subagent-driven-development skill
Execute plans via delegate_task subagents (2-stage review).
Is the subagent-driven-development skill safe?
Clean: nothing in its files matched our rules. We read 3 files in the folder on 2026-10-25.
No findings.
Install the subagent-driven-development skill
A skill is a folder. Copy it into your agent's skills folder and the agent loads it when the task matches its description.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-agent.git /tmp/hermes-agent mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills cp -r /tmp/hermes-agent/optional-skills/software-development/subagent-driven-development ~/.claude/skills/subagent-driven-development
In the Claude apps, zip the folder and upload it from the Skills settings. The folder on GitHub
The instructions your agent would load
SKILL.md as published, without the frontmatter. Read it on GitHub
Subagent-Driven Development
Overview
Execute implementation plans by dispatching fresh subagents per task with systematic two-stage review.
Core principle: Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration.
When to Use
Use this skill when:
- You have an implementation plan (from the plan skill or user requirements)
- Tasks are mostly independent
- Quality and spec compliance are important
- You want automated review between tasks
vs. manual execution:
- Fresh context per task (no confusion from accumulated state)
- Automated review process catches issues early
- Consistent quality checks across all tasks
- Subagents can ask questions before starting work
The Process
1. Read and Parse Plan
Read the plan file. Extract ALL tasks with their full text and context upfront. Create a todo list:
# Read the plan
read_file("docs/plans/feature-plan.md")
# Create todo list with all tasks
todo([
{"id": "task-1", "content": "Create User model with email field", "status": "pending"},
{"id": "task-2", "content": "Add password hashing utility", "status": "pending"},
{"id": "task-3", "content": "Create login endpoint", "status": "pending"},
])Key: Read the plan ONCE. Extract everything. Don't make subagents read the plan file — provide the full task text directly in context.
2. Per-Task Workflow
For EACH task in the plan:
Step 1: Dispatch Implementer Subagent
Use delegate_task with complete context:
delegate_task(
goal="Implement Task 1: Create User model with email and password_hash fields",
context="""
TASK FROM PLAN:
- Create: src/models/user.py
- Add User class with email (str) and password_hash (str) fields
- Use bcrypt for password hashing
- Include __repr__ for debugging
FOLLOW TDD:
1. Write failing test in tests/models/test_user.py
2. Run: pytest tests/models/test_user.py -v (verify FAIL)
3. Write minimal implementation
4. Run: pytest tests/models/test_user.py -v (verify PASS)
5. Run: pytest tests/ -q (verify no regressions)
6. Commit: git add -A && git commit -m "feat: add User model with password hashing"
PROJECT CONTEXT:
- Python 3.11, Flask app in src/app.py
- Existing models in src/models/
- Tests use pytest, run from project root
- bcrypt already in requirements.txt
""",
toolsets=['terminal', 'file']
)Step 2: Dispatch Spec Compliance Reviewer
After the implementer completes, verify against the original spec:
delegate_task(
goal="Review if implementation matches the spec from the plan",
context="""
ORIGINAL TASK SPEC:
- Create src/models/user.py with User class
- Fields: email (str), password_hash (str)
- Use bcrypt for password hashing
- Include __repr__
CHECK:
- [ ] All requirements from spec implemented?
- [ ] File paths match spec?
- [ ] Function signatures match spec?
- [ ] Behavior matches expected?
- [ ] Nothing extra added (no scope creep)?
OUTPUT: PASS or list of specific spec gaps to fix.
""",
toolsets=['file']
)If spec issues found: Fix gaps, then re-run spec review. Continue only when spec-compliant.
Step 3: Dispatch Code Quality Reviewer
After spec compliance passes:
delegate_task(
goal="Review code quality for Task 1 implementation",
context="""
FILES TO REVIEW:
- src/models/user.py
- tests/models/test_user.py
CHECK:
- [ ] Follows project conventions and style?
- [ ] Proper error handling?
- [ ] Clear variable/function names?
- [ ] Adequate test coverage?
- [ ] No obvious bugs or missed edge cases?
- [ ] No security issues?
OUTPUT FORMAT:
- Critical Issues: [must fix before proceeding]
- Important Issues: [should fix]
- Minor Issues: [optional]
- Verdict: APPROVED or REQUEST_CHANGES
""",
toolsets=['file']
)If quality issues found: Fix issues, re-review. Continue only when approved.
Step 4: Mark Complete
todo([{"id": "task-1", "content": "Create User model with email field", "status": "completed"}], merge=True)3. Final Review
After ALL tasks are complete, dispatch a final integration reviewer:
delegate_task(
goal="Review the entire implementation for consistency and integration issues",
context="""
All tasks from the plan are complete. Review the full implementation:
- Do all components work together?
- Any inconsistencies between tasks?
- All tests passing?
- Ready for merge?
""",
toolsets=['terminal', 'file']
)4. Verify and Commit
# Run full test suite
pytest tests/ -q
# Review all changes
git diff --stat
# Final commit if needed
git add -A && git commit -m "feat: complete [feature name] implementation"Task Granularity
Each task = 2-5 minutes of focused work.
Too big:
- "Implement user authentication system"
Right size:
- "Create User model with email and password fields"
- "Add password hashing function"
- "Create login endpoint"
- "Add JWT token generation"
- "Create registration endpoint"
Red Flags — Never Do These
- Start implementation without a plan
- Skip reviews (spec compliance OR code quality)
- Proceed with unfixed critical/important issues
- Dispatch multiple implementation subagents for tasks that touch the same files
- Make subagent read the plan file (provide full text in context instead)
- Skip scene-setting context (subagent needs to understand where the task fits)
- Ignore subagent questions (answer before letting them proceed)
- Accept "close enough" on spec compliance
- Skip review loops (reviewer found issues → implementer fixes → review again)
- Let implementer self-review replace actual review (both are needed)
- Start code quality review before spec compliance is PASS (wrong order)
- Move to next task while either review has open issues
Handling Issues
If Subagent Asks Questions
- Answer clearly and completely
- Provide additional context if needed
- Don't rush them into implementation
If Reviewer Finds Issues
- Implementer subagent (or a new one) fixes them
- Reviewer reviews again
- Repeat until approved
- Don't skip the re-review
If Subagent Fails a Task
- Dispatch a new fix subagent with specific instructions about what went wrong
- Don't try to fix manually in the controller session (context pollution)
Efficiency Notes
Why fresh subagent per task:
- Prevents context pollution from accumulated state
- Each subagent gets clean, focused context
- No confusion from prior tasks' code or reasoning
Why two-stage review:
- Spec review catches under/over-building early
- Quality review ensures the implementation is well-built
- Catches issues before they compound across tasks
Cost trade-off:
- More subagent invocations (implementer + 2 reviewers per task)
- But catches issues early (cheaper than debugging compounded problems later)
Integration with Other Skills
With plan
This skill EXECUTES plans created by the plan skill:
- User requirements → plan → implementation plan
- Implementation plan → subagent-driven-development → working code
More skills from NousResearch/hermes-agent
- A1passwordSet up op CLI, sign in, and read or inject secrets.
- A3-statement-modelBuild integrated IS/BS/CF financial workbooks in Excel.
- AaccelerateRun PyTorch training across GPUs with minimal changes.
- Cactual-setupSet up Actual Computer (actual.inc) inference in Hermes.
- Aadversarial-ux-testRoleplay a hostile user to find and triage UX pain points.
- Aagent-merge-conflict-arbiterNeutral arbiter for merge conflicts between two agents.
- AagentmailUse when an agent needs AgentMail CLI email inboxes.
- Aai-presenter-videoMake a verified AI presenter video from script + image.
- AairtableAirtable REST API via curl. Records CRUD, filters, upserts.
- AanatomyExplain an idea as an interactive isometric machine figure.
- Cantigravity-cliOperate the Antigravity CLI (agy): plugins, auth, sandbox.
- Aapple-notesManage Apple Notes via memo CLI: create, search, edit.