AgentSkillsCN

5d-build

以高质量与高意识执行实施任务。当满足以下条件时，可使用此功能：(1) 在 5D-SDD 工作流的 TASKS 阶段之后；(2) 任务已被明确界定并按顺序排列；(3) 用户已准备好编写代码；(4) 用户提出“实施”、“构建”或“编写”某项任务的请求。在此阶段，代码不仅能够正常运行，还能始终与规范意图保持一致。

SKILL.md
--- frontmatter
name: 5d-build
description: "Execute implementation tasks with quality and awareness. Use when: (1) After TASKS phase in 5D-SDD workflow, (2) Tasks are defined and sequenced, (3) User is ready to write code, (4) User asks to 'implement,' 'build,' or 'code' a task. This phase produces working code while maintaining connection to spec intent."
user-invocable: true

BUILD Phase

Execute tasks while maintaining spec alignment and code quality.

Build Principles

Spec Fidelity

Before writing code, re-read the relevant spec section. After writing code, verify it matches spec.

Common drift patterns:

  • •Adding features not in spec ("while I'm here...")
  • •Simplifying away spec requirements
  • •Changing interfaces without updating spec

If drift is intentional: update spec first, then code.

Level 3 Awareness

The implementation is one solution, not the only solution. Stay open to:

  • •Better approaches discovered during coding
  • •Spec errors revealed by implementation reality
  • •Edge cases the spec didn't anticipate

Flag these for VERIFY phase rather than silently changing.

Domain Connection (Width)

While building, ask: "Does this still serve the business/user intent?"

Technical correctness ≠ solving the right problem.

Quadrant Awareness

During implementation, check all perspectives:

  • •Individual Outer: Is the code artifact correct?
  • •Individual Inner: Do I understand what I'm building?
  • •Collective Outer: Does this integrate with existing systems?
  • •Collective Inner: Am I aligned with team/stakeholder expectations?

Skill Dependencies (Height)

If blocked:

  • •Is this a code problem or a knowledge problem?
  • •What adjacent skill would unblock this?
  • •Should I pause to learn, or flag for help?

Time Awareness

  • •Am I building on existing patterns (transcend and include)?
  • •Am I replacing something? Is deprecation handled?
  • •Am I creating future technical debt?

Identity Trap

Watch for defensive coding:

  • •Adding complexity to avoid admitting spec issues
  • •Protecting assumptions rather than solving problems
  • •"It works" vs "it's right"

Build Process

For each task:

  1. •Read the task description and done criteria
  2. •Read the relevant spec section
  3. •Implement the code
  4. •Self-verify against done criteria
  5. •Note any spec drift, discoveries, or concerns

Quality Checks During Build

  • •Does it compile/run?
  • •Does it match the spec interface?
  • •Are error cases handled?
  • •Is it testable?
  • •Would you be comfortable debugging this at 3am?

Output Per Task

code
## Task [N] Complete

**Status:** done / blocked / needs-spec-update

**Implementation notes:**
[Brief description of approach taken]

**Spec drift:**
[Any deviations from spec - intentional or discovered]

**Discoveries:**
[Edge cases, issues, or insights found during implementation]

**Ready for verify:** [yes/no]

When to Pause

Stop building and escalate if:

  • •Spec is ambiguous or contradictory
  • •Implementation reveals spec error
  • •Complexity far exceeds estimate
  • •Blocked by unresolved dependency

Return to appropriate earlier phase rather than guessing.

Exit Criteria

Proceed to VERIFY when:

  • •All tasks in current batch are complete
  • •Code runs without errors
  • •Self-verification passes
  • •Discoveries are documented