菜单
Route software work through the Agentic Development Lifecycle in Pi. Use when the user asks to apply ADLC, operate in ADLC, triage work, or choose the next ADLC gate.
用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt，粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里，让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Routes agentic development work to the right Agentic Development Lifecycle (ADLC) gate. Use when shaping a spec or ticket, deciding how to fan out work to models, protecting frozen rails during a build, prosecuting a change before merge, or distilling repeated review findings into defenses. Triggers on "shape this spec", "is this ticket ready", "freeze these tests", "prosecute this change", "is this safe to merge", "ADLC", "which gate", "spec-lint", "premortem", "coldstart", "rails-guard", "hollow-test", "behavior-diff".
Prosecute a change before merge (ADLC P5) — prove the tests are load-bearing rather than hollow, make behavior change visible, measure whether review would actually catch a planted defect, and record revision-bound evidence. Use before merging, or on requests like "prosecute this change", "is this safe to merge", "are these tests real", "will review catch anything".
Bootstrap the ADLC runtime in a repository — install the gate toolkit, create the .adlc/ workspace, and wire the CI rails-guard control. Use when adopting the Agentic Development Lifecycle in a repo for the first time, when `adlc --version` fails, when `.adlc/` is missing, or on requests like "set up ADLC here", "install ADLC", "initialize the lifecycle".
Routes agentic development work to the right Agentic Development Lifecycle (ADLC) gate. Use when shaping a spec or ticket, deciding how to fan out work to models, protecting frozen rails during a build, prosecuting a change before merge, or distilling repeated review findings into defenses. Triggers on "shape this spec", "is this ticket ready", "freeze these tests", "prosecute this change", "is this safe to merge", "ADLC", "which gate", "spec-lint", "premortem", "coldstart", "rails-guard", "hollow-test", "behavior-diff".
Refute-charter review discipline for prosecuting a diff against its ticket. Use when asked to act as a prosecutor, reviewer, or to find reasons a change must not merge.
Run ADLC P7 distillation and maintenance workflows in Codex, including lesson-foundry, rejection-mining, skill-mining, scheduled maintenance, skill-rot, model-ratchet, review-calibration, and gate-fuzzing.
| name | adlc |
| description | Route software work through the Agentic Development Lifecycle in Pi. Use when the user asks to apply ADLC, operate in ADLC, triage work, or choose the next ADLC gate. |
Classify the work before acting:
Use deterministic ADLC CLIs for pass/fail. Skills may recommend commands; they do not declare gates complete unless the relevant CLI and .adlc/manifest.jsonl evidence pass.
Start with:
adlc preflight --json
For strict phase assertions, use:
adlc run <p1|p2|p3|p4|p5|p6|p7> --dir .adlc --json
P3, P4, P5, and P6 assertions are ticket-scoped; include --ticket <ticket-id> for those phases.
Reference adversarial-review at P1 (design review of the ticket/spec) and P3
(attack the declared rail set for adequacy — is every invariant covered and
unbypassable) — recommended practice today via --prompt-only or diff review, since it
only reviews a git diff/branch and first-class artifact input (--input) is a deferred
follow-on — and at P5 (built code; ≥2 distinct providers on the risk gate), where it
runs directly. It is a cross-model, fresh-context ship/no-ship review that loops
review→fix→re-review until clean (exit 0 = SHIP). Flags: --verify (refute stale
findings), --loop (autonomous fix loop over working-tree code changes only, needs a
write sandbox), --providers (multi-provider quorum). Installed separately — invoke via
npx adversarial-review if not on PATH. See ADR-0008 (adversarial-review coverage map)
in the ADLC repo.