workflows:work

Work Plan Execution Command

Execute a work plan efficiently while maintaining quality and finishing features.

Introduction

This command takes a work document (plan, specification, or todo file) and executes it systematically. The focus is on shipping complete features by understanding requirements quickly, following existing patterns, and maintaining quality throughout.

Input Document

<input_document> #$ARGUMENTS </input_document>

Execution Workflow

Phase 1: Quick Start

Read Plan and Clarify
- Read the work document completely
- Review any references or links provided in the plan
- If anything is unclear or ambiguous, ask clarifying questions now
- Get user approval to proceed
- Do not skip this - better to ask questions now than build the wrong thing
Setup Environment

First, check the current branch:
Terminal window
```
current_branch=$(git branch --show-current)
default_branch=$(git symbolic-ref refs/remotes/origin/HEAD 2>/dev/null | sed 's@^refs/remotes/origin/@@')

# Fallback if remote HEAD isn't set
if [ -z "$default_branch" ]; then
  default_branch=$(git rev-parse --verify origin/main >/dev/null 2>&1 && echo "main" || echo "master")
fi
```
If already on a feature branch (not the default branch):
- Ask: “Continue working on [current_branch], or create a new branch?”
- If continuing, proceed to step 3
- If creating new, follow Option A or B below
If on the default branch, choose how to proceed:

Option A: Create a new branch
Terminal window
```
git pull origin [default_branch]
git checkout -b feature-branch-name
```
Use a meaningful name based on the work (e.g., feat/user-authentication, fix/email-validation).

Option B: Use a worktree (recommended for parallel development)
Terminal window
```
skill: git-worktree
# The skill will create a new branch from the default branch in an isolated worktree
```
Option C: Continue on the default branch
- Requires explicit user confirmation
- Only proceed after user explicitly says “yes, commit to [default_branch]”
- Never commit directly to the default branch without explicit permission
Recommendation: Use worktree if:
- You want to work on multiple features simultaneously
- You want to keep the default branch clean while experimenting
- You plan to switch between branches frequently
Create Todo List
- Use todowrite to break plan into actionable tasks
- Include dependencies between tasks
- Prioritize based on what needs to be done first
- Include testing and quality check tasks
- Keep tasks specific and completable

Phase 2: Execute

Task Execution Loop

For each task in priority order:

while (tasks remain):
   - Mark task as in_progress in todowrite
  - Read any referenced files from the plan
  - Look for similar patterns in codebase
  - Implement following existing conventions
  - Write tests for new functionality
  - Run tests after changes
   - Mark task as completed in todowrite
  - Mark off the corresponding checkbox in the plan file ([ ] → [x])
  - Evaluate for incremental commit (see below)

IMPORTANT: Always update the original plan document by checking off completed items. Use the edit tool to change - [ ] to - [x] for each task you finish. This keeps the plan as a living document showing progress and ensures no checkboxes are left unchecked.

Incremental Commits

After completing each task, evaluate whether to create an incremental commit:

Commit when…	Don’t commit when…
Logical unit complete (model, service, component)	Small part of a larger unit
Tests pass + meaningful progress	Tests failing
About to switch contexts (backend → frontend)	Purely scaffolding with no behavior
About to attempt risky/uncertain changes	Would need a “WIP” commit message

Heuristic: “Can I write a commit message that describes a complete, valuable change? If yes, commit. If the message would be ‘WIP’ or ‘partial X’, wait.”

Commit workflow:

# 1. Verify tests pass (use project's test command)
# Examples: bin/rails test, npm test, pytest, go test, etc.

# 2. Stage only files related to this logical unit (not `git add .`)
git add <files related to this logical unit>

# 3. Commit with conventional message
git commit -m "feat(scope): description of this unit"

Handling merge conflicts: If conflicts arise during rebasing or merging, resolve them immediately. Incremental commits make conflict resolution easier since each commit is small and focused.

Note: Incremental commits use clean conventional messages without attribution footers. The final Phase 4 commit/PR includes the full attribution.

Follow Existing Patterns
- The plan should reference similar code - read those files first
- Match naming conventions exactly
- Reuse existing components where possible
- Follow project coding standards (see AGENTS.md)
- When in doubt, grep for similar implementations
Test Continuously
- Run relevant tests after each significant change
- Don’t wait until the end to test
- Fix failures immediately
- Add new tests for new functionality
Figma Design Sync (if applicable)

For UI work with Figma designs:
- Implement components following design specs
- Use figma-design-sync agent iteratively to compare
- Fix visual differences identified
- Repeat until implementation matches design
Track Progress
- Keep todowrite updated as you complete tasks
- Note any blockers or unexpected discoveries
- Create new tasks if scope expands
- Keep user informed of major milestones

Phase 3: Quality Check

Run Core Quality Checks

Always run before submitting:

# Run full test suite (use project's test command)
# Examples: bin/rails test, npm test, pytest, go test, etc.

 # Run linting (per AGENTS.md)
# Use linting-agent before pushing to origin

Consider Reviewer Agents (Optional)

Use for complex, risky, or large changes:
- code-simplicity-reviewer: Check for unnecessary complexity
- kieran-rails-reviewer: Verify Rails conventions (Rails projects)
- performance-oracle: Check for performance issues
- security-sentinel: Scan for security vulnerabilities
- cora-test-reviewer: Review test quality (Rails projects with comprehensive test coverage)
Run reviewers in parallel with task tool:
```
 task(code-simplicity-reviewer): "Review changes for simplicity"
 task(kieran-rails-reviewer): "Check Rails conventions"
```
Present findings to user and address critical issues.
Final Validation
- All todowrite tasks marked completed
- All tests pass
- Linting passes
- Code follows existing patterns
- Figma designs match (if applicable)
- No console errors or warnings

Phase 4: Ship It

Create Commit

git add .
git status  # Review what's being committed
git diff --staged  # Check the changes

# Commit with conventional format
git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF'
feat(scope): description of what and why

Brief explanation if needed.

 🤖 Generated with [OpenCode](https://opencode.ai)

 Co-Authored-By: OpenCode <noreply@opencode.ai>
EOF
)"

Capture and Upload Screenshots for UI Changes (REQUIRED for any UI work)

For any design changes, new views, or UI modifications, you MUST capture and upload screenshots:

Step 1: Start dev server (if not running)
Terminal window
```
bin/dev  # Run in background
```
Step 2: Capture screenshots with agent-browser CLI
Terminal window
```
agent-browser open http://localhost:3000/[route]
agent-browser snapshot -i
agent-browser screenshot output.png
```
See the agent-browser skill for detailed usage.

Step 3: Upload using imgup skill
Terminal window
```
skill: imgup
# Then upload each screenshot:
imgup -h pixhost screenshot.png  # pixhost works without API key
# Alternative hosts: catbox, imagebin, beeimg
```
What to capture:
- New screens: Screenshot of the new UI
- Modified screens: Before AND after screenshots
- Design implementation: Screenshot showing Figma design match
IMPORTANT: Always include uploaded image URLs in PR description. This provides visual context for reviewers and documents the change.

Create Pull Request

git push -u origin feature-branch-name

gh pr create --title "Feature: [Description]" --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Summary
- What was built
- Why it was needed
- Key decisions made

## Testing
- Tests added/modified
- Manual testing performed

## Before / After Screenshots
| Before | After |
|--------|-------|
| ![before](URL) | ![after](URL) |

## Figma Design
[Link if applicable]

---

 [![Systematic](https://img.shields.io/badge/Systematic-Engineered-6366f1)](https://github.com/marcusrbrown/systematic) 🤖 Generated with [OpenCode](https://opencode.ai)
EOF
)"

Notify User
- Summarize what was completed
- Link to PR
- Note any follow-up work needed
- Suggest next steps if applicable

Swarm Mode (Optional)

Note: Swarm mode coordination primitives (Teammate API — team creation, shutdown signals, cleanup) are not yet available in OpenCode. The concepts below are aspirational. For current parallel execution, use the task tool with multiple background subagents, or see the dispatching-parallel-agents skill.

For complex plans with multiple independent workstreams, enable swarm mode for parallel execution with coordinated agents.

When to Use Swarm Mode

Use Swarm Mode when…	Use Standard Mode when…
Plan has 5+ independent tasks	Plan is linear/sequential
Multiple specialists needed (review + test + implement)	Single-focus work
Want maximum parallelism	Simpler mental model preferred
Large feature with clear phases	Small feature or bug fix

Enabling Swarm Mode

To trigger swarm execution, say:

“Make a Task list and launch an army of agent swarm subagents to build the plan”

Or explicitly request: “Use swarm mode for this work”

Swarm Workflow

When swarm mode is enabled, the workflow changes:

Create Team

Teammate({ operation: "spawnTeam", team_name: "work-{timestamp}" })

Create Task List with Dependencies
- Parse plan into TaskCreate items
- Set up blockedBy relationships for sequential dependencies
- Independent tasks have no blockers (can run in parallel)

Spawn Specialized Teammates

Task({
  team_name: "work-{timestamp}",
  name: "implementer",
  subagent_type: "general-purpose",
  prompt: "Claim implementation tasks, execute, mark complete",
  run_in_background: true
})

Task({
  team_name: "work-{timestamp}",
  name: "tester",
  subagent_type: "general-purpose",
  prompt: "Claim testing tasks, run tests, mark complete",
  run_in_background: true
})

Coordinate and Monitor
- Team lead monitors task completion
- Spawn additional workers as phases unblock
- Handle plan approval if required

Cleanup

Teammate({ operation: "requestShutdown", target_agent_id: "implementer" })
Teammate({ operation: "requestShutdown", target_agent_id: "tester" })
Teammate({ operation: "cleanup" })

See the orchestrating-swarms skill for detailed swarm patterns and best practices.

Key Principles

Start Fast, Execute Faster

Get clarification once at the start, then execute
Don’t wait for perfect understanding - ask questions and move
The goal is to finish the feature, not create perfect process

The Plan is Your Guide

Work documents should reference similar code and patterns
Load those references and follow them
Don’t reinvent - match what exists

Test As You Go

Run tests after each change, not at the end
Fix failures immediately
Continuous testing prevents big surprises

Quality is Built In

Follow existing patterns
Write tests for new code
Run linting before pushing
Use reviewer agents for complex/risky changes only

Ship Complete Features

Mark all tasks completed before moving on
Don’t leave features 80% done
A finished feature that ships beats a perfect feature that doesn’t

Quality Checklist

Before creating PR, verify:

When to Use Reviewer Agents

Don’t use by default. Use reviewer agents only when:

Large refactor affecting many files (10+)
Security-sensitive changes (authentication, permissions, data access)
Performance-critical code paths
Complex algorithms or business logic
User explicitly requests thorough review

For most features: tests + linting + following patterns is sufficient.

Common Pitfalls to Avoid

Analysis paralysis - Don’t overthink, read the plan and execute
Skipping clarifying questions - Ask now, not after building wrong thing
Ignoring plan references - The plan has links for a reason
Testing at the end - Test continuously or suffer later
Forgetting todowrite - Track progress or lose track of what’s done
80% done syndrome - Finish the feature, don’t move on early
Over-reviewing simple changes - Save reviewer agents for complex work