SDLC Engineering Router
Overview
This skill routes SDLC-related requests to the appropriate specialist skill within the axiom-sdlc-engineering skillpack. It detects the project's CMMI maturity level and ensures users receive guidance tailored to their context.
Core Principle: Match the right process rigor to the project's needs. Not all projects need Level 3 or 4 formality.
When to Use
Use this skill when requests involve:
- Requirements management (tracking, traceability, change control)
- Design and architecture (ADRs, design reviews, coding standards)
- Quality assurance (testing, code reviews, verification, validation)
- Governance and risk (decision documentation, risk management)
- Metrics and measurement (what to measure, how to analyze)
- Process adoption (implementing CMMI on existing projects)
- Platform integration (GitHub, Azure DevOps implementation patterns)
- General SDLC questions (where to start, what process to follow)
When NOT to use: Implementation details for specific technologies (Python testing → axiom-python-engineering, security → ordis-security-architect).
CMMI Level Detection
Priority order (check in this sequence):
- CLAUDE.md configuration: Look for
CMMI Target Level: X or CMMI Level: X
- User message: Explicit mention ("Level 2", "Level 3", "Level 4", "CMMI L3")
- Context clues:
- "FDA", "medical device", "royal commission" → Level 3-4 (regulatory rigor)
- "startup", "small team", "2-3 developers" → Level 2 (lightweight)
- "audit", "compliance", "SOC 2" → Level 3 (organizational standards)
- Default: Level 3 (good balance of rigor and agility)
Level Summary:
- Level 2 (Managed): Minimal viable practices, ~5% overhead, 1-5 person teams
- Level 3 (Defined): Organizational standards, ~10-15% overhead, 5+ person teams, audit-ready
- Level 4 (Quantitatively Managed): Statistical process control, ~20-25% overhead, regulated industries (FDA, medical devices)
Routing Decision Tree
User request received
│
├─ New project setup / comprehensive adoption?
│ └─ Route to: lifecycle-adoption
│ (Bootstrapping guidance, parallel tracks, incremental rollout)
│
├─ Requirements-related? (tracking, traceability, elicitation, changes)
│ └─ Route to: requirements-lifecycle
│ (RD + REQM practices at detected level)
│
├─ Design/architecture? (ADRs, design docs, code standards, branching)
│ └─ Route to: design-and-build
│ (TS + CM + PI practices at detected level)
│
├─ Quality/testing? (code review, testing strategy, peer review, UAT)
│ └─ Route to: quality-assurance
│ (VER + VAL practices at detected level)
│
├─ Decisions/risk? (ADRs, formal decisions, risk management)
│ └─ Route to: governance-and-risk
│ (DAR + RSKM practices at detected level)
│
├─ Metrics/measurement? ("what to measure", dashboards, SPC)
│ └─ Route to: quantitative-management
│ (MA + QPM + OPP practices at detected level)
│
├─ Platform-specific? (GitHub setup, Azure DevOps setup)
│ └─ Route to: platform-integration
│ (GitHub vs Azure DevOps implementation patterns)
│
└─ Ambiguous / multiple concerns?
└─ Ask clarifying question OR provide overview of relevant skills
Routing Table
| User Intent |
Route To |
Key Indicators |
| New project, comprehensive setup |
lifecycle-adoption |
"starting new", "from day one", "bootstrapping", "where to start" |
| Existing project adoption |
lifecycle-adoption |
"existing project", "retrofit", "adopt CMMI", "parallel tracks" |
| Requirements tracking |
requirements-lifecycle |
"requirements", "user stories", "traceability", "RTM", "change requests" |
| Architecture decisions |
design-and-build |
"design", "architecture", "ADR", "technical decision", "coding standards" |
| Version control setup |
design-and-build |
"Git", "branching", "GitFlow", "releases", "configuration management" |
| Testing strategy |
quality-assurance |
"testing", "test coverage", "code review", "peer review", "UAT", "validation" |
| Formal decisions |
governance-and-risk |
"ADR", "decision documentation", "alternatives analysis" |
| Risk management |
governance-and-risk |
"risk", "risk register", "mitigation", "probability×impact" |
| Metrics planning |
quantitative-management |
"metrics", "what to measure", "dashboards", "DORA", "KPIs" |
| Statistical analysis |
quantitative-management |
"Level 4", "SPC", "control charts", "Cp/Cpk", "process capability" |
| GitHub implementation |
platform-integration |
"GitHub", "GitHub Actions", "issue tracking" |
| Azure DevOps implementation |
platform-integration |
"Azure DevOps", "Azure Pipelines", "Azure Boards" |
| General quality improvement |
quality-assurance (first), then others |
"better quality", "fewer bugs", "improve" (ambiguous) |
Cross-Skillpack Coordination
Separation of Concerns: axiom-sdlc-engineering defines WHAT to do (process), other skillpacks define HOW (implementation).
| Scenario |
SDLC Skill |
Implementation Skill |
Handoff |
| Python testing |
quality-assurance (test strategy) |
axiom-python-engineering (pytest implementation) |
"Use axiom-python-engineering for writing pytest tests" |
| Python code quality |
design-and-build (coding standards) |
axiom-python-engineering (ruff, mypy, black) |
"Use axiom-python-engineering for Python-specific tooling" |
| UX design reviews |
quality-assurance (review process) |
lyra-ux-designer (design critique) |
"Use lyra-ux-designer for UX-specific review criteria" |
| Security testing |
quality-assurance (test strategy) |
ordis-security-architect (security testing) |
"Use ordis-security-architect for security test cases" |
| Documentation writing |
governance-and-risk (ADR process) |
muna-technical-writer (technical writing) |
"Use muna-technical-writer for documentation structure" |
| E2E testing |
quality-assurance (test pyramid) |
ordis-quality-engineering (E2E automation) |
"Use ordis-quality-engineering for E2E test frameworks" |
Key Rule: If the request is about process/policy → SDLC skill. If it's about tool/technology implementation → domain-specific skillpack.
Handling Ambiguous Requests
When multiple skills could apply:
Option 1: Ask Clarifying Question
"I can help with quality improvement in several ways:
1. Testing strategy and code reviews (quality-assurance skill)
2. Design practices and architecture (design-and-build skill)
3. Metrics to track quality (quantitative-management skill)
Which aspect of quality are you most concerned about?"
Option 2: Provide Overview
"Quality improvement involves multiple CMMI process areas:
- Requirements quality (requirements-lifecycle): Clear, testable requirements
- Design quality (design-and-build): Architecture reviews, coding standards
- Test quality (quality-assurance): Test coverage, peer reviews, UAT
I recommend starting with quality-assurance skill for immediate impact on defect rates."
Countering Rationalizations
| Objection |
Counter-Response |
Route To |
| "We're too small for CMMI" |
"Level 2 works for 1-2 person teams. It's ~5% overhead: basic Git branching, lightweight code review, simple issue tracking." |
lifecycle-adoption |
| "Process slows us down" |
"Process prevents rework. Level 2 saves time: no re-litigating decisions, no integration hell, no forgotten requirements." |
lifecycle-adoption |
| "We need to ship fast" |
"Level 2 speeds delivery: clear requirements (no misunderstandings), CI/CD (no manual deploys), peer review (catch bugs early)." |
lifecycle-adoption |
| "CMMI is waterfall" |
"CMMI is methodology-agnostic. GitHub Flow + CI/CD + user stories = Level 3 compliance. Agile and CMMI coexist." |
lifecycle-adoption |
| "Too much documentation" |
"Level 2 minimizes docs: ADRs in markdown (15 min), requirements in GitHub Issues, traceability via commit messages." |
design-and-build |
| "We don't have time to measure" |
"Level 3 automates metrics via GitHub API. 1-hour setup, then free data forever. No manual spreadsheets." |
quantitative-management |
Red Flags - Stop and Reconsider
Symptoms of wrong routing:
- User asks about implementation (pytest setup, GitHub Actions YAML) → Wrong, should route to implementation skillpack
- User asks about domain-specific practices (ML experiment tracking, UX wireframes) → Wrong, should route to domain skillpack
- User asks how to write code → Wrong, SDLC is about process, not coding
- User needs technology tutorial → Wrong, SDLC assumes technical competence
Correct routing examples:
- "What testing strategy should I use?" →
quality-assurance (process question)
- "How do I write pytest fixtures?" →
axiom-python-engineering (implementation)
- "What metrics should we track?" →
quantitative-management (process question)
- "How do I query GitHub API?" →
platform-integration (implementation detail)
Multi-Skill Roadmaps
For comprehensive requests, provide sequenced guidance:
Example: "Starting new Level 3 project"
- First:
lifecycle-adoption → Assess current state, plan rollout
- Then:
platform-integration → Choose and configure GitHub/Azure DevOps
- Then:
requirements-lifecycle → Set up requirements tracking
- Then:
design-and-build → Establish branching, ADR process, coding standards
- Then:
quality-assurance → Define test strategy, code review policy
- Then:
governance-and-risk → Set up risk register, decision documentation
- Then:
quantitative-management → Define metrics, establish baselines
Example: "Adopting on existing 6-month-old project"
- First:
lifecycle-adoption → Parallel tracks strategy (new work = new process)
- Then:
design-and-build → Git branching cleanup, start ADRs for new decisions
- Then:
requirements-lifecycle → Capture current requirements, traceability for new work
- Then:
quality-assurance → Add tests for new code, code review for new PRs
- Later:
quantitative-management → Metrics after 2-3 months of data
Routing Workflow
- Detect CMMI Level: Check CLAUDE.md → user message → default to Level 3
- Analyze Request Intent: Match against routing table for keywords/symptoms
- Check Routing Table: Find the skill(s) that best match the user's needs
- Determine Single Skill OR Multi-Skill Sequence: Single concern vs. multi-skill roadmap
- Announce Routing Decision: "I'm routing you to [skill-name] for [reason]. CMMI Level detected: [X]"
- Invoke Appropriate Skill: Use Skill tool to load the skill
- Follow Loaded Skill Exactly: Defer to the specialist skill's guidance
Quick Reference
Default Routing (when in doubt):
- Process adoption questions →
lifecycle-adoption
- Requirements questions →
requirements-lifecycle
- Design/architecture questions →
design-and-build
- Testing/quality questions →
quality-assurance
- Decision/risk questions →
governance-and-risk
- Metrics questions →
quantitative-management
- Tool setup questions →
platform-integration
Default Level: Level 3 (unless otherwise specified)
Cross-Skillpack Default: If request is about technology implementation (not process), route to appropriate domain skillpack (axiom-python-engineering, ordis-quality-engineering, etc.)
Success Criteria
Router is effective when:
Common Mistakes to Avoid
❌ Don't: Guess at CMMI level if not specified → Default to Level 3
❌ Don't: Route technology questions here → Send to domain skillpacks
❌ Don't: Provide process guidance directly → Load appropriate skill
❌ Don't: Skip level detection → Always check CLAUDE.md first
❌ Don't: Overwhelm with all 7 skills → Route to most relevant one
✅ Do: Detect level systematically (CLAUDE.md → message → default)
✅ Do: Announce routing decision ("Routing to X skill because...")
✅ Do: Load the skill and follow it exactly
✅ Do: Provide multi-skill roadmap for complex requests
✅ Do: Counter "process = overhead" rationalizations with Level 2 examples
1---2name: using-sdlc-engineering3description: Use when users request SDLC guidance, CMMI processes, requirements management, design documentation, quality assurance, governance, metrics, or adopting processes on existing projects4---5
6# SDLC Engineering Router
7
8## Overview
9
10This skill routes SDLC-related requests to the appropriate specialist skill within the axiom-sdlc-engineering skillpack. It detects the project's CMMI maturity level and ensures users receive guidance tailored to their context.
11
12**Core Principle**: Match the right process rigor to the project's needs. Not all projects need Level 3 or 4 formality.
13
14## When to Use
15
16Use this skill when requests involve:
17- **Requirements management** (tracking, traceability, change control)
18- **Design and architecture** (ADRs, design reviews, coding standards)
19- **Quality assurance** (testing, code reviews, verification, validation)
20- **Governance and risk** (decision documentation, risk management)
21- **Metrics and measurement** (what to measure, how to analyze)
22- **Process adoption** (implementing CMMI on existing projects)
23- **Platform integration** (GitHub, Azure DevOps implementation patterns)
24- **General SDLC questions** (where to start, what process to follow)
25
26**When NOT to use**: Implementation details for specific technologies (Python testing → axiom-python-engineering, security → ordis-security-architect).
27
28## CMMI Level Detection
29
30**Priority order** (check in this sequence):
31
321. **CLAUDE.md configuration**: Look for `CMMI Target Level: X` or `CMMI Level: X`
332. **User message**: Explicit mention ("Level 2", "Level 3", "Level 4", "CMMI L3")
343. **Context clues**:
35 - "FDA", "medical device", "royal commission" → Level 3-4 (regulatory rigor)
36 - "startup", "small team", "2-3 developers" → Level 2 (lightweight)
37 - "audit", "compliance", "SOC 2" → Level 3 (organizational standards)
384. **Default**: Level 3 (good balance of rigor and agility)
39
40**Level Summary**:
41- **Level 2 (Managed)**: Minimal viable practices, ~5% overhead, 1-5 person teams
42- **Level 3 (Defined)**: Organizational standards, ~10-15% overhead, 5+ person teams, audit-ready
43- **Level 4 (Quantitatively Managed)**: Statistical process control, ~20-25% overhead, regulated industries (FDA, medical devices)
44
45## Routing Decision Tree
46
47```
48User request received
49 │
50 ├─ New project setup / comprehensive adoption?
51 │ └─ Route to: lifecycle-adoption
52 │ (Bootstrapping guidance, parallel tracks, incremental rollout)
53 │
54 ├─ Requirements-related? (tracking, traceability, elicitation, changes)
55 │ └─ Route to: requirements-lifecycle
56 │ (RD + REQM practices at detected level)
57 │
58 ├─ Design/architecture? (ADRs, design docs, code standards, branching)
59 │ └─ Route to: design-and-build
60 │ (TS + CM + PI practices at detected level)
61 │
62 ├─ Quality/testing? (code review, testing strategy, peer review, UAT)
63 │ └─ Route to: quality-assurance
64 │ (VER + VAL practices at detected level)
65 │
66 ├─ Decisions/risk? (ADRs, formal decisions, risk management)
67 │ └─ Route to: governance-and-risk
68 │ (DAR + RSKM practices at detected level)
69 │
70 ├─ Metrics/measurement? ("what to measure", dashboards, SPC)
71 │ └─ Route to: quantitative-management
72 │ (MA + QPM + OPP practices at detected level)
73 │
74 ├─ Platform-specific? (GitHub setup, Azure DevOps setup)
75 │ └─ Route to: platform-integration
76 │ (GitHub vs Azure DevOps implementation patterns)
77 │
78 └─ Ambiguous / multiple concerns?
79 └─ Ask clarifying question OR provide overview of relevant skills
80```
81
82## Routing Table
83
84| User Intent | Route To | Key Indicators |
85|-------------|----------|----------------|
86| **New project, comprehensive setup** | `lifecycle-adoption` | "starting new", "from day one", "bootstrapping", "where to start" |
87| **Existing project adoption** | `lifecycle-adoption` | "existing project", "retrofit", "adopt CMMI", "parallel tracks" |
88| **Requirements tracking** | `requirements-lifecycle` | "requirements", "user stories", "traceability", "RTM", "change requests" |
89| **Architecture decisions** | `design-and-build` | "design", "architecture", "ADR", "technical decision", "coding standards" |
90| **Version control setup** | `design-and-build` | "Git", "branching", "GitFlow", "releases", "configuration management" |
91| **Testing strategy** | `quality-assurance` | "testing", "test coverage", "code review", "peer review", "UAT", "validation" |
92| **Formal decisions** | `governance-and-risk` | "ADR", "decision documentation", "alternatives analysis" |
93| **Risk management** | `governance-and-risk` | "risk", "risk register", "mitigation", "probability×impact" |
94| **Metrics planning** | `quantitative-management` | "metrics", "what to measure", "dashboards", "DORA", "KPIs" |
95| **Statistical analysis** | `quantitative-management` | "Level 4", "SPC", "control charts", "Cp/Cpk", "process capability" |
96| **GitHub implementation** | `platform-integration` | "GitHub", "GitHub Actions", "issue tracking" |
97| **Azure DevOps implementation** | `platform-integration` | "Azure DevOps", "Azure Pipelines", "Azure Boards" |
98| **General quality improvement** | `quality-assurance` (first), then others | "better quality", "fewer bugs", "improve" (ambiguous) |
99
100## Cross-Skillpack Coordination
101
102**Separation of Concerns**: axiom-sdlc-engineering defines **WHAT** to do (process), other skillpacks define **HOW** (implementation).
103
104| Scenario | SDLC Skill | Implementation Skill | Handoff |
105|----------|-----------|---------------------|---------|
106| **Python testing** | `quality-assurance` (test strategy) | `axiom-python-engineering` (pytest implementation) | "Use axiom-python-engineering for writing pytest tests" |
107| **Python code quality** | `design-and-build` (coding standards) | `axiom-python-engineering` (ruff, mypy, black) | "Use axiom-python-engineering for Python-specific tooling" |
108| **UX design reviews** | `quality-assurance` (review process) | `lyra-ux-designer` (design critique) | "Use lyra-ux-designer for UX-specific review criteria" |
109| **Security testing** | `quality-assurance` (test strategy) | `ordis-security-architect` (security testing) | "Use ordis-security-architect for security test cases" |
110| **Documentation writing** | `governance-and-risk` (ADR process) | `muna-technical-writer` (technical writing) | "Use muna-technical-writer for documentation structure" |
111| **E2E testing** | `quality-assurance` (test pyramid) | `ordis-quality-engineering` (E2E automation) | "Use ordis-quality-engineering for E2E test frameworks" |
112
113**Key Rule**: If the request is about **process/policy** → SDLC skill. If it's about **tool/technology implementation** → domain-specific skillpack.
114
115## Handling Ambiguous Requests
116
117When multiple skills could apply:
118
119**Option 1: Ask Clarifying Question**
120```
121"I can help with quality improvement in several ways:
1221. Testing strategy and code reviews (quality-assurance skill)
1232. Design practices and architecture (design-and-build skill)
1243. Metrics to track quality (quantitative-management skill)
125
126Which aspect of quality are you most concerned about?"
127```
128
129**Option 2: Provide Overview**
130```
131"Quality improvement involves multiple CMMI process areas:
132- Requirements quality (requirements-lifecycle): Clear, testable requirements
133- Design quality (design-and-build): Architecture reviews, coding standards
134- Test quality (quality-assurance): Test coverage, peer reviews, UAT
135
136I recommend starting with quality-assurance skill for immediate impact on defect rates."
137```
138
139## Countering Rationalizations
140
141| Objection | Counter-Response | Route To |
142|-----------|------------------|----------|
143| "We're too small for CMMI" | "Level 2 works for 1-2 person teams. It's ~5% overhead: basic Git branching, lightweight code review, simple issue tracking." | `lifecycle-adoption` |
144| "Process slows us down" | "Process prevents rework. Level 2 saves time: no re-litigating decisions, no integration hell, no forgotten requirements." | `lifecycle-adoption` |
145| "We need to ship fast" | "Level 2 speeds delivery: clear requirements (no misunderstandings), CI/CD (no manual deploys), peer review (catch bugs early)." | `lifecycle-adoption` |
146| "CMMI is waterfall" | "CMMI is methodology-agnostic. GitHub Flow + CI/CD + user stories = Level 3 compliance. Agile and CMMI coexist." | `lifecycle-adoption` |
147| "Too much documentation" | "Level 2 minimizes docs: ADRs in markdown (15 min), requirements in GitHub Issues, traceability via commit messages." | `design-and-build` |
148| "We don't have time to measure" | "Level 3 automates metrics via GitHub API. 1-hour setup, then free data forever. No manual spreadsheets." | `quantitative-management` |
149
150## Red Flags - Stop and Reconsider
151
152**Symptoms of wrong routing**:
153- User asks about **implementation** (pytest setup, GitHub Actions YAML) → Wrong, should route to implementation skillpack
154- User asks about **domain-specific** practices (ML experiment tracking, UX wireframes) → Wrong, should route to domain skillpack
155- User asks **how to write code** → Wrong, SDLC is about process, not coding
156- User needs **technology tutorial** → Wrong, SDLC assumes technical competence
157
158**Correct routing examples**:
159- "What testing strategy should I use?" → `quality-assurance` (process question)
160- "How do I write pytest fixtures?" → `axiom-python-engineering` (implementation)
161- "What metrics should we track?" → `quantitative-management` (process question)
162- "How do I query GitHub API?" → `platform-integration` (implementation detail)
163
164## Multi-Skill Roadmaps
165
166For comprehensive requests, provide sequenced guidance:
167
168**Example: "Starting new Level 3 project"**
1691. **First**: `lifecycle-adoption` → Assess current state, plan rollout
1702. **Then**: `platform-integration` → Choose and configure GitHub/Azure DevOps
1713. **Then**: `requirements-lifecycle` → Set up requirements tracking
1724. **Then**: `design-and-build` → Establish branching, ADR process, coding standards
1735. **Then**: `quality-assurance` → Define test strategy, code review policy
1746. **Then**: `governance-and-risk` → Set up risk register, decision documentation
1757. **Then**: `quantitative-management` → Define metrics, establish baselines
176
177**Example: "Adopting on existing 6-month-old project"**
1781. **First**: `lifecycle-adoption` → Parallel tracks strategy (new work = new process)
1792. **Then**: `design-and-build` → Git branching cleanup, start ADRs for new decisions
1803. **Then**: `requirements-lifecycle` → Capture current requirements, traceability for new work
1814. **Then**: `quality-assurance` → Add tests for new code, code review for new PRs
1825. **Later**: `quantitative-management` → Metrics after 2-3 months of data
183
184## Routing Workflow
185
1861. **Detect CMMI Level**: Check CLAUDE.md → user message → default to Level 3
1872. **Analyze Request Intent**: Match against routing table for keywords/symptoms
1883. **Check Routing Table**: Find the skill(s) that best match the user's needs
1894. **Determine Single Skill OR Multi-Skill Sequence**: Single concern vs. multi-skill roadmap
1905. **Announce Routing Decision**: "I'm routing you to [skill-name] for [reason]. CMMI Level detected: [X]"
1916. **Invoke Appropriate Skill**: Use Skill tool to load the skill
1927. **Follow Loaded Skill Exactly**: Defer to the specialist skill's guidance
193
194## Quick Reference
195
196**Default Routing** (when in doubt):
197- Process adoption questions → `lifecycle-adoption`
198- Requirements questions → `requirements-lifecycle`
199- Design/architecture questions → `design-and-build`
200- Testing/quality questions → `quality-assurance`
201- Decision/risk questions → `governance-and-risk`
202- Metrics questions → `quantitative-management`
203- Tool setup questions → `platform-integration`
204
205**Default Level**: Level 3 (unless otherwise specified)
206
207**Cross-Skillpack Default**: If request is about technology implementation (not process), route to appropriate domain skillpack (axiom-python-engineering, ordis-quality-engineering, etc.)
208
209## Success Criteria
210
211Router is effective when:
212- [ ] CMMI level detected correctly from all sources
213- [ ] Requests routed to correct skill 95%+ of time
214- [ ] Ambiguous requests result in clarifying questions, not guesses
215- [ ] Cross-skillpack boundaries respected (process vs. implementation)
216- [ ] Multi-skill roadmaps provided when needed
217- [ ] Rationalizations countered with evidence-based responses
218- [ ] Users understand WHY they were routed to specific skill
219
220## Common Mistakes to Avoid
221
222**❌ Don't**: Guess at CMMI level if not specified → Default to Level 3
223**❌ Don't**: Route technology questions here → Send to domain skillpacks
224**❌ Don't**: Provide process guidance directly → Load appropriate skill
225**❌ Don't**: Skip level detection → Always check CLAUDE.md first
226**❌ Don't**: Overwhelm with all 7 skills → Route to most relevant one
227
228**✅ Do**: Detect level systematically (CLAUDE.md → message → default)
229**✅ Do**: Announce routing decision ("Routing to X skill because...")
230**✅ Do**: Load the skill and follow it exactly
231**✅ Do**: Provide multi-skill roadmap for complex requests
232**✅ Do**: Counter "process = overhead" rationalizations with Level 2 examples