Mission Creation
Create a new mission through research and collaborative discovery.
Prerequisites
- •Project must be initialized with
/init-project(.flightops/ARTIFACTS.mdmust exist)
Workflow
Phase 1: Research
Before asking questions, gather context:
- •
Identify the target project
- •Read
projects.mdto find the project's path - •If not listed, ask the user for details
- •Read
- •
Verify project is initialized
- •Check if
{target-project}/.flightops/ARTIFACTS.mdexists - •If missing: STOP and tell the user to run
/init-projectfirst - •Do not proceed without the artifact configuration
- •Check if
- •
Read the artifact configuration
- •Read
{target-project}/.flightops/ARTIFACTS.mdfor artifact locations and formats
- •Read
- •
Explore the target project's codebase
- •Project structure and architecture
- •Existing patterns and conventions
- •Related functionality
- •
Read existing documentation
- •README and project docs
- •Any existing missions
- •Technical specs or design documents
- •
Search external sources if needed
- •API documentation
- •Library documentation
- •Relevant patterns or best practices
Phase 2: Interview
Ask about outcomes, not tasks. Focus on:
- •
Desired outcomes
- •"What does success look like when this is done?"
- •"What problem does this solve for users/stakeholders?"
- •"How will you know this mission succeeded?"
- •
Stakeholders and their needs
- •"Who benefits from this outcome?"
- •"Are there competing interests to balance?"
- •"Who needs to approve or review?"
- •
Constraints
- •"What technical constraints exist?"
- •"Are there timeline or resource boundaries?"
- •"What's out of scope?"
- •
Success criteria
- •"What specific, observable criteria indicate completion?"
- •"How will each criterion be verified?"
- •"Do any criteria name specific tools or technologies? Reframe as capabilities."
- •"Could each criterion be satisfied by more than one implementation approach?"
- •
Environment requirements
- •"What development environment will be used?"
- •"Are there runtime dependencies?"
- •"What tooling versions are required?"
Phase 3: Draft
Create the mission artifact using the format defined in .flightops/ARTIFACTS.md.
Phase 3b: Technical Viability Check
Read {target-project}/.flightops/agent-crews/mission-design.md for crew definitions and prompts (fall back to defaults at .claude/skills/init-project/defaults/agent-crews/mission-design.md).
Validate structure: The phase file MUST contain ## Crew, ## Interaction Protocol, and ## Prompts sections with fenced code blocks. If the file exists but is malformed, STOP and tell the user: "Phase file mission-design.md is missing required sections. Either fix it manually or re-run /init-project to reset to defaults."
- •Spawn an Architect agent in the target project context (Task tool,
subagent_type: "general-purpose")- •Provide the "Validate Mission" prompt from the mission-design phase file's Prompts section
- •The Architect reviews the draft mission against the codebase, stack, and constraints
- •The Architect provides a structured assessment: feasible / feasible with caveats / not feasible
- •Incorporate feedback — update the mission artifact to address issues raised
- •If not feasible: discuss with user, adjust scope or approach
- •If feasible with caveats: present caveats to user, adjust if needed
- •Human gives final sign-off before proceeding
Phase 4: Iterate
Present the draft and iterate:
- •Walk through each section with the user
- •Validate success criteria are measurable
- •Screen each criterion for technology names, tool names, config file paths, or specific libraries — reframe any that describe implementation rather than capability
- •Confirm flight breakdown makes sense
- •Refine until the user explicitly approves
Guidelines
Role Engagement
Consider involving these roles during mission creation:
- •Mission Liaison: Should participate in the interview phase to ensure stakeholder needs are captured
- •Flight Director: May need to approve mission scope and resource allocation
- •Technical Architects: Consult early if the mission has significant architectural implications
Mission Sizing
A well-sized mission:
- •Takes days to weeks to complete
- •Spawns 5-7 flights typically
- •Represents a meaningful outcome stakeholders recognize
- •Has clear success criteria
Too small: Can be completed in a single flight Too large: Success criteria are vague or numerous (>10)
Outcome vs. Activity
Frame missions around results, not tasks:
Activity-focused (avoid):
Implement user authentication
Outcome-focused (prefer):
Users can securely access their personal data without sharing credentials
This applies equally to success criteria. Criteria that name specific tools or technologies constrain the solution space prematurely — if the prescribed tool doesn't work, the criteria become misaligned with reality.
Implementation-specific criterion (avoid):
OAuth tokens are stored in Redis with a 24-hour TTL
Capability-focused criterion (prefer):
Authenticated sessions persist across browser restarts for up to 24 hours
Adaptive Planning
- •Missions can be updated as understanding develops
- •New flights can be added during execution
- •Success criteria can be refined (with stakeholder agreement)
Output
Create the mission artifact using the location and format defined in .flightops/ARTIFACTS.md.