<mission_control> <objective>Generate meta-prompts for Claude-to-Claude pipelines with structured XML output and metadata for multi-stage workflows.</objective> <success_criteria>Prompt folder created in .claude/workspace/prompts/, SUMMARY.md generated, chain provenance maintained</success_criteria> </mission_control>
Quick Start
If you need to create a single prompt: Follow Phase 1 (Intake) → Phase 2 (Generate) → Phase 3 (Present).
If you need a prompt chain: Use Chain Detection → Generate multiple prompts → Execute sequentially with dependency handling.
If you need purpose-specific templates: Reference ## PATTERN: Purpose Templates for Do/Plan/Research/Refine patterns.
Navigation
| If you need... | Read this section... |
|---|---|
| Create a meta-prompt | ## PATTERN: Workflow |
| Purpose-specific templates | ## PATTERN: Purpose Templates |
| Purpose inference | ## PATTERN: Autonomous Purpose Detection |
| Chain detection and dependencies | ## PATTERN: Dependency Management |
| Execution modes | ## PATTERN: Execution Engine |
| SUMMARY.md structure | ## PATTERN: SUMMARY.md Template |
| Common mistakes | ## ANTI-PATTERN: Common Mistakes |
| Quality verification | ## Recognition Questions |
PATTERN: Workflow
Generate and execute meta-prompts for multi-stage workflows:
| Phase | Action | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Intake | Determine purpose, gather requirements | Clear prompt scope |
| 2. Chain Detection | Check for existing research/plan files | Referenced context |
| 3. Generate | Create prompt using purpose-specific patterns | Structured prompt folder |
| 4. Present | Show decision tree for running | User can execute, review, or save |
| 5. Execute | Run prompt(s) with dependency-aware engine | XML output with metadata |
| 6. Summarize | Create SUMMARY.md for human scanning | Quick-ler + key findings |
Folder Structure
.claude/workspace/prompts/ ├── 001-auth-research/ │ ├── completed/ │ │ └── 001-auth-research.md # Prompt (archived after run) │ ├── auth-research.md # Full output (XML for Claude) │ └── SUMMARY.md # Executive summary (markdown for human) ├── 002-auth-plan/ │ ├── completed/ │ │ └── 002-auth-plan.md │ ├── auth-plan.md │ └── SUMMARY.md ├── 003-auth-implement/ │ ├── completed/ │ │ └── 003-auth-implement.md │ └── SUMMARY.md # Do prompts create code elsewhere ├── 004-auth-research-refine/ │ ├── completed/ │ │ └── 004-auth-research-refine.md │ ├── archive/ │ │ └── auth-research-v1.md # Previous version │ └── SUMMARY.md
PATTERN: Autonomous Purpose Detection
1. Purpose Gate (CRITICAL - First Action)
BEFORE analyzing anything, infer purpose from context.
IF context provided: Infer purpose from keywords:
- •
implement,build,create,fix,add,refactor→ Do - •
plan,roadmap,approach,strategy,decide,phases→ Plan - •
research,understand,learn,gather,analyze,explore→ Research - •
refine,improve,deepen,expand,iterate,update→ Refine
IF context unclear: Trust inference from available information. Do not ask questions—proceed with best judgment.
2. Topic Identifier
Derive topic from context. Convert to kebab-case automatically:
- •Spaces → hyphens
- •CamelCase → kebab-case
- •Underscores → hyphens
3. Chain Detection
Scan .claude/workspace/prompts/*/ for existing *-research.md and *-plan.md files. If found:
header: "Reference"
question: "Should this prompt reference any existing research or plans?"
options:
- label: "{file1}"
description: "Found in .prompts/{folder1}/"
- label: "{file2}"
description: "Found in .prompts/{folder2}/"
- label: "None"
description: "Start fresh without referencing existing files"
multiSelect: true
4. Purpose-Specific Questions
For Do prompts:
header: "Output type"
question: "What are you creating?"
options:
- label: "Code/feature"
description: "Software implementation"
- label: "Document/content"
description: "Written material, documentation"
- label: "Design/spec"
description: "Architecture, wireframes, specifications"
header: "Scope"
question: "What level of completeness?"
options:
- label: "Production-ready"
description: "Ship to users, needs polish and tests"
- label: "Working prototype"
description: "Functional but rough edges acceptable"
- label: "Proof of concept"
description: "Minimal viable demonstration"
For Plan prompts:
header: "Plan for"
question: "What is this plan leading to?"
options:
- label: "Implementation"
description: "Break down how to build something"
- label: "Decision"
description: "Weigh options, choose an approach"
- label: "Process"
description: "Define workflow or methodology"
For Research prompts:
header: "Depth"
question: "How deep should the research go?"
options:
- label: "Overview"
description: "High-level understanding, key concepts"
- label: "Comprehensive"
description: "Detailed exploration, multiple perspectives"
- label: "Exhaustive"
description: "Everything available, edge cases included"
For Refine prompts:
header: "Target"
question: "Which output should be refined?"
options:
- label: "{file1}"
description: "In .prompts/{folder1}/"
- label: "{file2}"
description: "In .prompts/{folder2}/"
header: "Improvement"
question: "What needs improvement?"
options:
- label: "Deepen analysis"
description: "Add more detail, examples, or rigor"
- label: "Expand scope"
description: "Cover additional areas or topics"
- label: "Correct errors"
description: "Fix factual mistakes or outdated info"
- label: "Restructure"
description: "Reorganize for clarity or usability"
5. Decision Gate
After receiving answers, present decision gate:
header: "Ready"
question: "Ready to create the prompt?"
options:
- label: "Proceed"
description: "Create the prompt with current context"
- label: "Ask more questions"
description: "I have more details to clarify"
- label: "Let me add context"
description: "I want to provide additional information"
Loop until "Proceed" selected.
PATTERN: Purpose Templates
Do Pattern (Execution)
## Objective
{Clear statement of what to build/create/fix}
Purpose: {Why this matters, what it enables}
Output: {What artifact(s) will be produced}
## Context
{Referenced research/plan files if chained}
[topic]-research.md
[topic]-plan.md
{Project context}
[relevant-files]
## Requirements
{Specific functional requirements}
{Quality requirements}
{Constraints and boundaries}
## Implementation
{Specific approaches or patterns to follow}
{What to avoid and WHY}
{Integration points}
## Output
Create/modify files:
- `./path/to/file.ext` - {description}
## Verification
Before declaring complete:
- {Specific test or check}
- {How to confirm it works}
- {Edge cases to verify}
## Success Criteria
{Clear, measurable criteria}
- SUMMARY.md created with files list and next step
Plan Pattern (Roadmaps)
## Objective
Create a {plan type} for {topic}.
Purpose: {What decision/implementation this enables}
Input: {Research or context being used}
Output: {topic}-plan.md with actionable phases/steps
## Context
Research findings: [research-file]
## Planning Requirements
{What the plan needs to address}
{Constraints to work within}
{Success criteria for the planned outcome}
## Output Structure
Save to: `.prompts/{num}-{topic}-plan/{topic}-plan.md`
Structure using XML:
```xml
<plan>
## Summary
{One paragraph overview of the approach}
<phases>
#### Phase 1: {Phase Name}
## Objective
{What this phase accomplishes}
## Tasks
<task priority="high">{Specific actionable task}
<task priority="medium">{Another task}
<deliverables>
<deliverable>{What's produced}
## Dependencies
{What must exist before this phase}
<!-- Additional phases -->
<metadata>
### {high|medium|low}
{Why this confidence level}
## Dependencies
{External dependencies needed}
<open_questions>
{Uncertainties that may affect execution}
## Assumptions
{What was assumed in creating this plan}
Research Pattern (Information Gathering)
## Objective
Research {topic} to inform {subsequent use}.
Purpose: {What decision/implementation this enables}
Scope: {Boundaries of the research}
Output: {topic}-research.md with structured findings
## Research Scope
<include>
{What to investigate}
{Specific questions to answer}
<exclude>
{What's out of scope}
{What to defer to later research}
## Sources
Priority sources with exact URLs:
Official documentation:
- https://example.com/official-docs
Search queries:
- "{topic} best practices {current_year}"
- "{topic} latest version"
## Verification Checklist
□ Verify ALL known options (enumerate below)
□ Document exact file locations/URLs for each option
□ Verify precedence/hierarchy rules if applicable
□ Confirm syntax and examples from official sources
□ Check for recent updates or changes
## Output Structure
Save to: `.prompts/{num}-{topic}-research/{topic}-research.md`
Structure using XML:
```xml
<research>
## Summary
{2-3 paragraph executive summary of key findings}
<findings>
<finding category="{category}">
<title>{Finding title}
<detail>{Detailed explanation}
<source>{Where this came from}
<relevance>{Why this matters for the goal}
<recommendations>
<recommendation priority="high">
<action>{What to do}
## Rationale
{Why}
<code_examples>
{Relevant code patterns, snippets, configurations}
<metadata>
### {high|medium|low}
{Why this confidence level}
## Dependencies
{What's needed to act on this research}
<open_questions>
{What couldn't be determined}
## Assumptions
{What was assumed}
<quality_report>
<sources_consulted>
{List URLs of official documentation}
<claims_verified>
{Key findings verified with official sources}
<claims_assumed>
{Findings based on inference or incomplete information}
### Refine Pattern (Iteration)
```xml
## Objective
Refine {topic}-{original_purpose} based on feedback.
Target: [prompt-file]
Current summary: [summary-file]
Purpose: {What improvement is needed}
Output: Updated {topic}-{original_purpose}.md with improvements
## Context
Original output: [prompt-file]
<feedback>
{Specific issues to address}
{What was missing or insufficient}
{Areas needing more depth}
<preserve>
{What worked well and should be kept}
{Structure or findings to maintain}
## Requirements
- Address all feedback points
- Maintain original structure and metadata format
- Keep what worked from previous version
- Update confidence based on improvements
## Output
1. Archive current to: `.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/archive/{topic}-{original_purpose}-v{n}.md`
2. Write improved to: `.prompts/{num}-{topic}-{original_purpose}/{topic}-{original_purpose}.md`
3. Create SUMMARY.md with version info and changes
PATTERN: Dependency Management
Detection
Scan prompt contents for cross-references to determine dependencies:
- •Parse each prompt for
.claude/workspace/prompts/{number}-{topic}/patterns - •Build dependency graph
- •Detect cycles (error if found)
- •Determine execution order
Inference Rules
If no explicit cross-references found, infer from purpose:
- •Research prompts: No dependencies (can run parallel)
- •Plan prompts: Depend on same-topic research
- •Do prompts: Depend on same-topic plan
Override with explicit references when present.
Missing Dependencies
If a prompt references output that doesn't exist:
- •Check if it's another prompt in this session (will be created)
- •Check if it exists in
.claude/workspace/prompts/*/(already completed) - •If truly missing: Warn user and offer options
PATTERN: Execution Engine
Single Prompt
- •Read prompt file contents
- •Delegate to implementation specialist
- •Include: complete prompt contents, output location
- •Wait for completion
- •Validate output
- •Archive prompt to
completed/subfolder - •Report results with next-step options
Sequential Execution
For chained prompts where each depends on previous output.
- •Build execution queue from dependency order
- •For each prompt: a. Read prompt file b. Spawn Task agent c. Wait for completion d. Validate output e. If validation fails → stop, report failure, offer recovery f. If success → archive prompt, continue
- •Report consolidated results
Progress Reporting:
Executing 1/3: 001-auth-research... ✅ Executing 2/3: 002-auth-plan... ✅ Executing 3/3: 003-auth-implement... (running)
Parallel Execution
For independent prompts with no dependencies.
- •Read all prompt files
- •CRITICAL: Spawn ALL Task agents in a SINGLE message
- •Wait for all to complete
- •Validate all outputs
- •Archive all prompts
- •Report consolidated results
Mixed Dependencies (DAGs)
For complex graphs (e.g., two parallel research → one plan).
- •Analyze dependency graph from file references
- •Group into execution layers:
- •Layer 1: No dependencies (run parallel)
- •Layer 2: Depends only on layer 1
- •Layer 3: Depends on layer 2, etc.
- •Execute each layer (parallel within, sequential between)
- •Stop if any dependency fails
Example:
Layer 1 (parallel): 001-api-research, 002-db-research Layer 2 (after layer 1): 003-architecture-plan
PATTERN: SUMMARY.md Template
Every executed prompt creates this file for human scanning:
# {Topic} {Purpose} Summary
**{Substantive one-liner describing outcome}**
## Version
{v1 or "v2 (refined from v1)"}
## Changes from Previous
{Only include if v2+}
## Key Findings
- {Most important finding or action}
- {Second key item}
- {Third key item}
## Files Created
{Only include for Do prompts}
- `path/to/file.ts` - Description
## Decisions Needed
{Specific actionable decisions, or "None"}
## Blockers
{External impediments, or "None"}
## Next Step
{Concrete forward action}
---
*Confidence: {High|Medium|Low}*
*Iterations: {n}*
*Full output: {filename.md}*
One-Liner Requirements
Must be substantive - describes actual outcome, not status.
| Good | Bad |
|---|---|
| "JWT with jose library and httpOnly cookies recommended" | "Research completed" |
| "4-phase implementation: types → JWT core → refresh → tests" | "Plan created" |
| "JWT middleware complete with 6 files in src/auth/" | "Implementation finished" |
Purpose Variations
- •Research: Emphasize key recommendation, decision readiness. Next step: Create plan.
- •Plan: Emphasize phase breakdown, assumptions needing validation. Next step: Execute first phase.
- •Do: Emphasize files created, test status. Next step: Run tests or execute next phase.
- •Refine: Emphasize what improved, version number. Include Changes from Previous.
PATTERN: Metadata Requirements
For Research and Plan outputs, require XML metadata:
<metadata>
### {high|medium|low}
{Why this confidence level}
## Dependencies
{External requirements that must be met}
<open_questions>
{What couldn't be determined or needs validation}
## Assumptions
{Context assumed that might need validation}
Confidence Levels
- •high: Official docs, verified patterns, clear consensus, few unknowns
- •medium: Mixed sources, some outdated info, minor gaps, reasonable approach
- •low: Sparse documentation, conflicting info, significant unknowns, best guess
ANTI-PATTERN: Common Mistakes
Mistake 1: Skipping Chain Detection
❌ Wrong: Created new research prompt without checking existing prompts → Duplicate work.
✅ Correct: Before generating, scan .claude/workspace/prompts/*/ for existing research/plan files → Reference existing outputs.
Mistake 2: Missing Metadata in Research/Plan Outputs
❌ Wrong: Prompt outputs research.md without <confidence>, <dependencies>, <assumptions> → Planning prompt lacks context.
✅ Correct: Include metadata requirements in prompt template.
Mistake 3: Empty SUMMARY.md
❌ Wrong: Created SUMMARY.md with "Research completed" → No value for human scanning.
✅ Correct: Require substantive SUMMARY.md with one-liner, key findings, decisions, blockers, next step.
Mistake 4: No Validation Before Archiving
❌ Wrong: Archived prompt immediately after execution without checking output → Broken chains continue downstream.
✅ Correct: Validate before archiving: file exists, not empty, required metadata present, SUMMARY.md created.
Mistake 5: Sequential Failure Without Stop
❌ Wrong: Prompt 2 of 3 failed → Continued to prompt 3 → Waste.
✅ Correct: For sequential chains, stop immediately on failure:
❌ Failed at 2/3: 002-auth-plan Completed: 001-auth-research ✅ Not started: 003-auth-implement
Mistake 6: Missing Decision Tree
❌ Wrong: Created prompt → Immediately executed → User had no opportunity to review.
✅ Correct: Present decision tree after prompt creation:
Prompt created. What's next? 1. Run now 2. Review/edit first 3. Save for later
Mistake 7: Asking Instead of Inferring
❌ Wrong: Ask "What do you want?" without attempting inference first.
✅ Correct: Trust ability to infer from context. If context is sparse, make educated assumptions and proceed.
EDGE: Validation
Output Validation Checklist
After each prompt completes, verify:
- •File exists: Check output file was created
- •Not empty: File has content (> 100 chars)
- •Metadata present (for research/plan): Check for required XML tags
- •SUMMARY.md exists: Check SUMMARY.md was created
- •SUMMARY.md complete: Has required sections
- •One-liner is substantive: Not generic like "Research completed"
Validation Failure Handling
If validation fails:
- •Report what's missing
- •Offer options:
- •Retry the prompt
- •Continue anyway (for non-critical issues)
- •Stop and investigate
Sequential Failure
Stop the chain immediately:
❌ Failed at 2/3: 002-auth-plan Completed: - 001-auth-research ✅ (archived) Failed: - 002-auth-plan: Output file not created Not started: - 003-auth-implement What's next? 1. Retry 002-auth-plan 2. View error details 3. Stop here (keep completed work)
Parallel Failure
Continue others, report all results:
Parallel execution completed with errors: ✅ 001-api-research (archived) ❌ 002-db-research: Validation failed - missing <confidence> tag ✅ 003-ui-research (archived) What's next? 1. Retry failed prompt (002) 2. View error details 3. Continue without 002
Recognition Questions
| Question | Recognition |
|---|---|
| Purpose identified correctly? | Do/Plan/Research/Refine inferred from context |
| Topic identifier derived? | kebab-case format, auto-converted |
| Chain detection performed? | Existing research/plan files scanned and referenced |
| Correct purpose template used? | Do/Plan/Research/Refine pattern matched to purpose |
| Purpose inferred autonomously? | No AskUserQuestion used—trust inference |
| Prompt folder created correctly? | .claude/workspace/prompts/{number}-{topic}-{purpose}/ |
| Output location specified? | Prompt includes file path for output |
| SUMMARY.md requirement included? | All prompts require human-scannable summary |
| Metadata requirements included? | Research/Plan outputs require XML metadata |
| Validation checklist complete? | File exists, content present, metadata valid |
<critical_constraint>
Portability Invariant: This skill must work in a project with ZERO external rules access (no CLAUDE.md, CLAUDE.local.md, or .claude/rules/ dependencies). All necessary patterns and philosophy are self-contained in this file. Never use relative paths pointing outside the skill itself. When referencing other components, use: "invoke skill-name" or "invoke skill-name and read its file".
</critical_constraint>