Conductor New Track

New Track

Create a new track (feature, bug fix, chore, or refactor) with a detailed specification and phased implementation plan.

Use this skill when

• Working on new track tasks or workflows
• Needing guidance, best practices, or checklists for new track

Do not use this skill when

• The task is unrelated to new track
• You need a different domain or tool outside this scope

Instructions

• Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs.
• Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes.
• Provide actionable steps and verification.
• If detailed examples are required, open resources/implementation-playbook.md.

Pre-flight Checks

1. Verify Conductor is initialized:

   • Check conductor/product.md exists
   • Check conductor/tech-stack.md exists
   • Check conductor/workflow.md exists
   • If missing: Display error and suggest running /conductor:setup first

2. Load context files:

   • Read conductor/product.md for product context
   • Read conductor/tech-stack.md for technical context
   • Read conductor/workflow.md for TDD/commit preferences

Track Classification

Determine track type based on description or ask user:

What type of track is this?

1. Feature - New functionality
2. Bug - Fix for existing issue
3. Chore - Maintenance, dependencies, config
4. Refactor - Code improvement without behavior change

Interactive Specification Gathering

CRITICAL RULES:

• Ask ONE question per turn
• Wait for user response before proceeding
• Tailor questions based on track type
• Maximum 6 questions total

For Feature Tracks

Q1: Feature Summary

Describe the feature in 1-2 sentences.
[If argument provided, confirm: "You want to: {argument}. Is this correct?"]

Q2: User Story

Who benefits and how?

Format: As a [user type], I want to [action] so that [benefit].

Q3: Acceptance Criteria

What must be true for this feature to be complete?

List 3-5 acceptance criteria (one per line):

Q4: Dependencies

Does this depend on any existing code, APIs, or other tracks?

1. No dependencies
2. Depends on existing code (specify)
3. Depends on incomplete track (specify)

Q5: Scope Boundaries

What is explicitly OUT of scope for this track?
(Helps prevent scope creep)

Q6: Technical Considerations (optional)

Any specific technical approach or constraints?
(Press enter to skip)

For Bug Tracks

Q1: Bug Summary

What is broken?
[If argument provided, confirm]

Q2: Steps to Reproduce

How can this bug be reproduced?
List steps:

Q3: Expected vs Actual Behavior

What should happen vs what actually happens?

Q4: Affected Areas

What parts of the system are affected?

Q5: Root Cause Hypothesis (optional)

Any hypothesis about the cause?
(Press enter to skip)

For Chore/Refactor Tracks

Q1: Task Summary

What needs to be done?
[If argument provided, confirm]

Q2: Motivation

Why is this work needed?

Q3: Success Criteria

How will we know this is complete?

Q4: Risk Assessment

What could go wrong? Any risky changes?

Track ID Generation

Generate track ID in format: {shortname}_{YYYYMMDD}

• Extract shortname from feature/bug summary (2-3 words, lowercase, hyphenated)
• Use current date
• Example: user-auth_20250115, nav-bug_20250115

Validate uniqueness:

• Check conductor/tracks.md for existing IDs
• If collision, append counter: user-auth_20250115_2

Specification Generation

Create conductor/tracks/{trackId}/spec.md:

# Specification: {Track Title}

**Track ID:** {trackId}
**Type:** {Feature|Bug|Chore|Refactor}
**Created:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Status:** Draft

## Summary

{1-2 sentence summary}

## Context

{Product context from product.md relevant to this track}

## User Story (for features)

As a {user}, I want to {action} so that {benefit}.

## Problem Description (for bugs)

{Bug description, steps to reproduce}

## Acceptance Criteria

- [ ] {Criterion 1}
- [ ] {Criterion 2}
- [ ] {Criterion 3}

## Dependencies

{List dependencies or "None"}

## Out of Scope

{Explicit exclusions}

## Technical Notes

{Technical considerations or "None specified"}

---

_Generated by Conductor. Review and edit as needed._

User Review of Spec

Display the generated spec and ask:

Here is the specification I've generated:

{spec content}

Is this specification correct?
1. Yes, proceed to plan generation
2. No, let me edit (opens for inline edits)
3. Start over with different inputs

Plan Generation

After spec approval, generate conductor/tracks/{trackId}/plan.md:

Plan Structure

# Implementation Plan: {Track Title}

**Track ID:** {trackId}
**Spec:** spec.md
**Created:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Status:** [ ] Not Started

## Overview

{Brief summary of implementation approach}

## Phase 1: {Phase Name}

{Phase description}

### Tasks

- [ ] Task 1.1: {Description}
- [ ] Task 1.2: {Description}
- [ ] Task 1.3: {Description}

### Verification

- [ ] {Verification step for phase 1}

## Phase 2: {Phase Name}

{Phase description}

### Tasks

- [ ] Task 2.1: {Description}
- [ ] Task 2.2: {Description}

### Verification

- [ ] {Verification step for phase 2}

## Phase 3: {Phase Name} (if needed)

...

## Final Verification

- [ ] All acceptance criteria met
- [ ] Tests passing
- [ ] Documentation updated (if applicable)
- [ ] Ready for review

---

_Generated by Conductor. Tasks will be marked [~] in progress and [x] complete._

Phase Guidelines

• Group related tasks into logical phases
• Each phase should be independently verifiable
• Include verification task after each phase
• TDD tracks: Include test writing tasks before implementation tasks
• Typical structure:
  1. Setup/Foundation - Initial scaffolding, interfaces
  2. Core Implementation - Main functionality
  3. Integration - Connect with existing system
  4. Polish - Error handling, edge cases, docs

User Review of Plan

Display the generated plan and ask:

Here is the implementation plan:

{plan content}

Is this plan correct?
1. Yes, create the track
2. No, let me edit (opens for inline edits)
3. Add more phases/tasks
4. Start over

Track Creation

After plan approval:

1. Create directory structure:

   conductor/tracks/{trackId}/
   ├── spec.md
   ├── plan.md
   ├── metadata.json
   └── index.md
   

2. Create metadata.json:

   {
     "id": "{trackId}",
     "title": "{Track Title}",
     "type": "feature|bug|chore|refactor",
     "status": "pending",
     "created": "ISO_TIMESTAMP",
     "updated": "ISO_TIMESTAMP",
     "phases": {
       "total": N,
       "completed": 0
     },
     "tasks": {
       "total": M,
       "completed": 0
     }
   }
   

3. Create index.md:

   # Track: {Track Title}
   
   **ID:** {trackId}
   **Status:** Pending
   
   ## Documents
   
   - Specification
   - Implementation Plan
   
   ## Progress
   
   - Phases: 0/{N} complete
   - Tasks: 0/{M} complete
   
   ## Quick Links
   
   - Back to Tracks
   - Product Context
   

4. Register in conductor/tracks.md:

   • Add row to tracks table
   • Format: | [ ] | {trackId} | {title} | {created} | {created} |

5. Update conductor/index.md:

   • Add track to "Active Tracks" section

Completion Message

Track created successfully!

Track ID: {trackId}
Location: conductor/tracks/{trackId}/

Files created:
- spec.md - Requirements specification
- plan.md - Phased implementation plan
- metadata.json - Track metadata
- index.md - Track navigation

Next steps:
1. Review spec.md and plan.md, make any edits
2. Run /conductor:implement {trackId} to start implementation
3. Run /conductor:status to see project progress

Error Handling

• If directory creation fails: Halt and report, do not register in tracks.md
• If any file write fails: Clean up partial track, report error
• If tracks.md update fails: Warn user to manually register track

AGI Framework Integration

Adapted for @techwavedev/agi-agent-kit Original source: antigravity-awesome-skills

Memory-First Protocol

Retrieve prior Architecture Decision Records (ADRs), trade-off analyses, and system design rationale. Critical for maintaining consistency across long-running projects.

# Check for prior architecture/design context before starting
python3 execution/memory_manager.py auto --query "architecture decisions and trade-off analysis for Conductor New Track"

Storing Results

After completing work, store architecture/design decisions for future sessions:

python3 execution/memory_manager.py store \
  --content "Architecture: event-driven microservices with CQRS, Pulsar for messaging, Qdrant for semantic search" \
  --type decision --project <project> \
  --tags conductor-new-track architecture

Multi-Agent Collaboration

Broadcast architecture decisions to ALL agents so implementation stays aligned with the chosen patterns.

python3 execution/cross_agent_context.py store \
  --agent "<your-agent>" \
  --action "Completed architecture review — ADR documented, trade-offs analyzed, team aligned" \
  --project <project>

Control Tower Coordination

Register architecture tasks in the Control Tower so all agents across machines know the current system design and constraints.