mcpField
C
cook-parallel

cook-parallel

github.com/duc01226Development1237 installsUpdated 1w ago
Repository

About cook-parallel

cook-parallel is a skill for implementing multiple independent software tasks concurrently with subagents. It organizes work into parallel phases with separate file ownership, then integrates, tests, and reviews the results.

Key features

  1. 01Decompose work into parallel tasks
  2. 02Assign non-overlapping file ownership
  3. 03Dispatch implementation subagents
  4. 04Integrate and test changes
  5. 05Review the combined result

Use cases

  1. 01Building independent backend and frontend components
  2. 02Refactoring separate modules concurrently
  3. 03Writing tests alongside documentation updates

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform --skill cook-parallel

After installing, type/cook-parallelin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

[IMPORTANT] Use TaskCreate to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.

Critical Thinking Mindset — Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: Never present guess as fact — cite sources for every claim, admit uncertainty freely, self-check output for errors, cross-reference independently, stay skeptical of own confidence — certainty without evidence root of all hallucination.

AI Mistake Prevention — Failure modes to avoid on every task:

  • Check downstream references before deleting. Deleting components causes documentation and code staleness cascades. Map all referencing files before removal.
  • Verify AI-generated content against actual code. AI hallucinates APIs, class names, and method signatures. Always grep to confirm existence before documenting or referencing.
  • Trace full dependency chain after edits. Changing a definition misses downstream variables and consumers derived from it. Always trace the full chain.
  • Trace ALL code paths when verifying correctness. Confirming code exists is not confirming it executes. Always trace early exits, error branches, and conditional skips — not just happy path.
  • When debugging, ask "whose responsibility?" before fixing. Trace whether bug is in caller (wrong data) or callee (wrong handling). Fix at responsible layer — never patch symptom site.
  • Assume existing values are intentional — ask WHY before changing. Before changing any constant, limit, flag, or pattern: read comments, check git blame, examine surrounding code.
  • Verify ALL affected outputs, not just the first. Changes touching multiple stacks require verifying EVERY output. One green check is not all green checks.
  • Holistic-first debugging — resist nearest-attention trap. When investigating any failure, list EVERY precondition first (config, env vars, DB names, endpoints, DI registrations, data preconditions), then verify each against evidence before forming any code-layer hypothesis.
  • Surgical changes — apply the diff test. Bug fix: every changed line must trace directly to the bug. Don't restyle or improve adjacent code. Enhancement task: implement improvements AND announce them explicitly.
  • Surface ambiguity before coding — don't pick silently. If request has multiple interpretations, present each with effort estimate and ask. Never assume all-records, file-based, or more complex path.

Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code.

  1. Search 3+ similar patterns (grep/glob) — cite file:line evidence
  2. Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions
  3. Run python .claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --json when .code-graph/graph.db exists
  4. Map dependencies via connections or callers_of — know what depends on your target
  5. Write investigation to .ai/workspace/analysis/ for non-trivial tasks (3+ files)
  6. Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone
  7. NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation

BLOCKED until: - [ ] Read target files - [ ] Grep 3+ patterns - [ ] Graph trace (if graph.db exists) - [ ] Assumptions verified with evidence

  • docs/project-reference/domain-entities-reference.md — Domain entity catalog, relationships, cross-service sync (read when task involves business entities/models) (content auto-injected by hook — check for [Injected: ...] header before reading)
  • docs/specs/ — Test specifications by module (read existing TCs; generate/update test specs via /tdd-spec after implementation)

Plan Quality — Every plan phase MUST ATTENTION include test specifications.

  1. Add ## Test Specifications section with TC-{FEAT}-{NNN} IDs to every phase file
  2. Map every functional requirement to ≥1 TC (or explicit TBD with rationale)
  3. TC IDs follow TC-{FEATURE}-{NNN} format — reference by ID, never embed full content
  4. Before any new workflow step: call TaskList and re-read the phase file
  5. On context compaction: call TaskList FIRST — never create duplicate tasks
  6. Verify TC satisfaction per phase before marking complete (evidence must be file:line, not TBD)

Mode: TDD-first → reference existing TCs with Evidence: TBD. Implement-first → use TBD → /tdd-spec fills after.

Rationalization Prevention — AI skips steps via these evasions. Recognize and reject:

EvasionRebuttal
"Too simple for a plan"Simple + wrong assumptions = wasted time. Plan anyway.
"I'll test after"RED before GREEN. Write/verify test first.
"Already searched"Show grep evidence with file:line. No proof = no search.
"Just do it"Still need TaskCreate. Skip depth, never skip tracking.
"Just a small fix"Small fix in wrong location cascades. Verify file:line first.
"Code is self-explanatory"Future readers need evidence trail. Document anyway.
"Combine steps to save time"Combined steps dilute focus. Each step has distinct purpose.

Red Flag Stop Conditions — STOP and escalate to user via AskUserQuestion when:

  1. Confidence drops below 60% on any critical decision
  2. Changes would affect >20 files (blast radius too large)
  3. Cross-service boundary is being crossed
  4. Security-sensitive code (auth, crypto, PII handling)
  5. Breaking change detected (interface, API contract, DB schema)
  6. Test coverage would decrease after changes
  7. Approach requires technology/pattern not in the project

NEVER proceed past a red flag without explicit user approval.

Skill Variant: Variant of /cook — parallel multi-task implementation with subagents.

Quick Summary

Goal: Implement multiple independent tasks simultaneously using parallel fullstack-developer subagents.

Workflow:

  1. Plan — Create plan with parallel phases and strict file ownership
  2. Dispatch — Launch fullstack-developer subagents per phase
  3. Merge — Integrate all changes and verify
  4. Review — Run code-simplifier and review-changes

Key Rules:

  • Phases must have non-overlapping file ownership
  • User approval required before dispatching subagents
  • Break work into todo tasks; add final self-review task

Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).

Execute these tasks in parallel for maximum efficiency: $ARGUMENTS

Mode: PARALLEL - Multiple subagents working concurrently.

Workflow

1. Task Decomposition
  • Analyze tasks for independence
  • Group into parallelizable work units
  • Identify dependencies between units
  • Create dependency graph
  • External Memory: Write task analysis to .ai/workspace/analysis/{task-name}.analysis.md. Re-read before parallel dispatch.
2. Parallel Research (if needed)

Launch multiple researcher subagents simultaneously:

Task A research ──┐
Task B research ──┼──► Synthesis
Task C research ──┘
3. Parallel Planning
  • Use planner subagent with synthesized research
  • Create plan with parallel-safe phases
  • Mark file ownership boundaries (prevent conflicts)
4. Parallel Implementation

Launch multiple fullstack-developer subagents:

Phase 1 (Backend API) ──┐
Phase 2 (Frontend UI) ──┼──► Integration
Phase 3 (Tests)       ──┘

Critical: Each subagent must stay within file ownership boundaries.

5. Integration & Testing
  • Merge parallel outputs
  • Use tester subagent for integration tests
  • Use debugger if integration issues found
6. Review & Report
  • Use code-reviewer for final review
  • Consolidate all changes
  • Report to user

Parallelization Rules

RuleDescription
File OwnershipEach subagent owns specific files - no overlap
Dependency OrderRespect dependency graph
Max Concurrent3 subagents max to prevent conflicts
Sync PointsIntegration checkpoints between phases

When to Use

  • Multi-component features (backend + frontend)
  • Large refactoring across independent modules
  • Parallel test writing
  • Documentation updates alongside code

Example Task Split

"Add user authentication with login UI"
├── Backend API (subagent 1)
│   ├── auth-controller.ts
│   └── auth-service.ts
├── Frontend UI (subagent 2)
│   ├── login-page.component.ts
│   └── login-form.component.ts
└── Tests (subagent 3)
    ├── auth.spec.ts
    └── login.e2e.ts

Trade-offs

AspectParallelSequential
Speed~2-3x fasterBaseline
CoordinationHigher complexitySimple
ConflictsRisk of merge issuesNone
ContextSplit across agentsUnified

Next Steps (Standalone: MUST ATTENTION ask user via AskUserQuestion. Skip if inside workflow.)

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS: If this skill was called outside a workflow, you MUST ATTENTION use AskUserQuestion to present these options. Do NOT skip because the task seems "simple" or "obvious" — the user decides:

  • "Proceed with full workflow (Recommended)" — I'll detect the best workflow to continue from here (feature implemented). This ensures review, testing, and docs steps aren't skipped.
  • "/code-simplifier" — Simplify and clean up implementation
  • "/workflow-review-changes" — Review changes before commit
  • "Skip, continue manually" — user decides

If already inside a workflow, skip — the workflow handles sequencing.

Closing Reminders

  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act)
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate decisions with user via AskUserQuestion — never auto-decide MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION READ the following files before starting:
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists.
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include ## Test Specifications with TC IDs per phase. Call TaskList before creating new tasks.
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION follow ALL steps regardless of perceived simplicity. "Too simple to plan" is an evasion, not a reason.
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION STOP after 3 failed fix attempts. Report all attempts, ask user before continuing.
  • MUST ATTENTION apply critical thinking — every claim needs traced proof, confidence >80% to act. Anti-hallucination: never present guess as fact.
  • MUST ATTENTION apply AI mistake prevention — holistic-first debugging, fix at responsible layer, surface ambiguity before coding, re-read files after compaction.

[TASK-PLANNING] Before acting, analyze task scope and systematically break it into small todo tasks and sub-tasks using TaskCreate.

Comments

Markdown supported