR path |
never | (any) | completed | direct-commit path |
on-request (default) | yes | synthesize | PR path |
on-request (default) | no | completed | direct-commit path |
Step 5a — Direct-commit path (terminal)
If finalize resolved to completed, you're done. The commits made
during implementing are already on the current branch. Push them if
they aren't already pushed:
git push
The workflow is now in completed and will not appear in the default
pipeline view. Report completion:
## Oneshot Complete (direct-commit)
Workflow: <featureId>
Plan: <one-line summary>
Tests added: N
Commits: <hash list>
Path: direct-commit
Step 5b — Synthesize path
If finalize resolved to synthesize, hand off to the standard synthesis
flow — see @skills/synthesize/SKILL.md. The same prepare_synthesis /
validate_pr_body / create_pr machinery used by the feature
workflow applies. After the PR merges, the workflow transitions
synthesize → completed via the existing mergeVerified guard, same as
every other workflow type.
You do not need to run delegate or
review for an opt-in oneshot synthesize. Those phases
do not exist in the oneshot playbook. The PR review is the only review.
Report completion:
## Oneshot Complete (synthesize)
Workflow: <featureId>
PR: <url>
Tests: X pass | Build: 0 errors
Path: synthesize → PR review → merge
Example invocations
Example A — Direct-commit (default on-request policy, no opt-in)
User: "Quick fix — there's a typo in the README, 'recieve' should be 'receive'.
Use oneshot."
Agent:
1. exarchos_workflow init { featureId: "fix-readme-typo", workflowType: "oneshot" }
→ workflow created in 'plan' phase, synthesisPolicy defaults to 'on-request'
2. Produces a 4-line plan: goal=fix typo, approach=sed, files=[README.md],
tests=[readme has no occurrence of 'recieve']
3. exarchos_workflow update {
featureId: "fix-readme-typo",
phase: "implementing", // top-level
updates: {
"artifacts.plan": "...",
"oneshot.planSummary": "..."
}
}
4. edits README, fixes typo (low tier — a docs one-liner; static analysis
suffices, no test-first ceremony)
5. verifies: greps README for 'recieve' → 0 matches
6. git commit -m "docs: fix 'recieve' typo in README"
7. exarchos_orchestrate finalize_oneshot { featureId: "fix-readme-typo" }
→ guard sees policy='on-request' + no synthesize.requested event
→ resolves to 'completed'
8. git push
"Done. Workflow completed via direct-commit path."
Example B — Mid-implementing opt-in (on-request → user changes mind)
User: "Add input validation to the parseConfig helper. Oneshot."
Agent:
1. exarchos_workflow init { workflowType: "oneshot" }
→ 'plan' phase, default 'on-request'
2. plans (goal: validate input, files: [parser.ts, parser.test.ts])
3. transitions to 'implementing'
4. adds the null-input validation to parseConfig
5. adds a test for the null-input case (test-after)
6. refactors: extracts validateInput helper (tests stay green)
7. commits
User: "Actually, this is touching the parser — I want a review on it before
it lands."
Agent:
8. exarchos_orchestrate request_synthesize {
featureId, reason: "user requested review of parser changes"
}
→ appends synthesize.requested event
9. exarchos_orchestrate finalize_oneshot { featureId }
→ guard sees policy='on-request' + 1 synthesize.requested event
→ resolves to 'synthesize'
10. hands off to @skills/synthesize/SKILL.md → prepare_synthesis →
validate_pr_body → create_pr → merge
Example C — synthesisPolicy: 'always' (PR mandatory)
User: "I want a PR for any change to the auth module, even small ones.
Use oneshot but always make a PR."
Agent:
1. exarchos_workflow init {
workflowType: "oneshot",
synthesisPolicy: "always"
}
2-7. plan + implement + verify + commits, identical to Example A
8. exarchos_orchestrate finalize_oneshot { featureId }
→ guard sees policy='always' (short-circuits — no event check needed)
→ resolves to 'synthesize'
9. synthesis flow → PR
State management
Track oneshot-specific state under the oneshot key on the workflow state:
exarchos:exarchos_workflow({
action: "update",
featureId: "<id>",
updates: {
"oneshot": {
"synthesisPolicy": "on-request",
"planSummary": "Fix off-by-one in pagination helper"
}
}
})
The synthesisPolicy field is optional and defaults to 'on-request' per
the schema in servers/exarchos-mcp/src/workflow/schemas.ts. Setting it
explicitly is recommended when the user has stated a preference.
Phase Transitions and Guards
For the full transition table for oneshot, consult
@skills/checkpoint/references/phase-transitions.md.
Note: The engine's exarchos_workflow describe playbook="oneshot"
output and the HSM definitions in hsm-definitions.ts are the
canonical sources for transition behavior. phase-transitions.md is
a prose reference that can drift — when discrepancies arise, prefer
engine describe output.
Quick reference for oneshot:
| From | To | Guard |
|---|
plan | implementing | oneshotPlanSet (requires non-empty artifacts.plan) |
implementing | synthesize | synthesisOptedIn |
implementing | completed | synthesisOptedOut |
synthesize | completed | mergeVerified |
| (any) | cancelled | universal — always allowed |
synthesisOptedIn and synthesisOptedOut are pure functions of
state.oneshot.synthesisPolicy and state._events. They are mutually
exclusive across all 4 meaningful combinations — always and never
each map to one outcome (ignoring the event flag), and on-request
branches on whether a synthesize.requested event is present or
absent. Exactly one guard returns true at any given time.
Schema discovery
Use exarchos_workflow({ action: "describe", actions: ["init", "update"] })
for parameter schemas (including the synthesisPolicy enum) and
exarchos_workflow({ action: "describe", playbook: "oneshot" }) for the
phase transitions, guard names, and playbook prose. Use
exarchos_orchestrate({ action: "describe", actions: ["request_synthesize", "finalize_oneshot"] })
for the orchestrate action schemas.
Verification scales with risk
The verification ladder from @skills/_shared/references/verification.md applies to
oneshot. A oneshot defaults to the cheap (low) tier — a one-line fix or config
tweak leans on static analysis (typecheck + lint), no test-first ceremony — unless
risk signals say otherwise. Specifically:
- A low-risk change (docs/config/rename-only, near-zero blast radius) needs only
static analysis to pass; add a focused test only if behavior is non-obvious.
- If the change touches a higher-blast surface (schema/type/API/shared contract,
or it crosses an I/O boundary), it is not a low-tier task: cover the
new/changed behavior with tests (test-after is fine), and expect the
check_test_adequacy kill-probe to flag tests that cannot actually fail.
- Commits stay atomic — one logical change per commit, regardless of tier.
The temptation in a oneshot is to assume everything is "just one line" and skip
verification entirely. Resist that for anything past the low tier. The point of
oneshot is auditability at the right cost — not zero verification, and not the
full feature ceremony on a trivial edit.
Anti-patterns
| Don't | Do Instead |
|---|
| Skip the plan phase ("it's obvious") | Write the four-line plan anyway — it's the artifact future-you reads |
| Apply full red-green-refactor ceremony to a trivial one-liner | Match verification to risk: low-tier leans on static analysis; higher-blast changes add tests covering the changed behavior |
| Skip verification entirely because "it's a oneshot" | Even low-tier must pass static analysis; higher-blast changes still need tests covering the changed behavior |
| Use oneshot for multi-file refactors | Use ideate and the full feature workflow |
| Try to grow a oneshot into a feature workflow mid-stream | Cancel and restart with ideate |
Call request_synthesize without listening for the user's intent | Wait for the user to ask for a PR, then call it |
| Bundle unrelated changes into one commit "since it's a oneshot" | Keep commits atomic — there's no review phase to catch bundling |
Forget to call finalize_oneshot at the end | The workflow stays in implementing forever otherwise — call it explicitly |
Completion criteria