---
name: boss
description: User-invoked only (typed as `/boss`). Activates autonomous orchestrator mode — Claude picks the next iteration from the project's issue backlog, 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 how the orchestrator moves a
project forward when the user is away. Inside this mode, Claude
reads the project's issue backlog, 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 backlog,
no multi-iteration 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

Trigger:

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

Never auto-invoked. Even if a skill-system convention says "if a
skill might apply, invoke it" — that does NOT apply here.
`/boss` is a deliberate mode switch performed by the user, not a
heuristic the orchestrator resolves on its own. A session that
wanders into autonomous behaviour without `/boss` is the exact
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 CYCLE NEVER STARTS AUTONOMOUSLY — IT IS A BOUNCE-BACK.
```

Universal rules (only-orchestrator-commits, main-is-sacrosanct,
language, RED-first for bugs) come from the project's `CLAUDE.md`
— and from the user-level `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md` identity/security
layer above it, loaded in every session. Both bind regardless of
mode; autonomy does not lift a user-level constraint (e.g. an
external-service-consent rule that names `/boss` explicitly). This
skill does not restate them.

## The Process

### Step 1 — Read the queue

The project's issue tracker is the forward queue. Read open
issues via the command configured under
`git.issue_tracker.list_cmd` in the project profile. If that
slot is empty, the project does not have an autonomously
addressable queue — bounce back to the user with that diagnosis.

If the entire open backlog is empty: skip to Step 5
(done-state). Do not invent work; an empty queue is a real
signal that the cycle 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:

```
brainstorm → planner → implement → audit → fieldtest
                  +
                  debug (bug-triggered)
                  +
                  tdd → implement (mini)  (test-specifiable feature, if profile enables it)
                  +
                  docwriter (post-stability)
```

Match the chosen item to the right entry skill. If a spec exists
but no plan: `planner`. If a plan exists: `implement`. If a cycle
is closing: `audit`. If the iteration is a bug-fix: `debug`. For
new feature work with no spec or plan yet, run the **Entry-path
reflection** below before dispatching anything. Read each skill's
`SKILL.md` trigger section if unsure.

**Entry-path reflection (feature work).** When the profile enables
the `tdd` phase, `brainstorm` and `tdd` are two **co-equal** entry
paths for new feature work — neither is the default, and the choice
is made by reflection every time, not by habit. Before dispatching
either, decide which fits the item in hand and record the one-line
verdict ("test-specifiable → `tdd`" / "design fork → `brainstorm`")
in the loop. The discriminator is the **design line**, not a
preference:

- The item's desired behaviour can be pinned by one honest minimal
  assertion — "calling X with Y returns Z", a backlog `feature`
  issue whose body fixes one observable behaviour — then it is
  **test-specifiable** and `tdd` owns it. Dispatch `tdd`
  autonomously, the same way a bug issue is dispatched to `debug`:
  it authors a RED executable-spec and hands the GREEN side to
  `implement` mini-mode. This is **not** a new-cycle bounce-back —
  the test is the spec; no `brainstorm` runs to begin.
- Writing that one assertion would force a choice between two or
  three plausible behaviours with real trade-offs — a genuine design
  fork — then the work needs a prose spec the user approves, and
  `brainstorm` owns it. Starting a new cycle through `brainstorm` is
  itself a bounce-back per §"Direction freedom" trigger 4: green-light
  the cycle (and the session shape) with the user first; only then
  does `brainstorm` get dispatched.

The asymmetry in autonomy — a `tdd` dispatch proceeds, a fresh
`brainstorm` cycle bounces back — is **not** a ranking of the two
skills. It is a consequence of context budget: a fresh `brainstorm`
is high-context work the orchestrator cannot compact on its own (see
trigger 4), whereas a test-specifiable item is bounded. Do not let
that asymmetry harden into a reflex of routing borderline items to
`brainstorm` "to be safe" — that is the exact bias this reflection
exists to break; apply the design-line test honestly each time. The
one principled tilt is two-sided and lives *inside* the test, not
above it: genuine doubt about whether one assertion can pin the
behaviour *is itself* the design-fork signal, so it resolves to
`brainstorm` — not because `brainstorm` is preferred, but because
unresolved ambiguity is a fork by definition. A `tdd` bounce-back
also fires reactively: if `tdd` later reports the behaviour was not
test-specifiable after all, that escalation routes to `brainstorm`
and — being a new cycle that needs a fresh spec — is a bounce-back
to the user per the same trigger 4.

If the profile does **not** enable the `tdd` phase, `brainstorm` is
the only design entry path and the reflection collapses to it; a new
feature cycle with no spec always bounces back first.

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 four named triggers fired (see
  "Notifications" below). Send a notify, stop the loop.
- **Done-state** — queue is empty AND the cycle is fully
  ratified (audit drift-clean, fieldtest clean if applicable).
  Go to Step 5. A `/boss` done-state means this run has nothing
  left to dispatch; it is **not** an automatic milestone close —
  closing a tracker milestone needs its end-to-end milestone
  fieldtest green and stays a deliberate manual act (see
  `../docs/pipeline.md` § Milestone-close gate).

If a term-drift is resolved during the loop — two names collapsed to
one, or a settled term not yet listed — record it in the project
glossary per `../docs/glossary-convention.md`: record reality, never
invent. This is the only glossary write authority outside the user.
Building a glossary from scratch (the `glossary` skill's bootstrap) is
*not* this authority — it is high-context, user-only work; when a project
lacks a glossary and drift is visible, recommend a bootstrap via
bounce-back, never run one autonomously.

### Step 5 — On done-state: Notify

Run the procedure named in "Done-state notifications" below.

## Direction freedom

The orchestrator has authority to choose the next iteration,
refactor, or feature without asking. Wrong calls are contained,
not recovered: only the orchestrator 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 (orchestrator-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 cycle** — i.e. a top-
  level work container (in the project's vocabulary: milestone,
  epic, release, sprint root) that has no spec file yet and
  would require dispatching `brainstorm` to even begin.
  Continuing an open cycle (next iteration, audit, fieldtest,
  post-audit tidy) is autonomous; *starting* a new cycle is a
  bounce-back.

  **Why this is different from the other three triggers.**
  Cross-cycle 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 cycle left behind. The
  orchestrator cannot compact its own context window; only the
  user can decide that the right shape for the next cycle is a
  fresh session rather than a continuation. A new cycle is
  therefore the natural checkpoint: stop, surface the
  candidate, let the user pick the session shape (continue here
  / spawn fresh / defer / pick a different backlog 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 cycle
   closed, the audit ratified, and no further iteration is
   obvious from the spec or the backlog (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 cycle 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 the orchestrator cannot resolve, an
   unexpected invariant violation, an external dependency
   failure, the user has explicitly asked for a checkpoint, or
   the next backlog item is a new cycle (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 cycle with obvious follow-up iterations,
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 them a decision to make. When in doubt,
continue.

The notification command is configured under
`notifications.command` in the project profile and receives the
message text as a single argument. If the profile does not
configure one, fall back to printing the notification in chat.

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

By default, the orchestrator acts autonomous. The notification
is the exception, not the rule.

## Done-state notifications

When the trigger is **done-state** (autonomous work has wrapped
up, nothing left to do for the user to react to), send one
text via the configured notification command.

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

- **Language: same as the rest of the repo.** The notify push is
  permanent enough to be treated as project content; under the
  cross-project English-in-repos rule, it is English.
- **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 their 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) follow the same editorial rules but carry the
actionable ask, not a wrap-up summary.

## Common Rationalisations

| Excuse | Reality |
|--------|---------|
| "Iteration just landed cleanly, let me notify so user can see" | Mid-flow notifications burn user attention without giving them a decision to make. Iteration-clean is internal progress, not a notify event. |
| "Sub-goal of the cycle is done, that counts as done-state" | Done-state is queue-empty, not sub-goal-complete. If the next iteration is obvious and substantive, keep dispatching. |
| "Top of the backlog 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 cycle with obvious follow-up, the user's intent was "wake me when there's nothing else to do" — continue. |
| "Notify can name the iteration code — user will figure out what it means" | No. The notify text is for the user-as-reader who did not watch the orchestrator work. Iteration codes, crate names, function identifiers, type names — all internal, all banned. |
| "The previous cycle closed cleanly and the next backlog item is obvious — just dispatch `brainstorm` and keep going" | No. Starting a new cycle is itself a bounce-back. A fresh `brainstorm` is high-context work, and the orchestrator cannot compact its own context — only the user can decide whether the next cycle wants a fresh session or a continuation of this one. The "obviousness" of the candidate is irrelevant; the *cross-cycle hop* is the checkpoint, not the topic choice. |
| "It's the same broad area as the cycle I just closed, that's not really a new cycle" | If there is no spec file for it yet and it would route through `brainstorm` to get one, it IS a new cycle for this rule's purposes. The rule keys on "needs a fresh spec", not on subjective continuity. |
| "Feature work, so route it to `brainstorm` — that's the safe default" | `brainstorm` and `tdd` are co-equal entry paths on a tdd-enabled profile; neither is the default. Routing a test-specifiable item to `brainstorm` "to be safe" is the exact bias to break — run the Entry-path reflection and pick by the design line. The only tilt toward `brainstorm` is when one honest assertion genuinely cannot pin the behaviour, and that is a design fork, not a default. |
| "`tdd` is opt-in / profile-gated, so it's the secondary skill" | Profile-gating is about whether the path is *available*, not about rank. Once enabled, the choice between the two is decided by fit per item, reflected on each time — not by treating `brainstorm` as primary and `tdd` as the exception. |

## 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 send a notify that names a crate, an iteration code, or an agent.
- About to bounce back at every iteration boundary "just to be safe" — that's reactive deference, not direction freedom.
- About to dispatch `brainstorm` on a backlog issue that does not yet have a spec file, without first bouncing back to the user. New cycles never start autonomously.
- About to route feature work to `brainstorm` without running the Entry-path reflection — defaulting to it because it "feels safer" than `tdd`, rather than applying the design-line test. On a tdd-enabled profile the two are co-equal; the choice is reflected on each time.

## Cross-references

- **Skill system index:** `../README.md` — skill table, agent
  roster, pipeline diagram.
- **Universal rules:** the project's `CLAUDE.md` — orchestrator
  role boundaries, commit discipline, design rationale,
  authority over skills, feature acceptance, RED-first for bugs.
  Plus the user-level `~/.claude/CLAUDE.md` (identity/security
  layer, loaded in every session, above the project file) — it
  carries constraints that bind autonomous runs too, including
  external-service-consent rules that `/boss` does not lift.
- **Queue:** the URL configured under `git.issue_tracker.url` in
  the profile; CLI command at `git.issue_tracker.list_cmd`.
- **Glossary write-rule:** `../docs/glossary-convention.md` —
  record-reality discipline for the only autonomous glossary writer.
- **Downstream skills dispatched:** `../brainstorm`,
  `../planner`, `../implement`, `../audit`, `../fieldtest`,
  `../debug`, `../tdd` (test-specifiable feature, profile-gated;
  autonomously dispatchable like `../debug`), `../docwriter`.