[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6DBB1GC7K21X5VFDM5SEXNB":3,"skill-same:01M6DBB1GC7K21X5VFDM5SEXNB":58},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":18,"publishedAt":27,"linkOnly":28,"markdownContent":29,"markdownBody":30,"frontMatter":31,"refName":32,"commitSha":33,"skillDirectory":34,"forksCount":14,"repositoryHtmlUrl":35,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":36,"ownerBlogUrl":6,"ownerDescription":6,"updatedAt":37,"install":38,"resources":51},"01M6DBB1GC7K21X5VFDM5SEXNB","dispatching-parallel-agents",null,"Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies","Prekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain","Prekzursil","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F54636077?v=4","01M6DACZ1PCQHD99SCR1YXG28B","Andrei Mihai Visalon","01M6DACZ670WZF535V3WYYSS4Z",0,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.agents\u002Fskills\u002Fdispatching-parallel-agents\u002FSKILL.md",[],[19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26],"dispatching parallel agents","parallel agents","parallel","tasks","state","use","dependencies","shared","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: dispatching-parallel-agents\ndescription: Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies\n---\n\n# Dispatching Parallel Agents\n\n## Overview\n\nWhen you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each investigation is independent and can happen in parallel.\n\n**Core principle:** Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently.\n\n## When to Use\n\n```dot\ndigraph when_to_use {\n    \"Multiple failures?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Are they independent?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Single agent investigates all\" [shape=box];\n    \"One agent per problem domain\" [shape=box];\n    \"Can they work in parallel?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Sequential agents\" [shape=box];\n    \"Parallel dispatch\" [shape=box];\n\n    \"Multiple failures?\" -> \"Are they independent?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Are they independent?\" -> \"Single agent investigates all\" [label=\"no - related\"];\n    \"Are they independent?\" -> \"Can they work in parallel?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Can they work in parallel?\" -> \"Parallel dispatch\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Can they work in parallel?\" -> \"Sequential agents\" [label=\"no - shared state\"];\n}\n```\n\n**Use when:**\n- 3+ test files failing with different root causes\n- Multiple subsystems broken independently\n- Each problem can be understood without context from others\n- No shared state between investigations\n\n**Don't use when:**\n- Failures are related (fix one might fix others)\n- Need to understand full system state\n- Agents would interfere with each other\n\n## The Pattern\n\n### 1. Identify Independent Domains\n\nGroup failures by what's broken:\n- File A tests: Tool approval flow\n- File B tests: Batch completion behavior\n- File C tests: Abort functionality\n\nEach domain is independent - fixing tool approval doesn't affect abort tests.\n\n### 2. Create Focused Agent Tasks\n\nEach agent gets:\n- **Specific scope:** One test file or subsystem\n- **Clear goal:** Make these tests pass\n- **Constraints:** Don't change other code\n- **Expected output:** Summary of what you found and fixed\n\n### 3. Dispatch in Parallel\n\n```typescript\n\u002F\u002F In Claude Code \u002F AI environment\nTask(\"Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts failures\")\nTask(\"Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts failures\")\nTask(\"Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts failures\")\n\u002F\u002F All three run concurrently\n```\n\n### 4. Review and Integrate\n\nWhen agents return:\n- Read each summary\n- Verify fixes don't conflict\n- Run full test suite\n- Integrate all changes\n\n## Agent Prompt Structure\n\nGood agent prompts are:\n1. **Focused** - One clear problem domain\n2. **Self-contained** - All context needed to understand the problem\n3. **Specific about output** - What should the agent return?\n\n```markdown\nFix the 3 failing tests in src\u002Fagents\u002Fagent-tool-abort.test.ts:\n\n1. \"should abort tool with partial output capture\" - expects 'interrupted at' in message\n2. \"should handle mixed completed and aborted tools\" - fast tool aborted instead of completed\n3. \"should properly track pendingToolCount\" - expects 3 results but gets 0\n\nThese are timing\u002Frace condition issues. Your task:\n\n1. Read the test file and understand what each test verifies\n2. Identify root cause - timing issues or actual bugs?\n3. Fix by:\n   - Replacing arbitrary timeouts with event-based waiting\n   - Fixing bugs in abort implementation if found\n   - Adjusting test expectations if testing changed behavior\n\nDo NOT just increase timeouts - find the real issue.\n\nReturn: Summary of what you found and what you fixed.\n```\n\n## Durability mandate\n\n**A unit that holds its results in memory until the end is a total-loss risk.** Measured: one\nreview unit ran **70 minutes**, produced **691 KB** of transcript, completed a full mutation\nharness -- then froze and wrote **nothing**. Unrecoverable. A relaunched unit under a\nwrite-as-you-go mandate produced a truthful artifact within **3 minutes** and survived every\nlater check.\n\n**Any unit you expect to run longer than 10 minutes MUST be told to write as it goes.** Put all\nthree of these in its prompt:\n\n1. **Write the artifact IMMEDIATELY** as a skeleton -- every claim it will make, enumerated and\n   marked `UNKNOWN - not yet measured`, plus a `COVERAGE:` line naming which sections are still\n   unmeasured.\n2. **REWRITE it at each milestone** (per lane, per phase, per file checked) -- never once at the\n   end.\n3. **Whatever is on disk must ALWAYS be truthful.** A partial file with honest UNKNOWNs is a\n   SUCCESS; a perfect file that never gets written is a total loss.\n\nInclude this sentence verbatim in the skeleton, so a corpse is self-labelling:\n\n> If it still reads this way, the unit died before measuring anything and no verdict here may be\n> cited.\n\nDo not reach for a probe timeout instead. The freeze cause was NOT an unbounded external probe\n(measured: zero hung git\u002Fgit-crypt processes). Bounding probes is good hygiene but did not address\nit -- write-as-you-go is the fix that makes the cause irrelevant, because it converts a dead unit\nfrom a total loss into a partial result you can read.\n\n## Common Mistakes\n\n** Too broad:** \"Fix all the tests\" - agent gets lost\n** Specific:** \"Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts\" - focused scope\n\n** No context:** \"Fix the race condition\" - agent doesn't know where\n** Context:** Paste the error messages and test names\n\n** No constraints:** Agent might refactor everything\n** Constraints:** \"Do NOT change production code\" or \"Fix tests only\"\n\n** Vague output:** \"Fix it\" - you don't know what changed\n** Specific:** \"Return summary of root cause and changes\"\n\n## When NOT to Use\n\n**Related failures:** Fixing one might fix others - investigate together first\n**Need full context:** Understanding requires seeing entire system\n**Exploratory debugging:** You don't know what's broken yet\n**Shared state:** Agents would interfere (editing same files, using same resources)\n\n## Real Example from Session\n\n**Scenario:** 6 test failures across 3 files after major refactoring\n\n**Failures:**\n- agent-tool-abort.test.ts: 3 failures (timing issues)\n- batch-completion-behavior.test.ts: 2 failures (tools not executing)\n- tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts: 1 failure (execution count = 0)\n\n**Decision:** Independent domains - abort logic separate from batch completion separate from race conditions\n\n**Dispatch:**\n```\nAgent 1 -> Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts\nAgent 2 -> Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts\nAgent 3 -> Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts\n```\n\n**Results:**\n- Agent 1: Replaced timeouts with event-based waiting\n- Agent 2: Fixed event structure bug (threadId in wrong place)\n- Agent 3: Added wait for async tool execution to complete\n\n**Integration:** All fixes independent, no conflicts, full suite green\n\n**Time saved:** 3 problems solved in parallel vs sequentially\n\n## Key Benefits\n\n1. **Parallelization** - Multiple investigations happen simultaneously\n2. **Focus** - Each agent has narrow scope, less context to track\n3. **Independence** - Agents don't interfere with each other\n4. **Speed** - 3 problems solved in time of 1\n\n## Verification\n\nAfter agents return:\n1. **Review each summary** - Understand what changed\n2. **Check for conflicts** - Did agents edit same code?\n3. **Run full suite** - Verify all fixes work together\n4. **Spot check** - Agents can make systematic errors\n\n## Real-World Impact\n\nFrom debugging session (2025-10-03):\n- 6 failures across 3 files\n- 3 agents dispatched in parallel\n- All investigations completed concurrently\n- All fixes integrated successfully\n- Zero conflicts between agent changes\n","# Dispatching Parallel Agents\n\n## Overview\n\nWhen you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each investigation is independent and can happen in parallel.\n\n**Core principle:** Dispatch one agent per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently.\n\n## When to Use\n\n```dot\ndigraph when_to_use {\n    \"Multiple failures?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Are they independent?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Single agent investigates all\" [shape=box];\n    \"One agent per problem domain\" [shape=box];\n    \"Can they work in parallel?\" [shape=diamond];\n    \"Sequential agents\" [shape=box];\n    \"Parallel dispatch\" [shape=box];\n\n    \"Multiple failures?\" -> \"Are they independent?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Are they independent?\" -> \"Single agent investigates all\" [label=\"no - related\"];\n    \"Are they independent?\" -> \"Can they work in parallel?\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Can they work in parallel?\" -> \"Parallel dispatch\" [label=\"yes\"];\n    \"Can they work in parallel?\" -> \"Sequential agents\" [label=\"no - shared state\"];\n}\n```\n\n**Use when:**\n- 3+ test files failing with different root causes\n- Multiple subsystems broken independently\n- Each problem can be understood without context from others\n- No shared state between investigations\n\n**Don't use when:**\n- Failures are related (fix one might fix others)\n- Need to understand full system state\n- Agents would interfere with each other\n\n## The Pattern\n\n### 1. Identify Independent Domains\n\nGroup failures by what's broken:\n- File A tests: Tool approval flow\n- File B tests: Batch completion behavior\n- File C tests: Abort functionality\n\nEach domain is independent - fixing tool approval doesn't affect abort tests.\n\n### 2. Create Focused Agent Tasks\n\nEach agent gets:\n- **Specific scope:** One test file or subsystem\n- **Clear goal:** Make these tests pass\n- **Constraints:** Don't change other code\n- **Expected output:** Summary of what you found and fixed\n\n### 3. Dispatch in Parallel\n\n```typescript\n\u002F\u002F In Claude Code \u002F AI environment\nTask(\"Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts failures\")\nTask(\"Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts failures\")\nTask(\"Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts failures\")\n\u002F\u002F All three run concurrently\n```\n\n### 4. Review and Integrate\n\nWhen agents return:\n- Read each summary\n- Verify fixes don't conflict\n- Run full test suite\n- Integrate all changes\n\n## Agent Prompt Structure\n\nGood agent prompts are:\n1. **Focused** - One clear problem domain\n2. **Self-contained** - All context needed to understand the problem\n3. **Specific about output** - What should the agent return?\n\n```markdown\nFix the 3 failing tests in src\u002Fagents\u002Fagent-tool-abort.test.ts:\n\n1. \"should abort tool with partial output capture\" - expects 'interrupted at' in message\n2. \"should handle mixed completed and aborted tools\" - fast tool aborted instead of completed\n3. \"should properly track pendingToolCount\" - expects 3 results but gets 0\n\nThese are timing\u002Frace condition issues. Your task:\n\n1. Read the test file and understand what each test verifies\n2. Identify root cause - timing issues or actual bugs?\n3. Fix by:\n   - Replacing arbitrary timeouts with event-based waiting\n   - Fixing bugs in abort implementation if found\n   - Adjusting test expectations if testing changed behavior\n\nDo NOT just increase timeouts - find the real issue.\n\nReturn: Summary of what you found and what you fixed.\n```\n\n## Durability mandate\n\n**A unit that holds its results in memory until the end is a total-loss risk.** Measured: one\nreview unit ran **70 minutes**, produced **691 KB** of transcript, completed a full mutation\nharness -- then froze and wrote **nothing**. Unrecoverable. A relaunched unit under a\nwrite-as-you-go mandate produced a truthful artifact within **3 minutes** and survived every\nlater check.\n\n**Any unit you expect to run longer than 10 minutes MUST be told to write as it goes.** Put all\nthree of these in its prompt:\n\n1. **Write the artifact IMMEDIATELY** as a skeleton -- every claim it will make, enumerated and\n   marked `UNKNOWN - not yet measured`, plus a `COVERAGE:` line naming which sections are still\n   unmeasured.\n2. **REWRITE it at each milestone** (per lane, per phase, per file checked) -- never once at the\n   end.\n3. **Whatever is on disk must ALWAYS be truthful.** A partial file with honest UNKNOWNs is a\n   SUCCESS; a perfect file that never gets written is a total loss.\n\nInclude this sentence verbatim in the skeleton, so a corpse is self-labelling:\n\n> If it still reads this way, the unit died before measuring anything and no verdict here may be\n> cited.\n\nDo not reach for a probe timeout instead. The freeze cause was NOT an unbounded external probe\n(measured: zero hung git\u002Fgit-crypt processes). Bounding probes is good hygiene but did not address\nit -- write-as-you-go is the fix that makes the cause irrelevant, because it converts a dead unit\nfrom a total loss into a partial result you can read.\n\n## Common Mistakes\n\n** Too broad:** \"Fix all the tests\" - agent gets lost\n** Specific:** \"Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts\" - focused scope\n\n** No context:** \"Fix the race condition\" - agent doesn't know where\n** Context:** Paste the error messages and test names\n\n** No constraints:** Agent might refactor everything\n** Constraints:** \"Do NOT change production code\" or \"Fix tests only\"\n\n** Vague output:** \"Fix it\" - you don't know what changed\n** Specific:** \"Return summary of root cause and changes\"\n\n## When NOT to Use\n\n**Related failures:** Fixing one might fix others - investigate together first\n**Need full context:** Understanding requires seeing entire system\n**Exploratory debugging:** You don't know what's broken yet\n**Shared state:** Agents would interfere (editing same files, using same resources)\n\n## Real Example from Session\n\n**Scenario:** 6 test failures across 3 files after major refactoring\n\n**Failures:**\n- agent-tool-abort.test.ts: 3 failures (timing issues)\n- batch-completion-behavior.test.ts: 2 failures (tools not executing)\n- tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts: 1 failure (execution count = 0)\n\n**Decision:** Independent domains - abort logic separate from batch completion separate from race conditions\n\n**Dispatch:**\n```\nAgent 1 -> Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts\nAgent 2 -> Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts\nAgent 3 -> Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts\n```\n\n**Results:**\n- Agent 1: Replaced timeouts with event-based waiting\n- Agent 2: Fixed event structure bug (threadId in wrong place)\n- Agent 3: Added wait for async tool execution to complete\n\n**Integration:** All fixes independent, no conflicts, full suite green\n\n**Time saved:** 3 problems solved in parallel vs sequentially\n\n## Key Benefits\n\n1. **Parallelization** - Multiple investigations happen simultaneously\n2. **Focus** - Each agent has narrow scope, less context to track\n3. **Independence** - Agents don't interfere with each other\n4. **Speed** - 3 problems solved in time of 1\n\n## Verification\n\nAfter agents return:\n1. **Review each summary** - Understand what changed\n2. **Check for conflicts** - Did agents edit same code?\n3. **Run full suite** - Verify all fixes work together\n4. **Spot check** - Agents can make systematic errors\n\n## Real-World Impact\n\nFrom debugging session (2025-10-03):\n- 6 failures across 3 files\n- 3 agents dispatched in parallel\n- All investigations completed concurrently\n- All fixes integrated successfully\n- Zero conflicts between agent changes\n",{"name":5,"description":7},"main","a298c929b6cbd662e1fce54302ce520d5ceea1a5",".agents\u002Fskills\u002Fdispatching-parallel-agents","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil","2026-11-02 14:30:57",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":39,"prompt":49,"zipAvailable":50},[40,43,46],{"tool":41,"command":42},"npx","npx skills add Prekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain --skill dispatching-parallel-agents",{"tool":44,"command":45},"bunx","bunx skills add Prekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain --skill dispatching-parallel-agents",{"tool":47,"command":48},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add Prekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain --skill dispatching-parallel-agents","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.agents\u002Fskills\u002Fdispatching-parallel-agents\u002FSKILL.md",true,[52],{"path":53,"resourceType":54,"resourceTypeDesc":55,"sizeBytes":56,"sourceHtmlUrl":57},"agents\u002Fopenai.yaml","REFERENCE","参考文档",194,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002F.agents\u002Fskills\u002Fdispatching-parallel-agents\u002Fagents\u002Fopenai.yaml",[59,80,111,138,151,167],{"skillNo":60,"name":61,"nameZh":6,"description":62,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":63,"categories":64,"keywords":65,"publishedAt":27},"01M6DF7D7478R55P46REYH4QAC","clarify-requirements","Resolve genuine pre-execution ambiguity by scanning repo context, generating 1-6 grounded options, and asking 1-3 focused questions via AskUserQuestion. NOT for mid-task use (injection risk); NOT when the goal is already unambiguous; use to disambiguate vague prompts before any file edits.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ftools\u002Fworkspace-hooks\u002Fskills\u002Fclarify-requirements\u002FSKILL.md",[],[66,67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74,24,75,76,77,78,79],"clarify requirements","clarify","requirements","risk","options","task","prompts","goal","scanning","context","repo","injection","execution","file",{"skillNo":81,"name":82,"nameZh":6,"description":83,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":84,"categories":85,"keywords":91,"publishedAt":27},"01M6DF79CA4BHJS66J8EZDBPWJ","openmm-md","Run FREE, open-source, Windows-native GPU molecular dynamics via the openmm-md MCP (OpenMM + CUDA on the local NVIDIA GPU). Use for protein \u002F protein-ligand MD when you want a free stack or are on Windows without a Schrodinger license. Covers the full workflow (prepare, solvate, minimize, equilibrate, production, analyze, mmgbsa) AND an honest decision guide vs Schrodinger Desmond, including how to run Desmond legitimately on Linux or a cloud GPU with a real license. This is a deliberately LESSER free alternative and does NOT replace the schrodinger MCP tools. Do NOT use it to pick a free tool when a validated FEP+, WaterMap, IFD-MD, or Prime MM-GBSA result is actually required.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ftools\u002Fmcp\u002Fopenmm-md-mcp\u002Fskill\u002Fopenmm-md\u002FSKILL.md",[86],{"categoryNo":87,"categoryName":88,"taxonomyType":89,"taxonomyTypeDesc":90},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发","SCENARIO","使用场景",[92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,24,106,107,108,109,110],"openmm md","how","decision","pick","linux","analyze","tool","stack","open","NVIDIA","gpu","license","workflow","windows","free","molecular dynamics","local","do","MCP",{"skillNo":112,"name":113,"nameZh":6,"description":114,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":115,"categories":116,"keywords":123,"publishedAt":27},"01M6DF76C1MG85VEWP8VZCBNMN","visual-review","Take screenshots of web pages and UI using Playwright for visual review and iteration","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ftools\u002Feditor\u002Fmetaswarm\u002Fskills\u002Fvisual-review\u002FSKILL.md",[117,120],{"categoryNo":118,"categoryName":119,"taxonomyType":89,"taxonomyTypeDesc":90},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000003","演示文稿",{"categoryNo":121,"categoryName":122,"taxonomyType":89,"taxonomyTypeDesc":90},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000008","测试与质量",[124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,93,134,135,136,137],"review","visual","visual review","pages","web","false","iteration","take","check","slides","ui","screenshot","playwright","screenshots",{"skillNo":139,"name":140,"nameZh":6,"description":141,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":142,"categories":143,"keywords":144,"publishedAt":27},"01M6DF73AQVCBZKEN0YXEX9FXP","status","Diagnostic status report — shows metaswarm installation state, project setup, and potential issues","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ftools\u002Feditor\u002Fmetaswarm\u002Fskills\u002Fstatus\u002FSKILL.md",[],[140,145,146,147,148,149,150,23],"setup","report","project","installation","project setup","issues",{"skillNo":152,"name":153,"nameZh":6,"description":154,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":155,"categories":156,"keywords":158,"publishedAt":27},"01M6DF6X6C2XB0P6GX76P7TTYV","start","Use when starting work on any task, when the user mentions metaswarm, or when the user wants to begin tracked development work","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ftools\u002Feditor\u002Fmetaswarm\u002Fskills\u002Fstart\u002FSKILL.md",[157],{"categoryNo":87,"categoryName":88,"taxonomyType":89,"taxonomyTypeDesc":90},[153,159,71,160,161,162,24,163,164,165,166],"start issue","issue","ready","work on issue","user","work","work on","development",{"skillNo":168,"name":145,"nameZh":6,"description":169,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":170,"categories":171,"keywords":172,"publishedAt":27},"01M6DF6QMJ9AJKFKHHKRT005PQ","Interactive project setup — detects your project, configures metaswarm, writes project-local files","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FPrekzursil\u002Fagent-skills-toolchain\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Ftools\u002Feditor\u002Fmetaswarm\u002Fskills\u002Fsetup\u002FSKILL.md",[],[145,147,108,173,149,174],"files","interactive"]