Design composable agentic primitives for flexible workflows. Use when creating reusable workflow building blocks, designing SDLC primitives, or building agent operations that can be combined in different ways.
Limited to specific tools
Additional assets for this skill
This skill is limited to using the following tools:
Guide design of composable agentic primitives for flexible workflow creation.
"The secret of tactical agentic coding is that it's not about the software developer lifecycle at all. It's about composable agentic primitives you can use to solve any engineering problem class."
| Primitive | Purpose | Input | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classify | Categorize input | Issue/task | Classification |
| Plan | Create implementation spec | Issue | Plan file |
| Build | Implement the plan | Plan file | Code changes |
| Test | Validate functionality | Code changes | Pass/fail |
| Review | Validate alignment | Spec + code | Issue list |
| Patch | Fix specific issues | Issue description | Targeted fix |
| Document | Generate documentation | Code changes | Doc files |
| Ship | Deploy to production | Validated code | Deployed state |
| Branch | Create isolated context | Classification | Branch name |
| Commit | Save checkpoint | Changes | Commit hash |
What type of work?
Based on problem class, choose primitives:
| Problem Class | Primitives |
|---|---|
| Chore | Classify -> Build -> Test -> Ship |
| Bug | Classify -> Plan -> Build -> Test -> Review -> Ship |
| Feature | Full SDLC |
| Hotfix | Patch -> Test -> Ship |
| Documentation | Document -> Review -> Ship |
Ensure correct sequencing:
Where should failures stop the pipeline?
Plan -> Build -> [Test GATE] -> Review -> [Review GATE] -> Ship
```yaml
### Step 5: Define Entry/Exit
- Entry: What triggers this workflow?
- Exit: What signals completion?
## Standard Compositions
### Full SDLC
```text
Classify -> Plan -> Build -> Test -> Review -> Document -> Ship
```markdown
### ZTE (Zero-Touch)
```text
Classify -> Plan -> Build -> Test -> Review -> Document -> Ship
| |
[GATE] [GATE]
```markdown
### Quick Fix
```text
Classify -> Patch -> Test -> Ship
```markdown
### Review-Driven
```text
Review -> Patch -> Test -> Ship
```yaml
## Custom Composition Design
### Organization Factors
Consider:
- Testing requirements (mandatory E2E?)
- Review processes (who reviews?)
- Documentation standards (auto-generated?)
- Deployment pipelines (manual approval?)
- Compliance needs (audit trails?)
### Example: Compliance-Heavy
```text
Classify -> Plan -> [Compliance Review] -> Build -> Test ->
[Security Scan] -> Review -> Document -> [Approval] -> Ship
```markdown
### Example: Rapid Iteration
```text
Build -> Test -> Ship (no planning for small changes)
```markdown
## Key Memory References
- @composable-primitives.md - Detailed primitives documentation
- @template-engineering.md - Templates as primitive definitions
- @adw-anatomy.md - ADW as composition framework
## Output Format
Provide composition design:
```markdown
## Workflow Composition
**Problem Class:** {type}
**Entry Trigger:** {trigger}
**Exit Criteria:** {criteria}
### Primitives Selected
1. Classify - Categorize the task
2. Plan - Create implementation spec
3. Build - Implement changes
4. Test - Validate functionality
5. Ship - Deploy to production
### Composition Flow
```text
Classify -> Plan -> Build -> Test -> Ship
|
[GATE: Must pass]
```markdown
### Validation Gates
- After Test: Abort if tests fail
- After Review: Optional based on confidence
### Customizations
- [Organization-specific additions]