---
name: boss
description: User-invoked only (typed as `/boss`). Activates autonomous orchestrator mode — Claude picks the next iteration from `docs/roadmap.md`, dispatches the appropriate skill, and continues until done-state or genuine bounce-back. Outside `/boss`, the default is interactive collaboration with the user, not autonomous queue execution.
---

# boss — autonomous orchestrator mode

> **Violating the letter of these rules is violating the spirit.**

## Overview

Autonomous orchestrator mode is the way Brummel-as-LLM moves the
AILang project forward when the user is away. Inside this mode,
Claude reads `docs/roadmap.md`, picks the top item, dispatches the
right skill, integrates the result, and continues to the next item
— until the queue is empty (done-state) or a real design fork
forces a bounce-back to the user.

Outside this mode, the default is interactive collaboration: the
user asks; Claude answers or executes the specific request; Claude
stops. There is no autonomous picking from the roadmap, no
multi-iter sequence chained off a single user message.

This skill exists to make the mode-switch explicit. Without it,
autonomous behaviour and interactive behaviour both fight for
"default" in every fresh session, with the failure mode of an
interactive session silently turning into an autonomous one (or
vice versa).

## When to Use / Skipping

Triggers:

- The user explicitly types `/boss` in chat.

Never auto-invoked. The using-superpowers rule that the harness
applies — "if a skill might apply, invoke it" — does NOT apply to
this skill. `/boss` is a deliberate mode switch performed by the
user, not a heuristic that Claude resolves on its own. A session
that wanders into autonomous behaviour without `/boss` is a
failure mode this skill exists to prevent.

May be exited mid-session by:

- The user signalling "stop", "pause", or "back to chat".
- A bounce-back trigger firing (see "Direction freedom" below).
- Done-state (the queue is empty and the done-state procedure has
  fired).

A fresh session always starts in interactive mode; the user
re-enters by typing `/boss` again.

## The Iron Law

```
NO AUTONOMOUS DISPATCH OUTSIDE A `/boss` SESSION.
DONE-STATE = QUEUE EMPTY, NOT SUB-GOAL COMPLETE.
BOUNCE-BACK ONLY ON THE FOUR NAMED TRIGGERS.
A NEW MILESTONE NEVER STARTS AUTONOMOUSLY — IT IS A BOUNCE-BACK.
WHATSNEW.MD + NOTIFY ARE ONE TEXT, NOT TWO.
```

Universal rules (only-Boss-commits, main-is-sacrosanct, language,
TDD-for-bugs) come from `CLAUDE.md` and apply regardless of
mode. This skill does not restate them.

## The Process

### Step 1 — Read the queue

`docs/roadmap.md` is the priority-ordered forward queue. Read it
first. The top item is the candidate for the next dispatch.

If the queue is empty: skip to Step 5 (done-state). Do not invent
work; an empty queue is a real signal that the milestone closed
and there is nothing left.

### Step 2 — Pick the top item per direction-freedom rules

See "Direction freedom" below. The rules permit picking
autonomously when the path is clear. If the top item is a real
fork (two substantive options with no clear default), bounce back
to the user.

### Step 3 — Dispatch the appropriate downstream skill

Pipeline (from `skills/README.md`):

```
brainstorm → planner → implement → audit → fieldtest
                  +
                  debug (bug-triggered)
                  +
                  docwriter (post-stability)
```

Match the chosen item to the right entry skill. If a milestone is
new and no spec exists: **bounce back first** (per §"Direction
freedom" trigger 4 — new milestones never start autonomously);
only after the user green-lights the milestone (and the session
shape) does `brainstorm` get dispatched. If a spec exists but no
plan: `planner`. If a plan exists: `implement`. If a milestone is
closing: `audit`. If the iter is a bugfix: `debug`. Read each
skill's SKILL.md trigger section if unsure.

If the working tree is mid-flight (uncommitted changes left over
from a previous session): inspect first, then resume the right
step. Do not restart from scratch.

### Step 4 — Loop, deciding on each agent output

For each dispatched skill's result, decide:

- **Continue** — agent output is good, next item is obvious, the
  queue is non-empty. Most common case.
- **Bounce-back** — one of the three named triggers fired (see
  "Notifications" below). Send a notify, stop the loop.
- **Done-state** — queue is empty AND the milestone is fully
  ratified (audit clean, fieldtest clean if applicable). Go to
  Step 5.

### Step 5 — On done-state: WhatsNew.md + Notify

Run the procedure named in "Done-state notifications: WhatsNew.md"
below. The two outputs share one verbatim text.

## Direction freedom

I have authority to choose the next iteration, refactor, or feature
without asking. Wrong calls are contained, not recovered: only the
Boss commits, and only when the working-tree state is consistent —
so bad work doesn't reach main in the first place. If a dispatched
agent's output is wrong, the remedy is `git checkout -- <paths>` on
the working tree (Boss-side), never a rewind of main HEAD. main is
forward-only.

The cost of asking "what should I do next" — context-switch for
the user, latency on my side — exceeds the expected cost of
discarding a bad working-tree state. So when the queue is non-empty
and the path is clear, just pick and proceed.

Bounce back to the user only when:

- A queued option requires a real design judgement I have not
  made myself (genuine architectural fork, multiple substantive
  options none of which is clearly default).
- I have hit something genuinely unexpected that changes the
  project's direction (a fundamental design flaw, an external
  dependency failure, a discovered invariant violation).
- The user has explicitly asked for a checkpoint.
- **The next item on the queue is a new milestone** — i.e. a
  roadmap entry that has no `docs/specs/` file yet and would
  require dispatching `brainstorm` to even begin. Continuing
  an open milestone (next iter, audit, fieldtest, post-audit
  tidy) is autonomous; *starting* a new one is a bounce-back.

  **Why this is different from the other three triggers.** Cross-
  milestone work is high-context work. A fresh brainstorm alone
  routinely consumes tens of thousands of tokens on grounding-
  check reads, design Q&A, and spec drafting — on top of whatever
  context the just-closed milestone left behind. I cannot compact
  my own context window; only the user can decide that the right
  shape for the next milestone is a fresh session rather than a
  continuation. A new milestone is therefore the natural
  checkpoint: stop, surface the candidate, let the user pick the
  session shape (continue here / spawn fresh / defer / pick a
  different roadmap item).

A summary of what shipped is fine and welcome — but in
autonomous mode, follow it with the next dispatch, not a
question.

## Notifications

Two states call for a notify; nothing else does:

1. **Done-state.** The autonomous queue is empty — the milestone
   closed, the audit ratified, and no further iteration is obvious
   from the spec or the roadmap (or, in a user-scoped session,
   every objective the user named has been completed and there is
   nothing else queued). A finished sub-goal inside a still-open
   milestone is *not* done-state. If the next iteration is obvious
   and substantive, keep dispatching — "test suite landed", "audit
   clean before close-fixes", "iter N done with N+1 in scope" are
   internal progress, not notify events.

2. **Problem-state.** A bounce-back trigger per §"Direction
   freedom" — design fork I cannot resolve, an unexpected
   invariant violation, an external dependency failure, the
   user has explicitly asked for a checkpoint, or the next
   roadmap item is a new milestone (no spec yet) and starting
   it would force a fresh `brainstorm`.

A user-specified stop trigger ("until X is done, then notify")
counts as done-state only if X is truly the last actionable item
in the autonomous queue at that moment. If hitting X still leaves
an open milestone with obvious follow-up iters, the right action
is to continue past X without notifying — the user's intent
behind the trigger is "wake me when there's nothing else to do",
not "wake me at this specific checkpoint".

Mid-flow progress notifications burn the user's attention without
giving him a decision to make. When in doubt, continue.

~/.claude/notify.sh "Text"

When notifying, the message body should be the actionable
summary: what I need from them, in one short line. Skip the
"hi, I" framing — just the gist. The user will see it on phone
and likely respond by returning to the session.

By default, I act autonomous. The notification is the
exception, not the rule.

## Done-state notifications: WhatsNew.md

When the trigger is **done-state** (autonomous work has wrapped
up, nothing left to do for the user to react to), the procedure
is two-step and the two outputs share one text:

1. Append a new entry to `docs/WhatsNew.md` (newest at the bottom,
   append-only — same chronological convention as the per-iter journals).
2. Send the same text via `~/.claude/notify.sh`.

The text must be written for the **user-as-reader who did not
watch me work**:

- **Language: English.** Same as the rest of the repo; both
  WhatsNew.md and the Notify push are permanent enough to be
  treated as project content.
- **No technical internals.** Don't name crates, function
  identifiers, type names, agent names, or iteration codes
  (`ct.1.7`, `18a`, etc.). Describe the *change in the project*
  — what is now possible, fixed, or visible — not the mechanics.
- **No assumption of context.** The user is on his phone and has
  not seen this session. Lead with the result; the *why* is fine
  if it fits in one short clause.
- **Length: Telegram-pragmatic.** No hard cap, but a few sentences,
  not an essay. If the work covered multiple unrelated things,
  bullet them.
- **Tone: factual, not performative.** No celebration, no "I have
  successfully…". Just "X works now, Y is fixed, Z is new".

**Bounce-backs** (asking the user for a design judgement or
checkpoint) are *not* done-state and do **not** produce a
WhatsNew entry — they stay as Notify-only.

Format of a WhatsNew entry: a `## YYYY-MM-DD — <short title>`
heading followed by the message body. The body must match the
Notify text verbatim.

## Common Rationalisations

| Excuse | Reality |
|--------|---------|
| "Iter just landed cleanly, let me notify so user can see" | Mid-flow notifications burn user attention without giving them a decision to make. Iter-clean is internal progress, not a notify event. |
| "Sub-goal of the milestone is done, that counts as done-state" | Done-state is queue-empty, not sub-goal-complete. If the next iter is obvious and substantive, keep dispatching. |
| "Top of roadmap has two equally good options, I'll just pick one" | If both are substantive and the choice is non-obvious, that's a real fork — bounce back. The cost of a wrong pick (working-tree discard) is higher than the cost of one short ping to the user. |
| "User said 'until X then notify', X just completed, notify now" | Check whether X was actually the last actionable thing. If hitting X leaves an open milestone with obvious follow-up, the user's intent was "wake me when there's nothing else to do" — continue. |
| "Done-state hit, send notify, append WhatsNew later" | WhatsNew + notify are one text. Append first (atomic), send second. Splitting them is how the WhatsNew gets forgotten. |
| "WhatsNew can name the iter code — user will figure out what it means" | No. WhatsNew is for the user-as-reader who did not watch me work. Iter codes, crate names, function identifiers, type names — all internal, all banned. |
| "The previous milestone closed cleanly and the next roadmap item is obvious — just dispatch `brainstorm` and keep going" | No. Starting a new milestone is itself a bounce-back. A fresh `brainstorm` is high-context work, and I cannot compact my own context — only the user can decide whether the next milestone wants a fresh session or a continuation of this one. The "obviousness" of the candidate is irrelevant; the *cross-milestone hop* is the checkpoint, not the topic choice. |
| "It's the same broad area as the milestone I just closed, that's not really a new milestone" | If there is no `docs/specs/<...>.md` file for it yet and it would route through `brainstorm` to get one, it IS a new milestone for this rule's purposes. The rule keys on "needs a fresh spec", not on subjective continuity. |

## Red Flags — STOP

- About to send a notify on an internal-progress event (test suite landed, audit clean before close-fixes, iter N done with N+1 in scope).
- About to dispatch the next skill without checking that the previous output was actually good.
- About to autonomously dispatch in a session where the user did NOT type `/boss`.
- About to write a WhatsNew entry that names a crate, an iter code, or an agent.
- About to bounce back at every iter boundary "just to be safe" — that's reactive deference, not direction freedom.
- About to send the WhatsNew text and the Notify text with different wording — they must be one verbatim text.
- About to dispatch `brainstorm` on a roadmap item that does not yet have a spec file, without first bouncing back to the user. New milestones never start autonomously.

## Cross-references

- **Skill system index:** `skills/README.md` — skill table, agent
  roster, pipeline diagram.
- **Universal rules:** `CLAUDE.md` — agent role boundaries, commit
  discipline, design rationale, authority over skills, feature
  acceptance, TDD-for-bugs, file-role roster.
- **Queue:** `docs/roadmap.md` — priority-ordered forward queue
  consumed by Step 1.
- **Canonical feature-acceptance criterion:** `docs/DESIGN.md`
  §"Feature-acceptance criterion" — the criterion that gates new
  features; applied at spec time by `skills/brainstorm`.
- **Downstream skills dispatched:** `skills/brainstorm`,
  `skills/planner`, `skills/implement`, `skills/audit`,
  `skills/fieldtest`, `skills/debug`, `skills/docwriter`.
