Goal chunking agent architect
An Agent Skill that teaches your coding agent to design other (sub)agents well.
npx -y skills add halans/goal-chunking-agent-architectAssembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.
3 things to look at
- 16 days oldThe repository was created 16 days ago. New is not bad, but a brand new repository carrying a familiar-sounding name is the shape a typosquat arrives in, and there has been no time for anyone else to find a problem with it.
- no licenseNo license file was found in the repository. Code published without one is not open source by default, so using it at work is a question for whoever answers licensing questions where you are.
- 0 stars0 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
Design and generate a new AI agent (or agentic workflow) that reliably reaches a specific goal. Use this when the user asks to create, design, architect, scaffold, or "spin up" an agent or subagent aimed at a concrete outcome — and especially when they mention goal chunking, the Harada Method, mandala/OW64 goal decomposition, or want a rigorous, self-reliant agent instead of an ad-hoc prompt.
The file declares its own license as MIT. That is the author’s claim about this one file, and it is not the same thing as the license GitHub reports for the repository, which is listed with the other numbers below.
SKILL.md
9.2 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it
Goal-Chunking Agent Architect
Turn a goal into a deployable agent by running the goal through the Harada Method.
The Harada Method is a disciplined system for reaching meaningful goals through small, consistent, well-decomposed actions aligned to a clear purpose. This skill treats agent design as goal achievement: the same five instruments that make a person reliably hit a goal are used to make an agent reliably hit its objective.
You are not just writing a prompt. You are producing:
- The reasoning artifacts — filled Harada worksheets (goal sheet, OW64 mandala, routine sheet, reflection loop, countermeasures) that show why the agent is built the way it is, and
- A deployable agent definition — a subagent, or a generic system prompt, generated from those worksheets.
When to use / when not to use
Use it when the request is goal-shaped and deserves rigor:
- "Create an agent that keeps our changelog up to date."
- "Design a subagent that triages incoming bug reports."
- "Build me an agent that reviews PRs for security issues."
- "Use the Harada Method to make an agent that…"
Skip it (or go lighter) for one-off asks that don't warrant a persistent agent ("summarize this file"), or when the user just wants a quick prompt tweak. You can still borrow Phase 1 (charter) and Phase 2 (decomposition) informally.
The model: Harada instrument → agent construct
Each Harada instrument produces one part of the agent. Read references/mapping.md for
the full rationale and examples; the short version:
| Harada instrument | What it produces in the agent |
|---|---|
| Long-Term Goal Setting Sheet | Agent Charter — mission, purpose ("why"), the persona the agent must become, four-quadrant success criteria, definition of done, non-goals, capability audit |
| Open Window 64 (OW64) mandala | Capability Decomposition — 1 central goal → 8 capability pillars → 64 concrete behaviors/tools/subtasks that become the agent's operating backbone |
| Routine Check Sheet | Standard Operating Procedure — the repeatable pre-flight → main-loop → post-flight checklist the agent runs every task |
| Daily Diary | Reflection & Self-Evaluation Loop — the post-run retrospective the agent writes to self-correct (and log to memory/evals where supported) |
| Self-analysis & self-reliance | Obstacle/Countermeasure plan + Autonomy rules — anticipated failure modes with pre-committed responses, escalation policy, and honesty guardrails |
The central philosophy carries over too: self-reliance (the agent recovers on its own instead of stalling), consistency over intensity (deterministic guardrails beat heroic one-off effort), and character + performance together (the agent is honest, cites sources, and serves the user's real goal — not just the literal instruction).
Workflow
Work through the phases in order. Keep the user in the loop at Phase 0 and Phase 7; the
middle phases you can draft and then show. Fill each template in templates/ as you go —
either inline in the conversation or as files in the target repo.
Phase 0 — Intake (align on the goal)
Capture the objective in one sentence. If any of the following are unclear, ask up to three focused questions, then stop asking and proceed:
- Goal & success criteria — what outcome, measured how?
- Environment & tools — what can the agent actually use (repos, APIs, MCP servers, file access)?
- Deployment target — Claude Code subagent, GitHub Copilot agent profile, or a generic system prompt?
Record answers at the top of the goal sheet.
Phase 1 — Long-Term Goal Setting Sheet → Agent Charter
Fill templates/01-long-term-goal-sheet.md. Produce: mission, purpose/why, the persona
the agent must embody, the four-quadrant success criteria (value that is
tangible/intangible × for-the-user/for-the-wider-system), an explicit definition of
done, non-goals, and a capability audit (what tools/knowledge the goal requires
vs. what's available — gaps become requirements).
Phase 2 — Open Window 64 → Capability Decomposition
Fill templates/02-open-window-64.md. Put the goal in the center. Choose 8 pillars.
A strong default set for agentic goals (adapt to the specific goal — do not use blindly):
- Goal & Scope Mastery
- Context & Knowledge
- Planning & Decomposition
- Tools & Actions
- Execution Quality
- Verification & Validation
- Error Handling & Resilience
- Communication & Handoff
For each pillar, write 8 concrete actions/behaviors/tools (64 total). Be specific and testable ("run the test suite and parse failures", not "be careful"). Optionally validate completeness with the helper script (see Tooling).
Phase 3 — Routine Check Sheet → Standard Operating Procedure
Fill templates/03-routine-check-sheet.md. Select the highest-leverage recurring actions
from the 64 and turn them into the agent's per-run checklist, grouped as pre-flight
(before acting), main loop (the core cycle), and post-flight (before declaring
done). These become explicit numbered steps in the generated system prompt.
Phase 4 — Daily Diary → Reflection Loop
Fill templates/04-reflection-diary.md. Define the short retrospective the generated
agent writes after each run (what it did, what worked, what failed, what to change next
time). Where the platform supports memory/evaluation, wire the reflection into it.
Phase 5 — Self-analysis → Obstacles, Countermeasures & Autonomy
Fill templates/05-obstacles-countermeasures.md. List the top likely failure modes and a
pre-committed countermeasure for each. Define the escalation policy (when to ask
the human vs. proceed) and the honesty guardrails (no fabrication, cite sources, state
uncertainty, never silently substitute resources).
Phase 6 — Assemble the agent definition
Compose the worksheets into the chosen output artifact using templates/output/:
- Claude Code subagent →
claude-code-subagent.md(place at.claude/agents/<name>.md) - GitHub Copilot agent profile →
copilot-agent-profile.md(place at.github/agents/<name>.agent.md) - Generic system prompt →
generic-system-prompt.md
The system prompt body is built from: Charter (Phase 1) → SOP (Phase 3) → key
behaviors/tools from the decomposition (Phase 2) → reflection loop (Phase 4) →
countermeasures & autonomy rules (Phase 5). Attach the filled worksheets as an appendix or
a sibling *.harada.md file so the design is auditable.
Phase 7 — Review & iterate
Show the user (a) a one-paragraph summary of the agent, (b) the OW64 outline, and (c) the generated agent file. Offer to deepen any single pillar, swap the deployment target, or generate a companion evaluation rubric from the four-quadrant success criteria.
Tooling (optional helper script)
scripts/ow64.py scaffolds, validates, and renders the Open Window 64 mandala. It is pure
Python 3 standard library (no dependencies). Running it needs shell/bash access, which the
host tool will ask you to approve.
# Emit a blank OW64 file (JSON) to fill in
python3 scripts/ow64.py blank --out my-agent.ow64.json
# Check that all 8 pillars have 8 non-empty actions (exits non-zero if incomplete)
python3 scripts/ow64.py validate my-agent.ow64.json
# Render the 9x9 mandala as a Markdown table + outline
python3 scripts/ow64.py render my-agent.ow64.json --out my-agent.ow64.md
Guardrails for you (the architect)
- Adapt, don't copy. The 8 default pillars are a starting point. Re-derive them from the actual goal when the domain calls for it.
- Concrete beats aspirational. Every one of the 64 cells and every SOP step should be something an agent can actually do or check, not a vibe.
- Right-size it. A small goal doesn't need all 64 cells filled with filler — depth should match the goal's real complexity. Prefer 40 sharp actions over 64 padded ones.
- Ground the persona in the goal. "Who must this agent become?" should produce a role that materially changes behavior (e.g. "a skeptical security reviewer who assumes every input is hostile"), not a generic "helpful assistant."
- Keep the worksheets. They are the audit trail. Ship them alongside the agent.
Resource index
references/harada-method.md— the method itself, its five instruments, origin, sources.references/mapping.md— deep mapping from each instrument to agent architecture, with examples.templates/01–05— fillable worksheets for each phase.templates/output/— the three deployable output formats.scripts/ow64.py— scaffold / validate / render the OW64 mandala.examples/example-research-agent.md— a fully worked example (goal → filled charts → generated agent).