Simplified workflow

Skill: Simplified Workflow (Workflow 10)

A lightweight workflow for small, well-understood changes where the full two-pipeline architecture adds overhead without proportional safety benefit.

---

When to Offer

Leader MUST evaluate every incoming request against these smallness criteria before committing to a full workflow. If ALL of the following are true, leader SHOULD offer the simplified workflow:

Criterion	Test
Few files	Change touches ≤3 files (estimated during planning)
Low risk	No algorithmic changes, no numerical methods, no public API changes
Clear scope	Request is unambiguous — no uploaded files, no papers, no formulas
Well-understood	The fix/change pattern is routine (typo, config tweak, simple bug fix, dependency bump, adding a parameter, formatting)
No theoretical work	No mathematical derivation, no statistical methodology, no specification needed

Examples of Small Requests

• Fix a typo in a function name or docstring
• Bump a version number in DESCRIPTION/package.json/Cargo.toml
• Add a missing @export tag
• Fix a linting error
• Add a simple parameter with a default value
• Update a URL in documentation
• Fix a broken import/require path
• Add .Rbuildignore entries

Examples That Are NOT Small (use full workflow)

• Implement a new estimator or algorithm
• Fix a numerical bug that changes outputs
• Refactor a module's public API
• Any change where the user uploaded reference material (PDFs, papers)
• Changes that affect test outcomes or coverage

---

How to Offer

When leader detects a small request, it MUST ask the user before proceeding:

Leader uses AskUserQuestion with:
  question: "This looks like a small change (≤3 files, routine pattern). Use simplified workflow?"
  options:
    - label: "Simplified (faster)"
      description: "Skip planner/scriber. Direct: plan → build → validate → ship."
    - label: "Full workflow"
      description: "Run the complete two-pipeline architecture with all teammates."

If the user chooses "Full workflow" or provides a custom answer suggesting thoroughness, leader proceeds with the standard workflow (1–9).

If the user chooses "Simplified", leader uses Workflow 10.

If leader is uncertain whether the request is small, it MUST ask. The default is always to offer the choice — never silently downgrade to simplified.

---

Workflow 10: Simplified Pipeline

Agent Sequence

leader → builder → tester → shipper?

No planner, no scriber, no reviewer. Leader writes a lightweight spec directly in request.md (extended with acceptance criteria).

State Model (Simplified)

CREDENTIALS_VERIFIED → PLANNED → PIPELINES_COMPLETE → REVIEW_PASSED → DONE

Skipped states: SPEC_READY, DOCUMENTED. No comprehension.md, spec.md, test-spec.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, docs.md, or review.md from reviewer.

Steps

1. CREDENTIALS — Same as full workflow (step 4 in CLAUDE.md). Hard gate.
2. PLAN — Leader writes request.md with:
   • Clear description of the change
   • Acceptance criteria (what "done" looks like)
   • Affected files (the write surface)
   • Expected validation outcome Leader writes impact.md as in the full workflow. Status → PLANNED.
3. BUILD — Dispatch builder with isolation: "worktree". Builder receives request.md as its spec (no separate spec.md). Builder implements and writes implementation.md. Status → PIPELINES_COMPLETE.
4. VALIDATE — Dispatch tester. Tester runs profile validation commands and verifies acceptance criteria from request.md. Tester writes audit.md. If BLOCK → respawn builder (max 3). Tester acts as the quality gate (replaces reviewer for simplified workflow).
   • For audit pass: status → REVIEW_PASSED.
5. SHIP (if requested) — Dispatch shipper. Status → DONE.

Preconditions (Simplified)

Target State	Precondition
PLANNED	request.md with acceptance criteria AND impact.md exist
PIPELINES_COMPLETE	implementation.md exists
REVIEW_PASSED	audit.md exists with verdict PASS
DONE	shipper.md exists (if ship requested)

What Is Skipped

Component	Reason
planner	No theoretical analysis needed for routine changes
scriber	No architecture/process-record needed for small changes
reviewer	Tester provides sufficient quality gate
spec.md / test-spec.md	Builder uses request.md directly; tester validates against acceptance criteria
comprehension.md	No uploaded material to comprehend
ARCHITECTURE.md	Small change doesn't warrant architecture documentation
Log entry	No process record for routine changes

Escalation

If at any point during the simplified workflow:

• Builder raises HOLD (spec ambiguity) more than once
• Tester blocks more than once on the same issue
• The change turns out to affect more files than estimated

Leader MUST escalate to the full workflow. This means:

1. Dispatch planner with all context accumulated so far
2. Continue from SPEC_READY onward using the full pipeline
3. Update status.md to reflect the escalation

---

Progress Bar for Simplified Workflow

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  StatsClaw Progress (simplified)                             [2/4] │
│                                                                     │
│  [✔] Plan ── [▶] Implement ── [ ] Validate ── [ ] Ship             │
│                                                                     │
│  ▶ Active: builder implementing changes...                          │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

See skills/progress-bar/SKILL.md for full progress bar specification.