Architecture
AI coding harness composition orchestrator — manifest-described upstreams, composition skill workflows. Apache-2.0.
npx -y skills add easyinplay/harnessed --skill architectureAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
One thing to look at
- 2 stars2 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.
What its author says it does
Copied from the file, not written here
Stage ②.a 架构层 plan sub-workflow — gstack /plan-eng-review (复杂架构强制治理关卡; bundled plan-stage cadence: mandatory before complex-architecture phases)。schema_version: harnessed.workflow.v3 with disciplines_applied (6 default) + tools_available [plan-eng-review] + 1 phase (01-plan-eng-review) + gate literal expr `phase.is_complex_architecture == true`。Triggered by harnessed CLI `harnessed plan-architecture --module <name>` or slash command `/plan-architecture` after `harnessed setup`.
SKILL.md
5.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
plan-architecture workflow (v3)
Overview
1-phase sub-workflow mapping CLAUDE.md "⚠️ 复杂架构前 — plan-eng-review" onto harnessed runtime (Phase v3.0-3.4 W0.4 — D-04 Stage ② Plan 二层 + D-12 gstack 治理关卡 + Pattern A sub-workflow ship)。
| phase | id | upstream | model | capability | gate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 01-plan-eng-review | gstack | opus | {{ capabilities.plan-eng-review.cmd }} | gate: phase.is_complex_architecture == true (literal expr) |
Capability refs
Sister workflows/capabilities.yaml entries:
plan-eng-review— Bucket 7 gstack 33 optional (impl: gstack, cmd: /plan-eng-review)- Pattern A E.2 LOCK: no
gstack-prefix per CLAUDE.md gstack skill routing convention
- Pattern A E.2 LOCK: no
Gate ref
Inline literal expr phase.is_complex_architecture == true — sister capability
fires_when clause verbatim。W2.2 backfill 可加 judgments/phase-gate.yaml
trigger is-complex-architecture 重构 ref。
Invocation
- Slash command:
/plan-architecture <name>(afterharnessed setup)
Routing rules
触发条件 (sister CLAUDE.md "⚠️ 复杂架构前"):
- 涉及多模块跨界设计 (≥3 模块协同)
- 新引入核心抽象 (新 framework / 新数据模型 / 新协议)
- 性能 / scaling 关键路径
- 引入显著技术债 / migration 风险
How to invoke
!harnessed checkpoint intent plan-architecture
The banner above (when present) means this invocation is REGISTERED with the engine (an intent marker) — not yet compliant: the steps below (prompt → spawn → checkpoint complete) resolve it, and a per-turn
<workflow-intent>reminder persists until they run.
The numbered sequence below is the state machine — execute it with Bash. Do NOT improvise an equivalent flow from the Overview above: freelancing bypasses the engine (no ledger, no evidence guard). harnessed gives you the spawn-ready prompt; YOU spawn the subagent with a CC-native Task / Agent tool (keeps the session responsive + lets clarification round-trips reach the user).
Do NOT pipe to harnessed run plan-architecture — that is the CI/headless path (in-process SDK spawn
that blocks the session inside Claude Code).
- Bash:
harnessed prompt plan-architecture --task "$ARGUMENTS" --json→ parse{prompt, max_iterations, model}. - Spawn a CC-native subagent (Task / Agent tool) with that
promptandmodel, then drive delivery with harnessed's own completion gate:- on return, write the subagent's final output to a file and run
harnessed checkpoint complete plan-architecture --result-file <path>— it is fail-closed on the declared artifacts, the TDD boundary, and the verbatim<promise>COMPLETE</promise>. - if it blocks, run
harnessed checkpoint fail plan-architecture --failing-tests <n>to record the attempt; it prints BUDGET-EXHAUSTED / NO-PROGRESS / BREAK-LOOP when a stop condition is reached. - respawn ONLY while none of those three has fired. Any one of them means stop: re-scope the subtask, fix the blocker, or escalate to the user. Never respawn past a stop directive.
- on return, write the subagent's final output to a file and run
- If the output contains
STATUS: NEEDS_CLARIFICATION+ a question list: STOP, relay them verbatim via AskUserQuestion, append the answers to the spec, then re-spawn the same sub. - On
<promise>COMPLETE</promise>: write the subagent’s final output to a file, then Bashharnessed checkpoint complete plan-architecture --result-file <path> --summary "<one-line>". Fail-CLOSED — it blocks unless every declaredartifacts_expectedfile exists, the TDD boundary passes (non-empty evidence / both the red and green sides present / the test file was not deleted), and the result carries a verbatim<promise>COMPLETE</promise>(or a structured COMPLETE status).--result <text>is the inline variant;--result-filewins and is quoting-safe on Windows.--forcerecords an audited override (evidence_status=overridden) — it does not silently pass. - If the complete gate blocked: Bash
harnessed checkpoint fail plan-architecture --failing-tests <n>to record the attempt. It printsBUDGET-EXHAUSTED/NO-PROGRESS/BREAK-LOOPonce a stop condition is reached. Respawn ONLY while none of those three has fired; any one of them means STOP — re-scope the subtask, fix the blocker, or escalate to the user.
References
- D-04 Stage ② Plan 二层 (架构 / 计划)
- D-12 gstack 治理关卡 (复杂架构强制)
- workflows/capabilities.yaml — plan-eng-review (Bucket 7)
- workflows/defaults.yaml — ralph_max_iterations.plan-architecture.* values (W2.2 backfill)