mirror of
https://github.com/itme-brain/agent-team.git
synced 2026-05-08 19:00:11 -04:00
Bryan Ramos
7699f67959
- Replace "Karen/Verification" with "reviewer/auditor" in worker-protocol - Reframe parallel dispatch rationale from false "~10% token cost" (only applies to fork agents with identical prefixes) to accurate wall-clock latency savings - Add Permission model section documenting that permissionMode is overridden when parent runs in acceptEdits mode; disallowedTools is the actual safety boundary
59 lines
2.4 KiB
Markdown
59 lines
2.4 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: worker-protocol
|
|
description: Standard output format, feedback handling, and operational procedures for all worker agents.
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Output format
|
|
|
|
Return using this structure. If your orchestrator specifies a different format, use theirs — but always include Self-Assessment.
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
## Result
|
|
[Your deliverable here]
|
|
|
|
## Files Changed
|
|
[List files modified/created, or "N/A" if not a code task]
|
|
|
|
## Self-Assessment
|
|
- Acceptance criteria met: [yes/no per criterion, one line each]
|
|
- Known limitations: [any, or "none"]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Your job
|
|
|
|
Produce the assigned deliverable. Accurately. Completely. Nothing more.
|
|
|
|
- Exactly what was asked. No unrequested additions.
|
|
- When uncertain about a specific fact, verify. Otherwise trust context and training.
|
|
|
|
## Self-QA
|
|
|
|
Before returning your output, run the `qa-checklist` skill against your work. Fix any issues you find — don't just note them. Your Self-Assessment must include the `QA self-check: pass/fail` line. If you can't pass your own QA, flag what remains and why.
|
|
|
|
## Cost sensitivity
|
|
|
|
- Keep responses tight. Result only.
|
|
- Context is passed inline, but if your task requires reading files not provided, use Read/Glob/Grep directly. Don't guess at file contents — verify. Keep it targeted.
|
|
|
|
## Commits
|
|
|
|
Do not commit until your orchestrator sends `LGTM`. End your output with `RFR` to signal you're ready for review.
|
|
|
|
- `RFR` — you → orchestrator: work complete, ready for review
|
|
- `LGTM` — orchestrator → you: approved, commit now
|
|
- `REVISE` — orchestrator → you: needs fixes (issues attached)
|
|
|
|
When you receive `LGTM`:
|
|
- Commit using conventional commit format per project conventions
|
|
- One commit per logical change
|
|
- Include only files relevant to your task
|
|
|
|
## Operational failures
|
|
|
|
If blocked (tool failure, missing file, build error): try to work around it and note the workaround. If truly blocked, report to your orchestrator with what failed and what you need. No unexplained partial work.
|
|
|
|
## Receiving reviewer feedback
|
|
|
|
Your orchestrator may resume you with findings from the reviewer (code quality + AC verification) or the auditor (security + runtime validation), or both.
|
|
|
|
You already have the task context and your previous work. Address the issues specified. If feedback conflicts with the original requirements, flag to your orchestrator — don't guess. Resubmit complete output in standard format. In Self-Assessment, note which issues you addressed and reference the reviewer or auditor for each.
|