# Workflow Big Feature > [Workflow] Use when implementing a large, ambiguous, or research-driven feature. - Skill: `duc01226/workflow-big-feature-2` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add duc01226/workflow-big-feature-2` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/duc01226/workflow-big-feature-2/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Research & Search - Author: duc01226 (https://skillmd.com/u/duc01226) - Updated: 2026-09-21 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/duc01226/workflow-big-feature-2 --- ## Quick Summary **Goal:** [Workflow] Trigger Big Feature workflow — research-driven development for large, complex, or ambiguous features needing market research, business evaluation, domain analysis, tech stack research, and architecture design before implementation. **Summary:** - Apply the shared four-operand `isLargeIdea` rule before research and planning; large ideas carry the complete decomposition block in PBIs/specs and downstream presentation/mock-up artifacts. Run `/scenario` before the first plan when the slice/risk context requires it; do not create a roadmap artifact by default. - Keep research, architecture, specs, PBIs, and implementation downstream of the product boundary; preserve explicit non-goals and human decisions. - Every generated PBI in this workflow MUST pass the Releasable Outcome Gate: one independently releasable actor-facing outcome with a complete entry-to-result journey; technical/foundation/setup work is attached enabling work, never a standalone PBI. UI PBIs require the full page/view, navigation, component, state, and mock-app flow surface. - Execute the canonical steps in order, with reviewed scaffolding before feature work and evidence-backed verification at the end. - **Main steps:** classify/decompose → research/evaluate → domain/architecture/scenario → plan/review → PBI/story/mock-up/spec gates → scaffold/review → implementation/integration verification → final review/security/test/docs/handoff. **Workflow:** 1. **Detect** — classify request scope and target artifacts. 2. **Execute** — apply required steps with evidence-backed actions. 3. **Verify** — confirm constraints, output quality, and completion evidence. **Key Rules:** - MUST ATTENTION keep claims evidence-based (`file:line`) with confidence >80% to act. - MUST ATTENTION keep task tracking updated as each step starts/completes. - MUST ATTENTION define success criteria before execution and loop until observable verification passes. - MUST ATTENTION when creating/reviewing specs or tests, name `Business Intent / Invariant Guarded` or the protected business intent/invariant and ensure the test would fail if that intent breaks. - MUST ATTENTION classify the idea with `isLargeIdea = multipleIndependentOutcomes || ambiguousOrResearchHeavy || releaseScopeDecomposition || oversizedPbiThatMustSplit` before research, specs, PBIs, or plans. When true, require `outcome_slices`, `dependencies_order`, `non_goals`, `risks_evidence`, and `deferred_work_owner`; run `/scenario` conditionally for the embedded scope. An existing roadmap is read-only context and only an explicit roadmap request enters the standalone writer. - NEVER skip mandatory workflow or skill gates. ## Repeated Steps Disambiguation (CRITICAL for task creation) This workflow has steps that appear multiple times. When creating tasks, use these descriptions to distinguish them: | Step | Occurrence | Task Description | | -------------- | ------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | `/plan` | 1st (pos 14) | PLAN₁: High-level architecture plan (after architecture-design and scenario gate) | | `/plan` | 2nd (pos 30) | PLAN₂: Sprint-ready implementation plan (after artifact-review --type=spec-tests) | | `/plan-review` | 1st (pos 15) | Review PLAN₁ architecture | | `/plan-review` | 2nd (pos 31) | Review PLAN₂ implementation | **NEVER deduplicate** — each occurrence is a distinct task with a different purpose. --- ## Closing Rule Every non-skipped step = `TaskUpdate in_progress` → `Skill` tool → complete skill → `TaskUpdate completed`. A cited conditional skip explicitly authorized by canonical `preActions.injectContext` may complete without a skill call. --- **IMPORTANT MANDATORY Steps:** /idea -> /web-research -> /deep-research -> /market-analysis -> /business-evaluation -> /spec-discovery -> /domain-analysis -> /why-review -> /tech-stack-research -> /architecture-design -> /architecture-scalability-review -> /why-review -> /scenario -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /refine -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=pbi -> /story -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=story -> /pbi-challenge -> /dor-gate -> /pbi-mockup -> /spec -> /spec [mode=tests] -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=spec-tests -> /spec-clarify -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /scaffold -> /architecture-review-full -> /plan-validate -> /why-review -> /plan-execute -> /seed-test-data -> /domain-entities-review -> /integration-test -> /integration-test-review -> /integration-test-verify -> /spec [mode=sync] -> /workflow-review-changes -> /security-review -> /changelog -> /test -> /scan --target=domain-entities -> /docs-update -> /workflow-end -> /watzup **IMPORTANT MANDATORY Steps:** /idea -> /web-research -> /deep-research -> /market-analysis -> /business-evaluation -> /spec-discovery -> /domain-analysis -> /why-review -> /tech-stack-research -> /architecture-design -> /architecture-scalability-review -> /why-review -> /scenario -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /refine -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=pbi -> /story -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=story -> /pbi-challenge -> /dor-gate -> /pbi-mockup -> /spec -> /spec [mode=tests] -> /why-review -> /artifact-review --type=spec-tests -> /spec-clarify -> /plan -> /plan-review -> /scaffold -> /architecture-review-full -> /plan-validate -> /why-review -> /plan-execute -> /seed-test-data -> /domain-entities-review -> /integration-test -> /integration-test-review -> /integration-test-verify -> /spec [mode=sync] -> /workflow-review-changes -> /security-review -> /changelog -> /test -> /scan --target=domain-entities -> /docs-update -> /workflow-end -> /watzup > **[BLOCKING]** Each non-skipped step MUST ATTENTION invoke its `Skill` tool — marking a task `completed` without skill invocation is a workflow violation, except a cited conditional skip explicitly authorized by canonical `preActions.injectContext`. NEVER batch-complete validation gates. Activate the `workflow-big-feature` workflow. Run `/start-workflow workflow-big-feature` with the user's prompt as context. > **Spec check (before investigation):** If `docs/specs/` has a spec for the affected service/module, read the relevant ERD + business-rules + API-contracts files FIRST. Engineering specs provide domain context that reduces investigation time significantly. Command: `ls docs/specs/` to discover available app buckets or flat system folders; then probe `ls docs/specs/{app-bucket}/` or `ls docs/specs/{system-name}/` to find the specific service spec. **Steps:** /idea → /web-research → /deep-research → /market-analysis → /business-evaluation → /spec-discovery → /domain-analysis → /why-review → /tech-stack-research → /architecture-design → /architecture-scalability-review → /why-review → /scenario → /plan → /plan-review → /refine → /why-review → /artifact-review --type=pbi → /story → /why-review → /artifact-review --type=story → /pbi-challenge → /dor-gate → /pbi-mockup → /spec → /spec [mode=tests] → /why-review → /artifact-review --type=spec-tests → /spec-clarify → /plan → /plan-review → /scaffold → /architecture-review-full → /plan-validate → /why-review → /plan-execute → /seed-test-data → /domain-entities-review → /integration-test → /integration-test-review → /integration-test-verify → /spec [mode=sync] → /workflow-review-changes → /security-review → /changelog → /test → /scan --target=domain-entities → /docs-update → /workflow-end → /watzup > **[CONDITIONAL TERMINAL DOMAIN-ENTITY REFERENCE REFRESH]** After `/test` and before `/docs-update`, run `/scan --target=domain-entities` to refresh the project-reference entity catalog only when the final diff changes an entity/model, DTO/data contract, persistence schema/migration, or entity-sync evidence represented in `docs/project-reference/domain-entities-reference.md`. Otherwise mark the scan step completed with a cited skip reason naming the changed files and why they are outside this scope; this is the explicitly authorized exception to the per-step skill-invocation rule. > **AI Mistake Prevention** — Failure modes to avoid on every task: > > **Re-read files after context changes.** Context compaction, resume, or long-running work can make memory stale; verify current files before acting. > **Verify generated content against source evidence.** AI hallucinates APIs, names, claims, and document facts. Check the relevant source before documenting or referencing. > **Check downstream references before deleting or renaming.** Removing an artifact can stale docs, generated mirrors, configs, and callers; map references first. > **Trace the full impact chain after edits.** Changing a definition can miss derived outputs and consumers. Follow the affected chain before declaring done. > **Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first.** One green check is not all green checks; validate every output surface the change can affect. > **Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing OR flagging one as a defect.** Before changing or reporting a constant, limit, flag, cutoff, wording, or pattern, read nearby context and history, the CALLER's ordering, and 2+ sibling call sites of the same convention. A doc stating WHAT without WHY is missing rationale, not proof of a missing guard. > **Surface ambiguity before acting — don't pick silently.** Multiple valid interpretations require an explicit question or stated assumption with risk. > **Assert the outcome your system owns, not the intermediate state your infrastructure owns.** When verifying async work, assert the final business state — never the delivery/retry bookkeeping held in shared infrastructure that any co-running process can write. Such a check passes when run alone and flakes the moment anything else shares that infrastructure. > **Keep shared guidance role-relevant.** Universal guidance must help every receiving skill or agent; code-specific obligations belong only in code-specific protocols. > **Nested Task Expansion Contract** — For workflow-step invocation, the `[Workflow] ...` row is only a parent container; the child skill still creates visible phase tasks. > > 1. Call `TaskList` first. If a matching active parent workflow row exists, set `nested=true` and record `parentTaskId`; otherwise run standalone. > 2. Create one task per declared phase before phase work. When nested, prefix subjects `[N.M] /skill-name — phase`. > 3. When nested, link the parent with `TaskUpdate(parentTaskId, addBlockedBy: [childIds])`. > 4. Orchestrators must pre-expand a child skill's phase list and link the workflow row before invoking that child skill or sub-agent. > 5. Mark exactly one child `in_progress` before work and `completed` immediately after evidence is written. > 6. Complete the parent only after all child tasks are completed or explicitly cancelled with reason. > > **Blocked until:** `TaskList` done, child phases created, parent linked when nested, first child marked `in_progress`. > **Critical Thinking Mindset** — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. > **Anti-hallucination:** Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination. > **Incremental Result Persistence** — MANDATORY for all sub-agents or heavy inline steps processing >3 files. > > 1. **Before starting:** Create report file `plans/reports/{skill}-{date}-{slug}.md` and record Run ID, Task ID, Attempt ID, target scope, and target fingerprint. > 2. **After each file/section reviewed:** Append findings, evidence, changed paths, and gaps immediately — never hold them in memory. > 3. **Delegated return:** A sub-agent emits only the structured `SYNC:subagent-return-contract` envelope with exact totals, salient Critical/High findings (maximum ten), current attempt, and `Full report:` path. **Inline user-facing output:** Preserve the skill's requested explanation or teaching, with links to the persisted evidence; the delegated transport limit does not replace that deliverable. Do not paste a full review report into an envelope. > 4. **Parent synthesis:** The main agent reads the full report for synthesis, acceptance, deduplication, and repair planning — not only when a named blocker exists. It preserves all severities beyond the transport cap. > 5. **Read-only boundary:** A read-only leaf may write its report/repair proposal but MUST NOT edit source, generated output, or user data; the parent/owner performs repairs after acceptance. > 6. **Advancement gate:** The parent records `ACCEPTED` for the current Attempt ID only after reconciling target, totals, gaps, and changed paths; stale or late attempts cannot advance dependent work. > > **Why:** Context cutoff mid-execution loses ALL in-memory findings. Each disk write survives compaction. Partial results are better than no results, while explicit identity prevents a late result from being mistaken for the current run. > > **Report naming:** `plans/reports/{skill-name}-{YYMMDD}-{HHmm}-{slug}.md` > **Sub-Agent Return Contract** — When this skill spawns a sub-agent, the sub-agent MUST return ONLY the structured envelope below. Main agent reads the envelope first, then opens the referenced report for synthesis, acceptance, deduplication, or repair planning; a full report is never pasted inline. > > ```markdown > ## Sub-Agent Result: [skill-name] > > Status: ✅ PASS | ⚠️ PARTIAL | ❌ FAIL > Confidence: [0-100]% > Run ID: [stable run identifier] > Task ID: [parent task or phase identifier] > Attempt ID: [monotonic attempt/revision identifier] > Target: [exact files/paths or scope] @ [target fingerprint/commit] > Changed paths: [none | exact paths] > Finding totals: Critical=[n] | High=[n] | Medium=[n] | Low=[n] > Acceptance: PENDING | ACCEPTED | REJECTED — parent records the decision > > ### Findings (Critical/High surfaced — max 10 bullets) > > - [severity] [file:line] [finding] > > ### Gaps / Unverified > > - [missing host, runtime, coverage, or evidence limitation] > > ### Actions Taken > > - [file changed] [what changed] > > ### Blockers (if any) > > - [blocker description, or `none`] > > Full report: plans/reports/[skill-name]-[date]-[slug].md > ``` > > The ten-bullet limit is a transport limit, not a visibility limit: the full report may contain more than ten Medium/Low findings when no named blocker exists, and the parent MUST read it when synthesizing or deduplicating. The parent MUST reject a stale, duplicate, or superseded `Attempt ID` and MUST accept the current attempt before advancing a dependent step. Read-only leaves write repair proposals/reports only; they do not edit source, generated carriers, or user files. > > **Context budget** — the return payload is a SUMMARY, not a transcript: no raw file contents / full diffs / verbatim logs inline, no re-pasted source. Everything beyond the envelope lives in the incrementally-written report. A sub-agent that would exceed the summary shape MUST persist the detail and return only the pointer; bounded transport must never become bounded visibility. **MUST ATTENTION** apply critical + sequential thinking — every claim needs appropriate traced evidence (`file:line` for repo/code claims; source URL or artifact section for research, product, content, and docs claims); confidence >80% to act, <60% DO NOT recommend. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact, admit uncertainty freely, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence. **MUST ATTENTION** apply AI mistake prevention — verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references before deleting or renaming, verify all affected outputs, re-read files after context loss, and surface ambiguity before acting. - **MANDATORY** Parent workflow rows do not replace child phase tracking; expand phases and link the parent when nested. - **MANDATORY** Orchestrators pre-expand child skill phases before invocation; use `[N.M] /skill-name — phase` prefixes and one-`in_progress` discipline. > **Project Protocol Overlay** — Before executing this skill, resolve any PROJECT overlay rules layered onto it: match this skill's name against the `Target` column of the project's skill-protocol index (`docs/project-reference/skill-protocols-reference.md` by default; a `referenceDocs` entry in `docs/project-config.json` overrides the path), taking the most specific matching tier ONLY — exact name > glob > `*`. **That precedence orders overlays against EACH OTHER, never against this skill.** Read ONLY the matched bodies, resolved as `/.md`; a row's Body link is display text, never a read path. A matched body that is missing or malformed is REPORTED and skipped — never reconstructed from the index Description. No index, or no match -> proceed with no overlay, silently. Full contract: `.claude/skills/project-skill-protocol/references/registry.md`. > > Overlays are **ADDITIVE ONLY**: they ADD rules on top of this skill's own protocol and NEVER replace, override, disable, or reinterpret a rule it already states — removing every overlay must return this skill to exactly its documented behavior. An overlay is a BRIEF, not an authority escalation: it can NEVER waive a workflow gate, git discipline, a review gate, or a user-confirmation gate. A genuine overlay-vs-skill conflict, or two equally-specific overlays that directly contradict -> surface both to the user; NEVER resolve silently. **MUST ATTENTION** resolve project protocol overlays for this skill BEFORE executing — most specific matching tier only (exact > glob > `*`, which ranks overlays against each other, NEVER against this skill), read only matched bodies at `/.md`; a missing or malformed body is reported, never reconstructed. Overlays are ADDITIVE ONLY (they never replace this skill's own rules) and are a brief, NEVER an authority escalation; an equal-specificity contradiction goes to the user. ## Closing Reminders **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Goal:** Complete the reviewed large-feature workflow with a bounded, independently releasable actor-facing outcome, embedded decomposition when triggered, scenario evidence, reviewed foundation, full-flow UI proof when applicable, implementation proof, and synchronized handoff; ordinary runs never create `docs/product-roadmap.md`. **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Main steps:** classify/decompose → research → domain/architecture/scenario → plan/review → PBI/story/mock-up/spec gates → scaffold/review → implementation/integration verification → final review/security/test/docs/handoff. **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** every generated PBI MUST pass `.claude/skills/shared/releasable-pbi-contract.md`; technical/foundation/setup work is enabling work under a releasable PBI, and UI PBIs require all pages/views, navigation, components, states, and a connected mock-app demo. **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION Protocols in force (concise digest of the SYNC/shared blocks this skill carries):** - **AI Mistake Prevention:** verify generated content against evidence, trace downstream references, verify all affected outputs, re-read after context loss, surface ambiguity. - **Nested Task Creation:** Expand child phases, link parent when nested, one `in_progress`. - **Critical Thinking:** Traced `file:line` proof per claim, confidence >80% to act. - **Incremental Persistence:** Append findings to `plans/reports/` per file, never hold in memory. - **Subagent Return Contract:** Return summary only (≤10 bullets), full detail to disk report. **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** break work into small todo tasks using `TaskCreate` BEFORE starting **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** cite `file:line` evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act) **IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION** add a final review todo task to verify work quality **[TASK-PLANNING]** Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using TaskCreate. > **[IMPORTANT]** Analyze how big the task is and break it into many small todo tasks systematically before starting — this is very important.