Composable Primitives Skill

Guide design of composable agentic primitives for flexible workflow creation.

When to Use

• Designing new agentic workflows
• Customizing SDLC for specific needs
• Mapping problem classes to primitives
• Building organization-specific compositions

The Secret

"The secret of tactical agentic coding is that it's not about the software developer lifecycle at all. It's about composable agentic primitives you can use to solve any engineering problem class."

Core Primitives

Primitive	Purpose	Input	Output
Classify	Categorize input	Issue/task	Classification
Plan	Create implementation spec	Issue	Plan file
Build	Implement the plan	Plan file	Code changes
Test	Validate functionality	Code changes	Pass/fail
Review	Validate alignment	Spec + code	Issue list
Patch	Fix specific issues	Issue description	Targeted fix
Document	Generate documentation	Code changes	Doc files
Ship	Deploy to production	Validated code	Deployed state
Branch	Create isolated context	Classification	Branch name
Commit	Save checkpoint	Changes	Commit hash

Composition Workflow

Step 1: Identify Problem Class

What type of work?

• Chore (simple, low risk)
• Bug (medium complexity, clear criteria)
• Feature (complex, full SDLC)
• Hotfix (urgent, minimal process)
• Documentation (content only)

Step 2: Select Primitives

Based on problem class, choose primitives:

Problem Class	Primitives
Chore	Classify -> Build -> Test -> Ship
Bug	Classify -> Plan -> Build -> Test -> Review -> Ship
Feature	Full SDLC
Hotfix	Patch -> Test -> Ship
Documentation	Document -> Review -> Ship

Step 3: Order by Dependencies

Ensure correct sequencing:

• Plan before Build (Build needs plan)
• Build before Test (Test needs code)
• Test before Ship (Ship needs validation)

Step 4: Add Validation Points

Where should failures stop the pipeline?

Plan -> Build -> [Test GATE] -> Review -> [Review GATE] -> Ship

Step 5: Define Entry/Exit

• Entry: What triggers this workflow?
• Exit: What signals completion?

Standard Compositions

Full SDLC

Classify -> Plan -> Build -> Test -> Review -> Document -> Ship

ZTE (Zero-Touch)

Classify -> Plan -> Build -> Test -> Review -> Document -> Ship
                              | |
                          [GATE]         [GATE]

Quick Fix

Classify -> Patch -> Test -> Ship

Review-Driven

Review -> Patch -> Test -> Ship

Custom Composition Design

Organization Factors

Consider:

• Testing requirements (mandatory E2E?)
• Review processes (who reviews?)
• Documentation standards (auto-generated?)
• Deployment pipelines (manual approval?)
• Compliance needs (audit trails?)

Example: Compliance-Heavy

Classify -> Plan -> [Compliance Review] -> Build -> Test ->
[Security Scan] -> Review -> Document -> [Approval] -> Ship

Example: Rapid Iteration

Build -> Test -> Ship (no planning for small changes)

Key Memory References

• @composable-primitives.md - Detailed primitives documentation
• @template-engineering.md - Templates as primitive definitions
• @adw-anatomy.md - ADW as composition framework

Output Format

Provide composition design:

## Workflow Composition

**Problem Class:** {type}
**Entry Trigger:** {trigger}
**Exit Criteria:** {criteria}

### Primitives Selected
1. Classify - Categorize the task
2. Plan - Create implementation spec
3. Build - Implement changes
4. Test - Validate functionality
5. Ship - Deploy to production

### Composition Flow

Classify -> Plan -> Build -> Test -> Ship | [GATE: Must pass]

### Validation Gates

- After Test: Abort if tests fail
- After Review: Optional based on confidence

### Customizations

- [Organization-specific additions]

Anti-Patterns

• Rigid SDLC thinking (must do all steps)
• Over-composition (too many primitives)
• Under-composition (missing critical steps)
• Ignoring failure paths (no gates)
• One-size-fits-all (same for all problem classes)

Version History

• v1.0.0 (2025-12-26): Initial release

---

Last Updated

Date: 2025-12-26 Model: claude-opus-4-5-20251101