Standup
Multi-agent orchestration: Better decisions through collaborative specialist perspectives.
Workflow Routing
| Workflow | When to Use | Output |
|---|---|---|
| RunStandup | Complex decision needing multiple perspectives | Synthesized decision from agent discussion |
| ManageContext | Creating or updating project-context.md | Updated project "bible" with decisions |
| SynthesizeDecision | Combining agent perspectives into consensus | Actionable decision with rationale and action items |
Examples
Example 1: Architecture design review
User: "Review this microservices architecture design" Skill loads: Standup → RunStandup workflow Process: 1. Load project context 2. Present architecture to agents (Product, Security, QA) 3. Each agent provides perspective 4. Synthesize recommendations Output: Design feedback with security, testability, and business concerns identified
Example 2: Feature prioritization
User: "Should we add OAuth2 to MVP or defer to v1.1?" Skill loads: Standup → RunStandup workflow Process: 1. Load project context 2. Present decision to agents 3. Product: User value perspective 4. Security: Security/compliance perspective 5. QA: Testing complexity perspective 6. Synthesize: Balanced recommendation Output: Prioritization decision (Must Have / Should Have / Could Have / Won't Have)
Example 3: Smart roster selection (auto-suggest)
User: "Review this authentication feature design" Skill loads: Standup → RunStandup workflow Smart roster: Daniel, Mary, Clay, Hefley, Amy (full team - critical feature) Process: 1. Load project context 2. Auto-detect: authentication = critical feature → suggest full team 3. Daniel: Security threats (credential storage, session management) 4. Mary: User experience (signup friction, password reset flow) 5. Clay: Timeline estimates (6h for email/password, 9h for OAuth2) 6. Hefley: Business priority (MVP vs v1.1) 7. Amy: Test requirements (60 tests - 25 unit + 12 integration + 8 E2E + 15 security) 8. Synthesize: Team consensus with conflict resolution Output: Multi-perspective design review with actionable recommendations
Example 4: Custom roster - Code review
// Specify exact roster for focused code review
const result = await runStandup({
feature: 'Database migration script',
roster: ['Daniel', 'Clay'], // Only security + tech lead
codeSnippet: migrationScript
})
// Output: Daniel finds SQL injection risks, Clay estimates timeline
Example 5: Custom roster - Full team override
// Force full team review (override smart defaults)
const result = await runStandup({
feature: 'Minor UI tweak',
roster: ['Mary', 'Clay', 'Hefley', 'Daniel', 'Amy'], // All 5 agents
description: 'Change button color from blue to green'
})
// Output: Full team perspective on what seems like a simple change
// (may uncover accessibility, brand, or UX issues)
Example 6: Custom roster - Domain-specific experts
User: "Run standup with Investment Advisory Team to review portfolio allocation strategy" Skill loads: Standup → RunStandup workflow with custom roster Agents: Financial Analyst, Compliance Officer, Client Advisor Output: Investment strategy with risk, compliance, and client perspective
Example 7: Custom roster - Two agents only
// Minimal roster for quick checks
const result = await runStandup({
feature: 'Performance optimization',
roster: ['Clay', 'Amy'], // Only tech lead + QA
question: 'Is this optimization worth the complexity?'
})
// Output: Clay's capacity estimate + Amy's testing complexity
Example 8: Record decision
User: "Update project context with our decision on auth approach" Skill loads: Standup → ManageContext workflow Output: project-context.md updated with decision, rationale, and action items
Agent Rosters
Smart Roster Selection (Auto-Suggest)
FORGE automatically suggests the right experts based on your feature context:
| Feature Type | Suggested Roster | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Authentication | Daniel, Mary, Clay, Hefley, Amy | Critical feature - full team review |
| Security/Vulnerabilities | Daniel, Clay, Amy | Security-focused: threat + implementation + security tests |
| UX/User Experience | Mary, Daniel, Clay, Amy | UX-focused: user research + security review + implementation |
| Database/SQL | Daniel, Clay, Amy | Database-focused: SQL injection + implementation + testing |
| Architecture/Design | Clay, Mary, Hefley, Amy | Architecture-focused: tech lead + business impact + priority |
| Testing/QA | Amy, Daniel, Clay | QA-focused: test strategy + security tests + implementation |
| Timeline/Estimates | Clay, Hefley, Amy | Planning-focused: tech lead + priority + test time |
| Prioritization | Hefley, Mary, Clay | Prioritization-focused: product + UX + tech feasibility |
Question Context Override: Questions override feature patterns
- •"How long?" → Clay, Hefley, Amy (timeline focus)
- •"How many tests?" → Amy, Daniel, Clay (testing focus)
- •"Should we build this?" → Hefley, Mary, Clay (prioritization focus)
Manual Override: Explicitly specify roster to override smart defaults
runStandup({ feature: 'Auth', roster: ['Daniel', 'Clay'] }) // Override: only Daniel + Clay
Software Development Roster
- •Daniel (Security Engineer): Security threats, CMMC compliance, secure design
- •Mary (Business Analyst): User value, UX design, user research, stakeholder communication
- •Clay (Tech Lead): Technical feasibility, timeline estimates (Claude-time), capacity planning
- •Hefley (Product Manager): User value, business priorities, MVP scoping, MoSCoW prioritization
- •Amy (QA Lead): Test strategy, testability, quality gates, ATDD
Custom Rosters (Your Domain)
Define your own agent rosters for different domains:
- •Investment Advisory: Financial Analyst, Compliance Officer, Client Advisor
- •Legal Review: Contract Specialist, Risk Manager, Business Counsel
- •Healthcare: Clinical Specialist, Regulatory Affairs, Patient Advocate
- •Product Design: UX Designer, Brand Manager, Accessibility Expert
How to Create Custom Agents:
Use templates/custom-agent-template.md to define new agents with:
- •Role, expertise, personality
- •Standup participation style
- •Integration with other agents
Integration
- •Works with AgilePm skill (standup reviews PRDs, prioritizes epics)
- •Works with Security skill (Daniel uses threat modeling in standup)
- •Works with TestArchitect skill (Amy defines test strategy in standup)
- •Generates project-context.md (project "bible" for all agents)
- •Records decisions with rationale (audit trail for compliance)
Methodology
This skill follows multi-agent orchestration principles:
- •Diverse perspectives: Multiple specialists find more issues than solo agent
- •Smart roster selection: Auto-suggest experts based on feature context (authentication → full team, security → Daniel/Clay/Amy)
- •Structured discussion: Each agent speaks in turn, providing their unique expertise
- •Synthesis over voting: Find consensus that's better than any single perspective
- •Decision documentation: Record rationale in project-context.md
Core Innovation: Standup finds 2-3x more issues than solo agent mode (validated Week 8)
Key Features:
- •Context-aware roster suggestion: Automatically suggests the right experts (implemented)
- •Question context override: Questions override feature patterns ("How long?" → planning team)
- •Manual override: Explicitly specify roster to override smart defaults
- •Synthesis with conflict detection: Identifies disagreements and finds middle ground
Based on: Multi-agent systems, Ensemble learning, Scrum standup ceremonies (adapted for AI)
Customization (Release 0.3)
Future enhancements:
- •Configurable rosters: Define agent teams per project type
- •Agent voting: Tie-breaking when consensus fails
- •Historical decision search: "Why did we decide X?" answered from project-context.md
- •Domain-specific roster templates: Pre-defined rosters for finance, healthcare, legal, etc.