Deep Design Skill

When to use deep-design vs --spec mode

• deep-design (default): Multi-agent adversarial workflow — stress-tests designs with parallel critics. Use for complex systems. Outputs battle-tested design doc.
• deep-design --spec: Single-session lightweight spec writer. Outputs SDD-compatible spec.md with User Scenarios & Testing (prioritized P1/P2/P3), Functional Requirements (FR-###), Success Criteria (SC-###), Key Entities, Assumptions, and Edge Cases. Creates specs/{NNN-feature}/spec.md and checklists/requirements.md. Ready for deep-plan to consume.

Adversarially stress-test a design. Given a concept, validate input, draft a spec, attack it with parallel critic agents across orthogonal dimensions, fix discovered flaws using independent judge agents, and repeat until coverage is saturated. Output is a battle-tested design document with an honest coverage report.

Execution Model

All operations use Claude Code primitives. The following contracts are non-negotiable:

• All data passed to agents via files, never inline. Spec content, dedup lists, angle definitions, fact sheets — all written to disk before the agent prompt. Inline data is silently truncated.
• State written before agent spawn, not after. spawn_time_iso is written to state.json before the Agent tool call. Spawn failure records spawn_failed status. Resume uses persisted state, never in-memory reconstruction.
• Structured output is the contract; free-text is ignored. Every judge and checker produces machine-parseable structured lines as the final lines of output. Coordinator reads only structured fields. Unparseable output triggers fail-safe classification (critical or conflict). Critic output files MUST contain STRUCTURED_OUTPUT_START/STRUCTURED_OUTPUT_END markers; files without these markers are treated as failed (not partially consumed).
• No coordinator self-review of anything load-bearing. Fact sheets, severity classifications, cross-fix checks, form-switch dedup, section-impact scores — all delegated to independent agents. The coordinator orchestrates; it does not evaluate.
• Termination labels are honest. "Conditions Met" or "Max Rounds Reached" — never "no critical flaws remain." Coverage fraction includes the denominator caveat. Unverified sections are listed explicitly.
• Coverage completeness is a hard invariant — not a judgment call. All 5 required dimension categories (correctness, usability_ux, economics_cost, operability, security_trust) MUST have explored_count >= 1 before any run (in-session or sagaflow) can proceed to final synthesis. If a category has zero explored angles, the coordinator MUST spawn critics targeting that category — not skip it, not label it "out of scope," not cite context constraints. "Context is running low" is NOT a valid reason to skip required categories; the coordinator MUST either (a) use sagaflow durable execution to avoid context limits, (b) run coverage extension rounds, or (c) label the run INCOMPLETE — uncovered: {list} and refuse to present it as finished work. A run that declares completion while listing known uncovered categories is a protocol violation, not a judgment call.