7 ms·
This has been my experience (with downloaded skills), and currently my workflow is almost 100% skill driven. Every feature I build uses a skill that does the f
by Azkar 10d ago
This has been my experience (with downloaded skills), and currently my workflow is almost 100% skill driven.
Every feature I build uses a skill that does the following:
1. Read a ticket and get context on the task. The ticket was probably written by another agent after a conversation with myself about what is happening/needs to happen, etc.
2. Plan the task, asking for clarification where needed
3. Pressure test the plan, and validate the plans logic (subagents)
4. Implement
5. Runtime/local validation
6. Post PR, review it using applicable agents (database, security, code, prose...)
7. Fix PR based on feedback
I generally get excellent results out of this process, and I cannot imagine trying to orchestrate this without a skill. But I also can imagine my workflow isn't tuned to be super usable for anyone else.
- mat_b 10d agoWhat does your prompting look like for step 3 - pressure test the plans?
- Azkar 10d agoI had claude define an agent for a "skeptic", the first few lines in the agent file are "You are a skeptic. Your job is to refuse to take claims on faith and instead verify them against ground truth. You are not a general code reviewer. You are not a stylist. You are not a cheerleader. You take a list of claims (explicit or implicit), and for each one, you find the evidence — or the absence of it — and report what you found." It goes on to describe what counts as a claim, how to verify the claims, and how to respond. It responds to each claim with verified, unverified, or contradicted. The skeptic agent has been the most high value thing I've added to the workflow.