debug
無料Investigate and fix bugs, failing tests, regressions, build failures, or unexpected behavior using boundary localization, evidence, and bounded hypotheses.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Choose responsibility for substantial work before deep execution: keep one responsibility's coupled parts in a single lane, and hand a bounded or independent lane to a worker when clean context, an unknown cause, independent review, or coordinator attention materially improves the outcome.
インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。
Choose responsibility before deep execution. Worker lanes move a bounded responsibility into clean agent contexts without confusing delegation with permission. Use the fewest work surfaces that materially improve the outcome.
Decide, before committing to a deep implementation or investigation path, whether this task stays in the Coordinator lane or becomes a worker lane. This is a responsibility decision, not a parallelism switch.
Do not delegate an otherwise trivial task because a lane, an idle worker, or a coordination benefit happens to be available. A task must first have left the clear/direct path because the responsibility is substantive, uncertain, noisy, or otherwise meaningfully handoff-shaped.
servotab router reads this reference and applies its contract. The explicit delegate leaf is a manual entry point; its name need not appear in the UI for the method to govern a delegation.These are responsibilities, not ranks. A fresh context is a clean workbench; it creates neither a new objective nor new permission. Keep the main conversation as the coordination and judgment surface rather than replacing it with a worker dashboard.
When delegation is available, use a lane when at least one brings material value:
Keep the work in the Coordinator when it is trivial or nearly completed, easier to finish directly, or when handoff and acceptance would largely repeat the direct work. Frequent unresolved decisions that cross ownership boundaries also count against delegation; those decisions need the Coordinator's context rather than a handoff. Reversibility and a likely common cause do not prevent delegation by themselves. Keep symptoms with a likely common cause under one investigation owner; that coherent owner may be a worker when the bounded responsibility otherwise repays the handoff. Do not split one feature by file, create duplicate reviewers, or spawn workers merely because they are available.
Serial lanes need no concurrency: finish one bounded lane, then dispatch the next after its return. Use at most three concurrent Task Workers by default, and no delegation tree. One independent review lane is normally enough.
Give every Task Worker a compact order with:
The order must support independent judgment without hidden parent context. Delegation changes where authorized work happens, not what may happen. An instruction such as “if needed,” “if safe,” or “after approval” remains a gate. A worker that needs broader scope or authority stops the affected path and returns the exact conflict plus the smallest proposed correction.
Keep the order proportional: normally one to three bullets per field. Link canonical sources instead of restating whole plans or global rules, and include a constraint only when this lane needs it to judge or act correctly. A work order is not a second specification.
Before dispatch, the Coordinator checks that outcome, acceptance criteria, dependencies, authority, stop conditions, writer ownership, and return evidence are compatible. Ask the worker to validate that chain at entry, then make normal in-scope decisions without escalating trivia.
Reuse an active worker or session that already owns the lane. Do not create a second lane for a responsibility a live worker is already handling, and do not implement the same work in the Coordinator while a worker owns it.
Create each lane once. If creation returns an error, timeout, or ambiguous result, inspect existing agents once before retrying; an error does not prove that no worker exists.
Keep one writer for every overlapping file, branch, database, or live-state surface. For concurrent writes, use genuinely non-overlapping file and index operations, or separate worktrees with clear ownership. Different branch names in one checkout do not isolate working files or the index; a stable interface alone does not prevent write collisions. Reuse a suitable existing task workspace before creating another, and apply the Worktree method when selecting or retiring one. Read-only workers normally need no extra checkout. Worktrees still share refs and may share ports, databases, services, or output directories; allocate those resources or sequence the work. Workers do not commit, push, merge, deploy, mutate production, or change public contracts unless the order explicitly grants that action.
After confirmed dispatch, continue a non-overlapping Coordinator responsibility or wait. Do not repeatedly poll healthy workers; resume on an explicit return, a concrete delivery problem, or a user status request.
Require one explicit return containing:
Treat the packet as claims, not proof. The Coordinator checks source evidence, authority compliance, acceptance criteria, unknowns, and the combined diff or runtime state before integration. Resolve conflicting assumptions and run the narrowest meaningful integration check.
Do not run another worker wave by default. Dispatch again only when returned evidence reveals a new bounded responsibility whose value repays the coordination cost.
まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。
概要と使いどころ
Investigate and fix bugs, failing tests, regressions, build failures, or unexpected behavior using boundary localization, evidence, and bounded hypotheses.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Turn a rough feature, product interaction, or architecture idea into a concrete design. Use when meaningful decisions remain open; avoid for already-clear local edits.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Execute an existing implementation plan or settled multi-step request through connected slices with targeted checks and controlled plan drift.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Finish a development change safely by inspecting the final tree, verifying at the right scope, and performing only the requested Git or PR actions.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Create an implementation plan sized to settled work. Use when a multi-step change benefits from sequencing, file targets, and explicit verification.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。
Review a diff, commit, branch, PR, or implementation for actionable correctness and risk issues without duplicate reviewer loops or invented findings.
日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。