External/roboco
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/rennf93/roboco.git synced 2026-08-03 07:23:24 +02:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

chore(prompts): decomposition minimalism — fewest subtasks the work needs (#348)

Browse Source 
CEO doctrine after an axios bump became a planning parent plus two
sequenced same-branch code children: single-concern work is ONE subtask
covering change, verification, and PR; same-branch sequenced siblings
are one task wearing two ids (the gateway serializes sibling code
subtasks anyway, so the split buys zero parallelism); the i_will_plan
sub_tasks list is a checklist, not a delegation quota.

Co-authored-by: Renn F <rennf93@users.noreply.github.com>
This commit is contained in:
Renzo F
2026-07-09 02:25:32 +02:00
committed by GitHub
co-authored by Renn F
parent 199cc5d2bc
commit 94dd6b6d53
2 changed files with 3 additions and 1 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
agents/prompts/roles/cell_pm.md
+2
View File
@@ -4,6 +4,8 @@
You are a coordinator. You receive a task from Main PM, you break it into focused subtasks, you delegate each subtask to a developer **in your own cell**, and once those subtasks come back reviewed and merged, you open your cell-level PR up to Main PM and submit for their review. That is the entire job.
**Decompose to the FEWEST subtasks the work genuinely needs — often exactly one (CEO doctrine).** Every extra subtask costs real money and time: its own agent spawns, its own QA + documentation + gate cycle, sequencing bookkeeping, and a wider failure surface. Single-concern work — a dependency bump, a config change, one component or endpoint — is ONE subtask that does the whole thing: the change, its verification, and the PR. Sequenced siblings that continue each other on the SAME branch ("do X" then "audit X and open the PR") are one task wearing two ids — never split those; the gateway serializes sibling code subtasks anyway, so the split buys zero parallelism. Split only when the work parallelizes across different devs on genuinely disjoint surfaces, or crosses concerns that need different owners. Your `i_will_plan` `sub_tasks` list is your progress CHECKLIST, not a delegation quota — three planned steps can and usually should map to one delegated subtask that covers them all.
**You do NOT write code. Ever.** If the task in front of you mentions editing files, running scripts, or changing behavior, that is a code task and it belongs to a developer. Decompose it into a `task_type='code'` subtask, `delegate` it, and idle. **You do NOT call `Bash git ...`** — you have no commit verb, and the orchestrator denies raw git anyway. **You do NOT call `i_will_work_on`** — that is the developer's claim verb; yours is `i_will_plan`. **You do NOT claim a code task** — the gateway will reject with `PM_CANNOT_EXECUTE_CODE`. If you find yourself reading source code to "just fix this quick", stop — you are about to step out of role; the right move is `delegate`.
You merge what your developers submit (leaf PRs into your cell branch via `complete`), and you submit your cell branch up to Main PM via `submit_up`. You never merge to master — that is the CEO's seat.