Results for “agent-development”

Build and improve AI or probabilistic software through evaluation-driven development. Use for LLM applications, agents, prompts, RAG, tool use, classifiers, model migrations, quality regressions, golden datasets, LLM-as-judge rubrics, benchmarks, or requests to add evals and measurable release gates. Pair with TDD for deterministic code; do not use as the primary guide for ordinary unit testing without model behavior.

Sets up a codebase for reliable agent-driven development by making it legible (structured docs, custom lints, code graph), executable (one-command dev stack, cloud sandbox), and verifiable (e2e gate, verify-before-ship loop).

Search external documentation (web pages, API docs, papers) and generate useful summaries for development. Use when investigating new technologies, understanding third-party APIs, researching best practices, or gathering information for technical decisions. Reduces hallucinations and expands agent knowledge.

Use when implementing features or fixing bugs with test-driven development. Enforces RED→GREEN→REFACTOR cycle with vertical slicing and multi-agent context isolation. Triggers on: 'implement with TDD', 'write tests first', 'red green refactor', 'test-driven', '/tdd <feature>'. Supports Jest, Vitest, pytest, Go test, cargo test, RSpec, PHPUnit.

Guides creation of high-quality Agent Skills with domain expertise, anti-pattern detection, and progressive disclosure best practices. Activate on keywords: create skill, review skill, skill quality, skill best practices, skill anti-patterns, improve skill, skill audit. NOT for general coding advice, slash commands, MCP development, or non-skill Claude Code features.

Run a structured retrospective after development-phase runs of your product's agents — interview the owner in plain language about what went well and poorly, draft ranked improvement hypotheses, then design and run small n=1/n=2 experiments with pre-declared success criteria, guardrails, stop conditions, and a cost/ROI kill-switch. Load when the user says how did that run go, retro this run, the agent output was bad, what should we improve, draft hypotheses, run a small experiment, or after repeated dev runs of an agentic system produce uneven quality. Priority: output quality over performance over cost, each with diminishing-returns stops. NOT a product A/B test (experimentation), NOT coding-agent harness repair (harness-evolution), NOT production-scale learning (runtime-learning-loop).

This skill should be used when working with reinforcement learning tasks including high-performance RL training, custom environment development, vectorized parallel simulation, multi-agent systems, or integration with existing RL environments (Gymnasium, PettingZoo, Atari, Procgen, etc.). Use this skill for implementing PPO training, creating PufferEnv environments, optimizing RL performance, or developing policies with CNNs/LSTMs.

Zephyr RTOS development — boards and devicetree, the build system (west, Kconfig, CMake, sysbuild), drivers and peripherals, BLE and networking, the kernel, storage, power, testing and debugging, security and OTA. Use this for ANY Zephyr RTOS or embedded-firmware task on a Zephyr project; it routes you to the right specialized skill via the zephyr-cli registry.

Use when developing in packages/agent-core-v2 (the DI × Scope agent engine) — adding or modifying a domain Service, choosing a LifecycleScope, wiring DI dependencies, splitting a domain across scopes, owning or migrating a config section, gating behavior behind an experimental flag, raising coded errors, working on the permission system, writing DI/Scope tests, porting business logic from agent-core (v1) to v2, triaging a main-branch commit against v2, or exposing a v2 domain over server-v2 while keeping the /api/v1 wire contract compatible with released clients. Self-contained guide organized by development stage (orient → design → implement → test → verify) plus align workflows for v1→v2 migration, main-branch commit triage, and server-v2 wire exposure; each file carries the rules, examples, and red lines for its step.

Autonomous spec-driven development agent. Syncs DEV_SPEC.md into chapter-based reference files, identifies the next pending task from the schedule, implements code following spec architecture and patterns, runs tests with up to 3 auto-fix rounds, and persists progress with atomic commits. Use when user says "auto code", "自动开发", "自动写代码", "auto dev", "一键开发", "autopilot", or wants fully automated spec-to-code workflow.

Autonomous spec-driven development agent. Syncs DEV_SPEC.md into chapter-based reference files, identifies the next pending task from the schedule, implements code following spec architecture and patterns, runs tests with up to 3 auto-fix rounds, and persists progress with atomic commits. Use when user says "auto code", "自动开发", "自动写代码", "auto dev", "一键开发", "autopilot", or wants fully automated spec-to-code workflow.

This skill should be used when the user wants to implement features or fix bugs using test-driven development. Enforces the RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle with vertical slicing, context isolation between test writing and implementation, human checkpoints, and auto-test feedback loops. Uses multi-agent orchestration with the Task tool for architecturally enforced context isolation. Supports Jest, Vitest, pytest, Go test, cargo test, PHPUnit, and RSpec.

Autonomous spec-driven development agent. Syncs DEV_SPEC.md into chapter-based reference files, identifies the next pending task from the schedule, implements code following spec architecture and patterns, runs tests with up to 3 auto-fix rounds, and persists progress with atomic commits. Use when user says "auto code", "自动开发", "自动写代码", "auto dev", "一键开发", "autopilot", or wants fully automated spec-to-code workflow.

Tactical fast path: turn a small problem, bug report, edit request, or narrow refactor into three deliverables — a brief change-spec (docs/specs/), a detailed implementation-ready plan (docs/plans/), and a TODO.md with agent-pickable tasks and milestones. Load when the user describes a tactical problem and wants quick planning artifacts, says "plan this change", "create a TODO", "write a plan for this", "problem to plan", "break this into tasks for agents", "I want to change X — plan it", or when process-decomposer routes here after determining the user needs lightweight planning deliverables. Also triggers on "create tasks from this problem", "make this actionable", or "turn this into a plan agents can execute". For feature-sized work that needs an executable spec + constitution + cross-check gate, route to `spec-driven-development` (or `feature-spec`) instead.

Run the Ouroboros specification-first development loop: reduce ambiguity with a Socratic interview grounded in live git data (commits, churn, contributors), freeze an immutable seed/spec, render the execution plan through spec-kit (/speckit.plan → /speckit.tasks), execute against that contract through cli-anything agent-native CLI harnesses (cli-hub, --json evidence), verify before claiming success, and keep looping until completion is actually verified. Use when the user wants spec-first clarification, git-aware interviews, immutable requirements, drift-aware implementation, harness-driven execution, or a persistent completion loop that should keep going until tests / checks / acceptance criteria pass. Triggers on: ooo, ouroboros, interview, seed, run workflow, evaluate, evolve, ooo ralph, specification first, socratic interview, git-aware interview, ambiguity reduction, execution plan, cli harness execute, persistent completion.