# Exec > Use when running execution-ready task slices, dispatching verified `lev exec` flows, or reviewing implementation work in the Exec lane. - Skill: `lev-os/exec` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add lev-os/exec` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/lev-os/exec/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Productivity - Author: lev-os (https://skillmd.com/u/lev-os) - Updated: 2026-09-10 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/lev-os/exec --- # /exec - Exec Lane `/exec` runs execution-ready entities. It does not invent plans, weaken verifiers, or complete work without review evidence. ## Addresses `skill://exec` loads this guidance. Address the selected task as `lev://entity/work/task/`, its workstream as `lev://entity/work/workstream/`, and its executable FlowMind or capability as `lev://exec/`. Use `lev://subagent//?session_id=` when a worker or reviewer session has a stable binding. Load `skill://coder` for provider, CAAM, session, and SDD mechanics and `skill://lev` before authoring unfamiliar URI families. ## Domain Admission and Deferred Ralph First classify coding versus non-coding. The SDLC task-packet protocol below applies to coding or an explicitly selected SDLC overlay, not every Lev task. Coding with unresolved architecture routes to `skill://arch`, then `skill://lev-plan` for broad work and `skill://propose` for packet readiness. Skip settled decisions. Non-coding may enter from a sufficient plan or domain artifact without propose: bind outcome, permitted effects, acceptance, context, dependencies and stopping condition; then use the selected domain skill or available execution surface. Apply SDLC-only task validators and proof profiles only to SDLC packets. A plan does not grant execution permission. Ralph runtime adoption is deferred while Lev develops; this is planning/runbook awareness, not a requirement to launch or prove a loop now. The intended outer loop repeatedly reloads effort state and asks for ONE coherent next unit. `plugins/sdlc/flows/lev-ralph.flow.yaml` is the worker/reviewer variant: the worker does one thing and the reviewer may fix that same chunk before revalidation. A chunk may be substantial for long-horizon agents; it is not the whole effort or an arbitrary one-line edit. Reviewer/fixer is not an independent certifier. When isolated TDD is selected, its frozen-test and role boundaries still apply. Use this prompt shape when preparing a future iteration: > Do the next bit of work on this effort. Read the referenced plan/task and > current workstream frontier. Select ONE ready, coherent unit within the > authorized scope; finish that single thing, run its declared checks, record > the result and remaining frontier, then stop. If blocked or a claim/decision > needs changing, return the blocker instead of expanding the assignment. Completion of one chunk is not completion of the effort. The outer controller decides whether another iteration is eligible within its budget and authority. ## Goal Prompt Discipline When a user asks to set a goal involving `/exec`, the goal objective must be the domain task. Name `/exec`, Lev, Ralph, profiles, or runtime surfaces only as bounded tools/surfaces. Bad goal objective: - "Execute all slices through the exec lane, validate readiness, collect receipts, route blockers, and close with verified status." Good goal objective: - "COPI cutover. Tools: `/exec`/Lev Ralph as bounded execution surfaces. Run one slice at a time; stop on reviewer advice, blocker, failed declared gate, or a no-op/advice loop; report diagnostics." Do not turn the workflow mechanics into the goal. The goal is the product or repo outcome; `/exec` is just the controlled way to attempt it. ## Model Selection Discipline Model choice is execution policy, not skill prose. It varies by adapter, project, FlowMind topology, profile, and current local configuration. Before dispatch: 1. Run `lev exec --help` in the target project before choosing model, profile, flow, binding, budget, or loop flags. Do not guess flags or aliases. 2. Prefer the selected task `execution.yaml`, FlowMind `--flow=`, or exec `--profile=` over an inline `--model`. 3. Let exec profiles carry adapter/model policy. Project `.lev/exec-profiles/` overlays plugin profiles; explicit CLI flags override profile values only when the user or execution artifact requires an override. 4. Use `lev exec "binding smoke" --profile= --dry-run --dry-run-resolve-binding` before a real dispatch when profile/model selection matters. Treat dry-run binding output as resolution evidence, not live provider execution proof. 5. If no project, FlowMind, or exec-profile policy exists, stop and route to `/propose` or diagnostics for a policy decision instead of inventing a stale model default in the skill. ## Worker / Reviewer Profile Pattern Exec profiles are the ONLY profile system. Adapter-native profile/config layers (e.g. `codex -p `) are never read by Lev β€” the provider card passes explicit model flags. Do not duplicate adapter/model policy into adapter-native config; that is a split-brain. Canonical bounded-loop dispatch (ralph shape): ``` lev exec "" --profile= \ --until="" --verifier="" ``` - Worker and reviewer are separate profiles (separate lanes, separate system prompts). Review dispatch reuses the same shape with the reviewer profile and a verifier that greps machine-checkable `VERDICT :` lines. - Agent iterations outlive the default transport delta timeout; pass `--with execution_delta_timeout_ms=180000` (or higher) for loop dispatches unless the loop path already defaults it. - Per-iteration gate proofs land at `.lev/agentfs/exec/artifacts//loop-verifier/iteration-N/gate-proof.json`; cite them as receipt evidence, never the worker's prose claim. - Discover profile ids with `ls .lev/exec-profiles/` plus plugin-shipped profiles; never hardcode model names in prompts or skills. ## Entity Reconciliation After authorized material progress, reconcile touched and causally affected artifacts before routing, handoff, or final response. Track entity ref, island/provider locator (a path for file storage), basis/evidence, and the reason/action due. Update through the verified owning CLI/adapter; use a write-authorized skill fallback only when that operation is unavailable. Record updated, no_change(reason), or blocked(reason), preserving unresolved refs. Reading or mentioning a path alone creates no update obligation. Read-only work reports pending changes only. Reminders grant no write authority; task status stays with the bound tracker. Update only artifacts whose content or evidence changed; do not rewrite every referenced document. ## Work Link Lifecycle lane: Exec Entity movement: `execution_ready -> executing -> verified | blocked | needs_propose` Workstream: resolve active workstream and task entity before dispatch Upstream: `/propose` for SDLC; sufficient plan or domain artifact for non-coding Downstream: `/close`, `/lev-plan`, `/propose`, `/handoff`, selected domain skill Router: `/work` HUD: end with `🧬 {ws} ⚑{exec_count} πŸ“₯{capture_count} ⏸️{paused_count} βœ…{done_count} | 🚦{gate}={score} | ⏭️ {next} | πŸ”{loop_state}` ## Adversarial Exec Contract When a task has `dna.yaml` and `execution.yaml`, execution readiness is enforced by Lev SDK, not prose: 1. Resolve the task path. 2. Run `lev task validate ` before dispatch. 3. Prefer `plugins/sdlc/flows/exec-adversarial-readiness.flow.yaml` for claim-backed tasks. 4. Review order: source-design claim coverage -> verifier adequacy -> declared gate output -> write scope -> code quality. 5. If `proof_gates.pentagon.lfd.required` is true, verify the LFD target, constraints, instruments, dev/holdout policy, cheap paths, and preflight calibration before dispatch. 6. If readiness fails, stop before worker dispatch and route to `/propose`. Hard rule: a green command is not enough. Completion needs queryable receipt/trace evidence: node artifacts, branch decisions, verifier commands, stdout/stderr paths, exit codes, touched files, and `claim_verdicts` with `evidence_ref`. Score-lift needs row-level before/after deltas attributed to selected candidates. Routing and telemetry claims need machine-readable traces. `execution_ready` is never completion. For LFD-shaped work, a worker must not see or mutate holdout answers, scorer internals, private lint details, or calibration fixtures. If the execution surface cannot enforce that read/write split, run only dev/preflight checks and route the holdout or harness design back to `/propose`. ## Isolated TDD Cycle Contract When isolated TDD is selected, consult every applicable TDD section and rule at the start of and during each cycle. If `CONTEXT.md` exists, read it before naming tests or interfaces so the work uses the project's domain vocabulary; respect applicable ADRs. Keep RED before GREEN, and make GREEN only enough to pass the current frozen behavior. Do not anticipate future tests or add speculative features; refactoring waits for review. ## Review Entry and Separate Axes A review-only invocation inspects and reports; it does not dispatch implementation or require creating an SDLC packet just to review an existing diff. Establish the requested comparison first. For branch review, resolve the supplied base to a commit, pin HEAD, and use merge-base comparison (`git diff ...`) plus the commit list. Ask for the base if no request or artifact determines it. For uncommitted work use the explicitly requested staged/unstaged scope instead; three-dot HEAD does not include working-tree edits. Bad refs stop before review; an empty selected diff is reported as nothing to review, not a quality pass. Resolve the explicit source plan/spec first, then linked issue/commit references and matching local artifacts. If lookup finds no source, ask where it lives when interaction is available; if none exists or cannot be supplied, report Spec: unavailable; do not infer requirements from the implementation. Load applicable repository standards and compare only the selected diff and necessary context. Keep **Spec** and **Standards/quality** findings separate. Spec checks missing, partial, incorrect and unrequested behavior against cited source requirements. Quote the exact spec line for each Spec finding. Standards cites the standards file, exact rule, and affected hunk; any baseline smell names the smell and quotes its hunk. When independent subagents are used, give each the same pinned comparison with its own source material, not the other reviewer's conclusions. Include the applicable smell definitions below in the quality worker's input when it cannot read this skill. Analysis may run in parallel; settlement still checks spec compliance before accepting code quality. Never average the two verdicts. Use these smell heuristics only when the changed code supplies evidence: | Possible smell | Diagnostic / smallest repair to consider | |---|---| | Mysterious name | Name conceals purpose; rename from observed domain meaning | | Duplicated code | Same logic repeats; share the common behavior only when extraction reduces real duplication | | Feature envy | Behavior mostly manipulates another owner's data; consider moving it to that owner | | Data clump | Same fields repeatedly travel together; consider one meaningful domain value | | Primitive obsession | Primitive obscures a domain invariant; consider a small validated type | | Repeated switches | Same discriminator logic recurs; consider one shared mapping or existing dispatch mechanism | | Shotgun surgery | One logical change scatters across owners; gather the behavior that changes together | | Divergent change | One module changes for unrelated reasons; separate those responsibilities | | Speculative generality | Hooks or abstraction serve no current requirement; remove unused flexibility | | Message chain | Caller navigates another owner's internal structure; expose the needed operation at the owner | | Middle man | Layer only delegates without a boundary purpose; consider direct access | | Refused inheritance | Implementation rejects most inherited behavior; consider composition | Label them possible smells, not hard violations. Repository standards override heuristics; avoid duplicating tool-enforced findings. Recommend the smallest justified repair rather than automatically extracting types, classes or abstractions. Report per-axis counts and the most consequential finding within each axis; missing spec evidence stays unavailable, not passed. Reviewer-fixer runs still need checks after their edits. ## Execution Follow-up Ledger Every exec follow-up must preserve the artifact ledger from `/propose` and add runtime evidence: selected slice, command, cwd, verifier, receipt/trace refs, touched files, result, fidelity/confidence, and next route. Follow-ups are compiled into agent-operational rows, not copied from final-answer prose. If a fix, blocker, or follow-up is discovered, write or route it through `/capture`; do not leave it only in chat memory. ## SDLC Packet Protocol ```yaml steps: - id: resolve_context action: Identify workstream, task path, execution artifact, and target slice. validation: "workstream id, task id/path, and current slice are known." on_failure: "Route to /work, /ws, or /propose before executing." - id: validate_task action: Run `lev task validate `. validation: "Task validation exits 0, or failures are captured as proposal work." on_failure: "Do not dispatch. Route to /propose with diagnostics." - id: read_execution_yaml action: Extract topology, runtime_profile, proof_gates, verifier_contract, write_scope, dependencies, and forbidden_moves. validation: "Every slice has verifier, write scope, and dependency status." on_failure: "Treat as not execution-ready." - id: read_proof_gates action: Classify Pentagon, UltraQA, and ai-slop-cleaner gates for the selected slice. validation: "Each applicable proof gate has commands, scenario classes, expected receipts, owner-local test placement, and cleanup policy." on_failure: "Route to /propose for proof-gate repair before dispatch." - id: verify_lfd_preflight action: Verify Pentagon-LFD target and cheap-path hardening when present. validation: "Score/lint/probe/status/proof instruments exist, known-good passes, known-bad fails, lint VOID is non-oracular, holdout is aggregate-only or unavailable to worker, and cheap-path probes fail closed." on_failure: "Do not dispatch. Route to /propose with the failed cheap path and missing instrument." - id: classify_batch action: Mark slices parallel_safe or serial_only and lev_exec_first or subagent_required. validation: "No batch has overlapping write scope or more than 3 implementation tasks." on_failure: "Collapse to serial execution." - id: verify_surface action: Run `lev exec --help`, confirm flow exists, and confirm command shape before dispatch. validation: "No guessed flags or flow names." on_failure: "Downgrade to subagent or route to /propose." - id: dispatch action: Run the selected flow or subagent with bounded prompt, write scope, and verifier. validation: "Dispatch records command, cwd, verifier, and expected receipt/trace evidence." on_failure: "Emit ." - id: review_batch action: After declared checks pass, use one integrated checkpoint review for requested behavior, extra behavior, write scope, runtime contracts, interfaces, maintainability, tests, complexity, and correctness risks. validation: "Spec and quality verdicts remain separate in the result, but one reviewer covers both axes unless an explicit high-assurance contract requires role separation." on_failure: "Do not mark verified or launch another reviewer. Fix a concrete in-scope finding once, or stop as needs_propose/blocked when it changes scope, architecture, or acceptance." - id: run_runtime_qa action: Execute declared proof gates before final verification. validation: "Baseline verifiers, Pentagon gates, UltraQA runtime scenarios, cleanup, generated-artifact status, and ai-slop-cleaner review pass or produce a blocked verdict." on_failure: "Stop the current slice as blocked with diagnostics; do not spin." - id: final_verify action: Run declared verifiers, inspect changed files, and collect receipt/trace evidence. validation: "All verifiers pass and evidence supports the claims." on_failure: "Emit diagnostics and stop the failing slice." - id: update_followup_ledger action: Record verified, blocked, or follow-up rows with disk/memory state and evidence refs. validation: "Every new follow-up has compiled_intent, current_location, artifact_ref or blocker, fidelity/confidence, route_state, and next_route." on_failure: "Route unresolved rows to /capture before final summary." ``` ## QA / Pentagon Runtime Rules - Treat UltraQA scenario generation as proposal/design input, but runtime execution belongs here: commands, exit codes, timeouts, temporary harnesses, cleanup, flaky reruns, misleading-output checks, and residual risks. - Run Pentagon gates from `execution.yaml.proof_gates.pentagon` when present. Do not substitute a repo-wide green audit for a feature-local promotion claim. - When `proof_gates.pentagon.lfd` is present, run the declared score, lint, probe, status, and proof instruments in the declared order. Score must run lint first; holdout must be aggregate-only and rate-limited; known-bad calibration must fail before worker output can be trusted. - Run ai-slop-cleaner review when `proof_gates.quality.ai_slop_cleaner.required` is true, or when the exec slice performs cleanup/refactor work or touches fallback/boundary-risk code. - Module-specific tests, probes, fixtures, and harness suites stay with the owning module. `core/testing` is a shared testing/eval library and generic gate surface, not the destination for module-owned proof code. - Record generated harnesses, logs, state files, and cleanup status in the validation evidence. Remove temporary artifacts unless the task deliberately promotes them. ## Dogfood Rules - While working on Lev, use Lev surfaces first when reasonable. - Fix simple local errors discovered by the verified path when scoped, reversible, and covered by the same verifier. - Always try `--help` before unfamiliar Lev commands or flags. - Prefer short evidence chains: `--help`, `--dry-run`, verifier, then trace. - After failed or interesting `lev exec`, inspect receipt/trace lookup before summarizing. ## Fail-Closed Loop Rules - Multi-slice exec runs are serial by default. Complete one coherent batch, run its declared checks, review the integrated batch once when review is warranted, then decide whether the next slice is still execution-ready. - Reviewer `advice` is a terminal blocker for the current dispatch. Route to diagnostics or `/propose`; do not treat advice as another worker prompt. - A no-op worker followed by reviewer advice is an immediate stop condition. - A green command plus reviewer advice means the verifier is insufficient or the claim is overbroad. Stop and repair the task/proof, not the code. - Same blocker twice means stop. Do not spend a third loop unless the user explicitly asks for another attempt. ## Diagnostics Report ## Exec Diagnostics: {task_or_slice} - command: `{command}` - cwd: `{cwd}` - exit_code: `{exit_code}` - stdout: `{stdout_path_or_excerpt}` - stderr: `{stderr_path_or_excerpt}` - receipt_id: `{receipt_id_or_none}` - exec_id: `{exec_id_or_none}` - trace: `{trace_ref_or_none}` - ledger_row: `{capture_or_followup_id}` - compiled_intent: `{agent_operational_followup}` - current_location: `{disk|memory|both|external|unknown}` - artifact_ref: `{path_or_none}` - route_state: `{captured|execution_ready|blocked|done|rejected}` - next_route: `{retry_exec|propose|capture|work|blocked|close}` - suspected_layer: `{plan|surface|adapter|verifier|implementation|environment}` - simplest_next_fix: `{one_action}` - route: `{retry_exec|propose|work|blocked}` ## SDLC Flow Routing | Situation | Surface | |---|---| | task has execution.yaml | project-selected FlowMind/topology from execution artifact | | bounded implementation with verifier | verified `lev exec` flow | | reviewer loop needed | `lev-ralph` if supported by current CLI | | no clean verifier or bespoke context | subagent with explicit scope and verifier | | architecture or tradeoff work | `skill://arch`, then `/interview` for human decisions or `/lev-plan` for broad changes | | weak/missing execution artifact | `/propose` | ## Next-Step Mini-Router Show only applicable rows, numbered with `#`, `Route`, `Expected result` when a choice is useful. A clear authorized next step proceeds without a forced menu. | Result | Route | Expected result | |---|---|---| | Accepted checks and review | `skill://close` | Settle the completed chunk, not the whole effort by inference | | Coding contract or scope changed | `skill://propose` | Repair the selected SDLC packet | | Non-coding plan incomplete | `skill://lev-plan` | Repair outcome, acceptance or next unit without mandatory proposal | | Architecture decision unresolved | `skill://arch` | Resolve technical options before implementation | | Blocked, paused or budget spent | `skill://handoff` | Preserve result and exact resumption condition | | Domain or next owner unclear | `skill://lev` | Resolve the overlay and method | For 10x Ralph/proposal expansion, use an outer controller loop. One successful Ralph run produces one item, not the full list. ## Lev Contracts for Runtime Work If touching FlowMind, plugin config, scheduler, runtime steering, context injection, protocols, or graph control flow, load relevant DNA/gates/design docs and carry explicit notes for: - `LevEvent` lifecycle emission - trace context propagation - structured logging - bounded budgets, retries, and timeouts - append-only receipts - scope and permissions - structured machine schemas - resumability and idempotency - project scheduler use - protocol/config resolution through the fractal chain ## Red Flags - "Just ship it." - "The verifier is small but probably enough." - "Flow name probably maps to CLI." - "No execution.yaml, but this is obvious." - "execution_ready means done." - "Receipt lookup can wait." - "I'll summarize the failure without the command and exit code." - "UltraQA is just a scenario list; no runtime cleanup or evidence needed." - "A green Pentagon audit proves the feature-local claim." - "The loss-function harness is gameable, but the worker probably will not notice." - "Known-good passed; no need to run known-bad." - "Holdout is only a file path; prompt instructions are enough to keep it hidden." - "Exec follow-ups can stay in the final answer without a ledger route." - "Reviewer advice means try the worker again." - "The goal prompt should describe the exec workflow instead of the actual task." ## Rationalization Table | Excuse | Reality | |---|---| | "Smallest relevant checks." | Declared verifiers and claim evidence are mandatory. | | "We can infer success from no-regression." | Behavioral claims need direct outcome evidence. | | "The CLI probably supports that flag." | Run `--help`; never guess. | | "Trace is optional." | Routing, telemetry, and receipt claims need machine-readable evidence. | | "The executor can fix the plan." | Weak plans route to `/propose`, not execution. | | "The scorer is just a helper." | For LFD-shaped work, the scorer is the target; if it is weak, patch the loss function before dispatch. | ## Related - `/work` routes lifecycle state. - `/propose` creates execution-ready artifacts. - `/close` seals verified work.