# Agentic Repository Execution > Coordinate repository implementation through a master agent that discovers local rules, persists a scoped plan, delegates every production-file change to sub-agents, enforces authority boundaries, escalates material uncertainty, and closes evidence-based validation gates. Use when the user asks for delegated or multi-agent repository execution, a master/sub-agent workflow, staged autonomous implementation, parallel work with conflict control, or strict independent review of agent-written changes. - Skill: `ruicore/agentic-repository-execution` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 10 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add ruicore/agentic-repository-execution` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/ruicore/agentic-repository-execution/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: AI & ML - Author: ruicore (https://skillmd.com/u/ruicore) - Updated: 2026-09-21 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/ruicore/agentic-repository-execution --- # Agentic Repository Execution ## Purpose Run repository-changing work as a governed delegation system. Keep the master agent responsible for understanding, decomposition, dispatch, review, and validation while sub-agents make every code or production-file change. Protect against vague oversized assignments, conflicting parallel edits, context loss between phases, invented capabilities, weak validation evidence, an unreadable coordination site after execution, and a master silently taking over implementation. ## Boundaries - Use this procedure for implementation work that can be delegated through the current runtime. - Do not use it for a simple answer, translation, isolated read-only question, or task where multi-agent governance adds no execution value. - Do not use it to turn every small task into many assignments. Give a bounded low-risk change to one implementation agent when that is the smallest useful delegation. - Do not replace the repository's `AGENTS.md`, task graph, issue tracker, durable-memory convention, or user-specified coordination location. - Keep this a repository execution protocol. Do not turn it into an Agent Operating System, workflow engine, scheduler, or persistent runtime service. - Do not let the master edit code, tests, configuration, migrations, public documentation, or other production deliverables. Allow the master to write only coordination artifacts in an approved local convention. - Keep agent creation, dispatch, re-dispatch, and ownership assignment with the Root Master. Do not let a worker, reviewer, validator, or remediation agent create a child agent or transfer its production responsibility. - Do not claim delegated execution when the runtime cannot start sub-agents. Report `BLOCKED` instead of letting the master implement as a fallback. - Do not treat this skill as permission to commit, push, publish, deploy, or perform destructive actions. Require the authority applicable to each action. - Do not let a worker or the master expand scope, compatibility, data, security, infrastructure, or side-effect authority merely to finish. ## Inputs Infer these inputs from the latest user instruction and repository evidence before asking: - target repository, branch, worktree, and requested outcome; - scope, non-goals, acceptance criteria, and side-effect authority; - repository instructions, ownership boundaries, public hygiene rules, and durable coordination conventions; - explicit user- or repository-selected conventions that must remain frozen, such as canonical domain terms, visibility and naming rules, import roots or forms, formatting limits, declaration grouping, and compatibility aliases; - for mechanical transformations, the exact symbol or artifact categories in scope and the categories that must remain unchanged; - available sub-agent controls, models, reasoning efforts, skills, tools, and validation commands; - dirty-worktree state and files that must not be touched; - dependencies, risky surfaces, and serial versus parallel work. Ask only when an unresolved choice would materially change scope, behavior, target, or authority. Stop when the repository or user requires an input that cannot be inferred safely. ## Evidence Hierarchy Resolve conflicts in this order: 1. Follow the user's latest explicit instruction and side-effect boundary. 2. Follow applicable repository instructions and governance files. 3. Trust current code, tests, schemas, configuration, task graphs, and version control state. 4. Trust validation output, runtime observations, and generated diffs gathered for this task. 5. Use current repository docs, handoffs, decision traces, and existing skills. 6. Use current tool or platform documentation when runtime behavior depends on it. 7. Use naming conventions and inference only after checking stronger evidence. Never let a stale plan, old handoff, model assumption, or remembered skill name outrank inspected current state. ## Autonomy Principle Make autonomy the default inside every authorized assignment. Give the worker ownership of all normal engineering decisions within the assigned behavior and contract, owned surfaces, side-effect limit, and non-goals. Let the worker decide naming, internal code structure, helper extraction, local abstraction, test organization, and implementation strategy when the result can be verified locally without changing external or business meaning. Treat an explicit user or repository choice as a frozen constraint, not as an implementation option delegated to the worker. Worker autonomy applies only after those constraints are satisfied. Do not replace a configured local convention with a generic ecosystem preference merely because both are valid. For a mechanical rename or rewrite, enumerate the permitted symbol or artifact categories and preserve every excluded category literally. Do not escalate merely because multiple reasonable implementations exist, a technical tradeoff is subjective, or the master did not preselect an approach. Inspect the evidence, choose a defensible option, validate it, and continue. Escalate only when the choice may change business or domain semantics, architecture boundaries, system ownership, long-term component responsibility, public contracts, data meaning, security boundaries, irreversible behavior, or existing scope, side-effect, or decision authority. Treat internal module splits, class extraction, and local refactors as normal engineering decisions when those boundaries and meanings remain unchanged. ## Decision Escalation And Stop Contract Classify risk and uncertainty before dispatch and whenever new evidence changes the task: - Resolve **routine uncertainty** from current evidence, repository convention, and existing authority. Choose a defensible option among one or more reasonable implementations when it stays inside the assignment boundaries, the mutation is reversible or recoverable within the authorized side-effect boundary, and the choice can be verified locally without changing behavior or contract. Continue without approval; record the choice when it constrains later work. - For **material uncertainty**, make the worker pause the affected slice and complete the linked Decision Request. Before treating the escalation as raised or ready for master review, require the worker to emit or persist every field of that form. Use a safe coordination location when available; otherwise output the complete record in the worker response. Merely saying a record should be created is incomplete, and the affected slice remains paused. Do not silently choose among reasonable options that may change business or domain semantics, architecture boundaries, system ownership or long-term component responsibility, public behavior or compatibility, data integrity or migration, security or trust, external side effects, irreversible behavior, or the assignment boundary. - Make the master first apply the task context and Evidence Hierarchy to resolve material engineering or design choices within the user's original authority. Ask the human only when the decision still lacks required business or user authority, or evidence. Do not widen scope or authority, or choose an arbitrary assumption because of time pressure or a desire to finish. - When a material decision still lacks evidence or authority, require the master to emit or persist every field of the linked Stop Record before treating the decision-related gate as `BLOCKED`. Persist it at a safe coordination location readable by the next agent when available; otherwise output the complete record in the master response. Merely saying a Stop Record should be created does not close the gate or stop path. Then stop dependent work and ask the human one concrete question. - Stop the whole task when the blocker affects the root objective, a shared authoritative contract, data integrity, security or trust, irreversible behavior, or assumptions that would contaminate every branch. Otherwise stop only the affected dependency branch; independent safe work may continue. Treat human escalation and Evidence Gates as different paths. An Evidence Gate means execute-and-prove under existing authority; it is not default ask-first approval. Risk level controls decomposition, routing, review, and stop intensity, but never grants authority; a Low-risk action may still be unauthorized. Read [escalation-and-stop-policy.md](references/escalation-and-stop-policy.md) before classifying non-routine uncertainty, assigning Medium, High, or Critical risk, or resolving a Decision Request. Use the Decision Request and Stop Record forms in [execution-templates.md](references/execution-templates.md). Require these forms only for material or blocking decision escalation, not for routine uncertainty or an ordinary validation `FAIL`. ## Master Contract Keep these responsibilities with the master: - interpret the request and maintain scope; - discover repository rules and available execution capabilities; - persist and update the execution plan; - choose task boundaries, order, ownership, and gates; - create and dispatch every bounded peer assignment with a complete contract; - resolve worker Decision Requests only within existing authority, or escalate; - inspect returned artifacts, diffs, and validation evidence; - re-dispatch missing or insufficient work; - perform the final integrated review; - leave the approved coordination location readable and recoverable for the next agent; - report status. Keep delegation depth at one: make every worker, reviewer, validator, and remediation agent a peer dispatched directly by the Root Master. Permit workers to submit a Delegation Request when a newly discovered, separable responsibility needs another owner; never permit them to spawn or dispatch that owner. Read [agent-hierarchy-policy.md](references/agent-hierarchy-policy.md) before dispatching or re-dispatching agents, assigning ownership, or processing a Delegation Request. Use its request lifecycle without treating delegation as human escalation or granting the master production-file write authority. Delegate all implementation and production-file edits. Do not reinterpret a sub-agent timeout, silence, partial response, or unsupported capability as permission for the master to write the missing change. ## Workflow ### 1. Discover Before Planning Inspect the repository root, applicable instruction files, current branch and worktree state, existing task or memory conventions, relevant skills, tools, tests, and validation entry points. Extract explicit conventions and canonical domain terms from the user request, repository configuration, public contracts, and current authoritative code. Record them as frozen constraints before dispatch. When import form or module layout is in scope, identify the supported invocation modes and import roots; do not infer them from the current working directory or from one ad hoc script execution. Before planning or dispatching work that crosses component boundaries or handles extensible schemas, configuration, messages, or payloads owned outside the component being changed, run the **Concept Authority And Validation Boundary Gate** in [concept-authority-and-validation-boundary.md](references/concept-authority-and-validation-boundary.md). Use it to identify the concept owner and canonical source, decide whether each consumer should interpret or treat the data as opaque, separate generic boundary validation from owner-defined semantics, and simulate the change surface of a new valid variant. When triggered, require the gate to reach `PASS` before any production edit or implementation dispatch. Use a Decision Request when the owner, source, or responsibility boundary is materially uncertain; do not let workers resolve that uncertainty by duplicating semantic rules locally. Use repository-native code discovery before broad text search when available. Scan the runtime's actual skill inventory before recommending skills. Never invent a skill, model, reasoning effort, or tool. Confirm that sub-agent execution is available. If it is unavailable and the task requires production changes, stop with `BLOCKED`. ### 2. Persist The Execution Plan For non-trivial work, write the plan before production changes. Use the user-specified or repository-defined coordination location. Otherwise, prefer a simple ignored `.manifest//execution-plan.md` when the repository permits it. Do not create a complex `.manifest` hierarchy silently. If `.manifest` is tracked, prohibited, or conflicts with local governance, use the existing agent-memory or task convention instead. Record goal, scope, non-goals, expected artifacts, task graph, ownership, validation gates, risk classification, authority and side-effect boundaries, the concept-authority gate when triggered, stop conditions, and current status. Use the plan form in [execution-templates.md](references/execution-templates.md). For non-trivial serial or recovery-prone work, the Root Master may also maintain one replaceable `/execution-state.json` snapshot. Keep it optional for small coherent tasks. Read [execution-state-and-recovery.md](references/execution-state-and-recovery.md) before creating, updating, reconstructing, or resuming from that snapshot. ### 3. Size And Decompose The Work Choose the fewest assignments that preserve clear responsibility and independent validation. Evaluate behavior risk, change breadth, uncertainty, integration coupling, file overlap, and side effects. - Give a small localized change to one implementation agent. - Split medium work by coherent responsibility, risk, or independently verifiable outcome. - Split large work into discovery or contract work, bounded implementation slices, integration, and independent validation. Do not split by file count alone. Do not give one agent a broad instruction such as "implement the whole feature" when the work crosses unclear responsibilities or validation domains. Classify each assignment as Low, Medium, High, or Critical using [escalation-and-stop-policy.md](references/escalation-and-stop-policy.md). Use the level to strengthen decomposition, routing, review, and stop gates, not to infer permission. Read [task-decomposition-and-handoffs.md](references/task-decomposition-and-handoffs.md) before dispatching medium, large, serial, or parallel work. Before parallel dispatch, forecast whether two or more slices implement the same concept or contract and therefore form a **convergence set**. Do not infer a convergence requirement from superficial similarity alone. For each set, record its members and affected surfaces, shared invariant, required level, trusted reference or comparator, allowed variation, integration point, and review owner: - **Semantic:** observable behavior and invariants converge; internal structure may vary. - **Structural:** selected interfaces, types, lifecycle shape, organization, or other named structure converge; implementation details outside that shape may vary. - **Exact:** the selected artifact or representation matches a defined comparator exactly; explicitly bound the exact surface so unrelated details remain autonomous. When Structural or Exact convergence has no trustworthy existing reference, schedule a serial reference-first or contract-first assignment and hold its gate before dispatching the dependent parallel slices. Prefer no convergence set over a speculative one, and keep one coherent worker for low-risk local work when parallel governance adds no value. Use the convergence guidance and forms in the linked decomposition reference and execution templates. Treat implementer-run checks as author checks or implementation evidence, not independent Validation. Read [independent-review-policy.md](references/independent-review-policy.md) before choosing an assurance path or dispatching Review or Validation. Low risk normally uses independent Validation without a reviewer; Medium defaults to Independent Review then Validation; High and Critical require different peers for those two assurance roles. ### 4. Route And Dispatch For every assignment, state: - Goal - Scope - Non-goals - Expected artifacts - Validation - recommended model - recommended reasoning effort - recommended skills Also state owned files or surfaces, dependencies, required inputs, side-effect limits, risk level, authority boundary, escalation path, and the handoff path when relevant. For a slice in a convergence set, include the set ID, level, invariant, reference or comparator, allowed variation, and integration/review condition. Include frozen conventions and, for a mechanical transformation, the permitted and excluded symbol or artifact categories. State that delegation authority belongs to the Root Master, that the dispatched agent may not create child agents, and where it may submit a Delegation Request. Read [model-and-effort-routing.md](references/model-and-effort-routing.md) before recommending execution settings. Name only models and effort values advertised by the current runtime. If a preferred setting is unavailable or inadequate, apply the linked fallback ladder and record the substitution. Never let fallback weaken risk, acceptance, authority, side effects, assurance independence, or required proof. Use the dispatch form in [execution-templates.md](references/execution-templates.md). Treat the recommendations as routing guidance, not as claims that unavailable settings can be selected. When an assignment would introduce substantial custom validation, parsing, serialization, retry, protocol, lifecycle, or other framework-like machinery around an existing dependency, require the assignment to inspect the detected version and public extension points and make an evidence-backed choice among exact reuse, a thin public-extension adapter, and a focused custom implementation. Do not mandate reuse when existing components bundle unrelated behavior or impose a larger integration and test surface, and do not accept custom machinery merely because it is quicker to generate. ### 5. Execute With Ownership And Handoffs Run independent assignments in parallel only when their write ownership does not overlap and neither depends on the other's unreviewed output. Prefer serial work when agents would edit the same file, change the same contract, or consume the same evolving state. Do not let parallel members invent separate versions of a forecast convergence contract. Make every member consume the same trusted reference or the gated output of the reference-first assignment. Preserve autonomy for all choices listed as allowed variation. Require a handoff at every serial phase boundary. Make the next agent read the previous handoff before starting. Require each handoff to list completed work, changed artifacts, decisions, validation results, remaining risks, and exact next instructions. A handoff may include `Confidence: Level/Basis` as navigation metadata. It is not evidence, assignment state, an Evidence Gate, or permission for dependent work. Do not use chat memory as the only handoff for durable multi-stage work. Accept a worker Decision Request only after every field of the linked form has been emitted or persisted. Keep the affected slice paused while the record is incomplete and while the master inspects its cited evidence. Record the master's bounded resolution and rationale, then re-dispatch. If the master cannot resolve it within current evidence and authority, apply the stop contract instead of guessing. Accept a Delegation Request only as a control-plane proposal. Make the master approve, deny, merge, narrow, or defer it. On approval, update the task graph, ownership, dependencies, and gates before the Root Master creates the new peer agent. Continue the requester's authorized work when the proposed responsibility is independent; pause only the affected slice when it is a necessary dependency. Do not turn the request into a human escalation, Decision Request, new gate state, or automatic `BLOCKED`. ### 6. Hold Evidence Gates Use exactly four gate states: - `NOT RUN`: no validation attempt has occurred; keep the gate closed and do not start dependent work. - `PASS`: verify all required evidence; only this state permits dependent work to start. - `FAIL`: evidence proves that a requirement is unmet; keep the gate closed, assign narrow remediation, and revalidate. - `BLOCKED`: required evidence cannot be obtained or verified, or a required capability or input is missing; keep the gate closed, resolve the blocker or re-dispatch, and revalidate. Apply this model to every gate in the linked references and templates. Choose `FAIL` only when verified evidence proves noncompliance; choose `BLOCKED` when the required evidence cannot be obtained or verified. Do not introduce another gate state. Inspect the actual files and diff; do not accept a completion claim by itself. After integrating a forecast convergence set, dispatch a read-only **Convergence Reviewer** to compare every member against the recorded invariant, level, reference or comparator, and allowed variation. This is a focused Independent Review and uses an ordinary Evidence Gate; it is not another gate state or a substitute for Validation. The same peer may own the broader Independent Review when the assurance policy permits and both reviews inspect the same unchanged revision. On convergence `FAIL`, make the Root Master dispatch a bounded remediation implementer who is not the reviewer or validator for the affected revision. After remediation, rerun the convergence review and every affected downstream Review and Validation gate against the new revision. A Convergence Reviewer who edits the artifact becomes an implementer and loses reviewer independence for that revision. Do not mark a gate `BLOCKED` merely because a routine engineering judgment was needed. Use `BLOCKED` for a material decision that the master cannot resolve from available evidence within existing authority, or for another missing required capability, input, or proof. If an agent does not return, returns partial work, crosses scope, or supplies insufficient evidence: 1. record `FAIL` when evidence proves noncompliance, otherwise record `BLOCKED`; 2. preserve usable evidence; 3. narrow the missing responsibility; 4. re-dispatch that bounded responsibility; 5. rerun affected validation. Never count absent evidence as success. Never widen a re-dispatch merely to avoid another coordination step. When execution-state is active, reconcile it against the plan, current worktree, artifacts, diffs, and evidence before resuming. Treat `active` or `complete` as lifecycle history, never as gate success or proof of liveness. ### 7. Perform The Master Final Review After every assignment gate is `PASS`, inspect the integrated working tree and verify: - requested behavior and artifacts are present; - scope and non-goals were preserved; - every triggered concept-authority gate passed, and no component became an unrecorded semantic owner by duplicating another owner's extensible rules; - no parallel ownership conflict or unreviewed overwrite remains; - every forecast convergence set passed review against its recorded contract; - substantial custom machinery around an existing dependency passed the reuse-versus-focused-custom check, when applicable, with required and explicitly unwanted behavior covered by evidence; - repository tests and required checks passed; - checks in `NOT RUN` or `BLOCKED` are explicit; - public files contain no credentials or private identifiers; - no unrelated user change was staged, reverted, or overwritten; - commit, push, publication, deployment, and destructive boundaries remain within explicit authority. Keep the final gate closed when integrated evidence is incomplete, even if every individual agent reported success. The Master final integrated review closes the control plane. It does not replace a required peer Independent Review. ### 8. Close The Coordination Site Before the completion report, inspect the task's approved coordination location and leave it understandable without relying on chat history. Apply this step to `COMPLETED`, `PARTIAL`, and `BLOCKED` outcomes. It is control-plane hygiene, not a new Evidence Gate, and it must not change an existing gate result. Use the repository-defined or user-approved coordination convention; do not assume a directory name. When the skill created or used durable coordination artifacts, make the smallest useful update needed to expose: - the task purpose, final outcome, and current applicability; - the authoritative entry point and a short reading order; - the relationship from historical `FAIL` or `BLOCKED` evidence through remediation and revalidation to the latest result; - current authority versus plans, handoffs, validation evidence, superseded material, and remaining debt; - related predecessor, successor, or dependent tasks when those relationships affect interpretation; - restricted areas such as credentials, backups, logs, database snapshots, or binary artifacts that must be read only when the task requires them. Prefer updating or adding a small navigation index over moving or rewriting evidence. Preserve stable paths when handoffs, hashes, publication manifests, external references, or historical provenance depend on them. Do not rename, deduplicate, delete, sanitize, archive, or rewrite historical artifacts merely to make the directory look tidy. Those actions require their own authority and validation. The Root Master may edit coordination artifacts permitted by the Master Contract. Continue to delegate any cleanup that changes code, tests, configuration, migrations, public documentation, or other production deliverables. Treat repository-wide documentation reorganization as separate work rather than silently expanding task closure. If the coordination site is already legible, record that no structural change was needed. If no durable coordination location was used, report that fact and do not create one solely for cosmetic closure. ## Validation Define observable gates before implementation starts. Use repository-native tests, linting, type checks, builds, schema validation, dry-runs, rendered previews, or manual inspection appropriate to each artifact. Keep implementer author checks in implementation evidence. Assign independent Validation to a different owner, except that the Root Master may perform eligible read-only, reproducible Low-risk Validation under the linked policy. If a reviewer or validator edits a production artifact, that peer becomes an implementer for the new revision and another eligible peer must rerun affected assurance gates. Require each gate record to contain: - expected evidence; - exact command or manual check; - owner; - result: `NOT RUN`, `PASS`, `FAIL`, or `BLOCKED`; - artifact or output location; - remaining uncertainty. When imports, entrypoints, or module layout change, validate every supported invocation mode defined by the repository, such as an installed console entry, module execution, or direct script execution only when direct execution is an actual contract. Do not treat success from a modified working directory or an ad hoc `PYTHONPATH` as proof of the packaged execution contract. Rerun integration checks after combining parallel work. Run diff and scope-boundary review even when automated tests succeed. State every skipped check and why. ## Output Contract Return a concise completion report containing: - outcome: `COMPLETED`, `PARTIAL`, or `BLOCKED`; - delegated assignments and ownership; - files or artifacts changed; - coordination entry point and any closure updates, or confirmation that none were needed; - validation commands and results; - non-`PASS` gates, risks, and skipped checks; - side effects performed and explicitly not performed; - exact next action when work remains. Keep durable execution artifacts at the approved coordination location. Do not include hidden reasoning, raw credentials, private payloads, or unsupported success claims. ## Side-Effect Policy Default to `read-only` discovery and planning. Reach at most `git-working-tree` in normal use, and only after the user requests repository implementation. Delegate working-tree edits; preview broad changes through the plan and inspect the diff before closure. Require separate explicit authority for staging, committing, branch changes, pushing, PR or MR creation, deployment, publication, and destructive action. This skill does not grant those permissions. Preserve unrelated dirty work and never place credentials in dispatches, handoffs, logs, public files, or final reports. ## Failure Modes - **No sub-agent capability:** record the affected gate as `BLOCKED`; do not let the master implement. - **No safe coordination location:** use the existing repository convention or ask when placement materially affects version control or privacy. Record `BLOCKED` when no safe location can be resolved. - **Ambiguous target or authority:** resolve routine ambiguity from stronger evidence; for material ambiguity, request a master decision. Record `BLOCKED` and ask the human only when the master still lacks evidence or authority. - **Unavailable or inadequate model, effort, skill, or tool:** apply the linked fallback ladder, use an equivalent only when it produces the same evidence without broader side effects, and record the substitution. Record `BLOCKED` if no adequate capability remains. - **Overlapping parallel ownership:** pause the conflicting assignment, inspect the shared state, record the affected gate as `BLOCKED`, then serialize or redefine ownership. - **Cross-slice divergence:** record the convergence gate as `FAIL`, dispatch a bounded remediation implementer separate from the reviewer and validator, then rerun convergence review and affected downstream Review and Validation. - **Missing handoff:** record `BLOCKED` and request or reconstruct the handoff from verified artifacts through a bounded agent task. - **Agent timeout or incomplete evidence:** record `BLOCKED`, narrow and re-dispatch; do not infer completion. - **Validation failure:** record `FAIL`, assign diagnosis or remediation, and rerun the failed and integration checks. - **New independent responsibility discovered:** keep authorized work moving and submit a complete Delegation Request; do not spawn, dispatch, or transfer ownership from the worker. - **Private data in artifacts:** stop publication or registration, sanitize the public surface, record the affected gate as `FAIL`, and revalidate. - **Scope expansion discovered:** preserve completed in-scope work, pause the affected slice, and send a Decision Request. Because the master cannot grant new authority, record `BLOCKED` and ask the human before expanding.