end-to-end-orchestrator
目標設定から実装、テスト、品質検証まで、複数のAIスキルを連携させて開発ワークフロー全体を自動で管理し、エラーからの回復や進捗管理も行い、高品質なコードを迅速に生成するSkill。
📜 元の英語説明(参考)
Complete development workflow orchestrator coordinating all multi-ai skills (research → planning → implementation → testing → verification) with quality gates, failure recovery, and state management. Single-command complete workflows from objective to production-ready code. Use when implementing complete features requiring full pipeline, coordinating multiple skills automatically, or executing production-grade development cycles end-to-end.
🇯🇵 日本人クリエイター向け解説
目標設定から実装、テスト、品質検証まで、複数のAIスキルを連携させて開発ワークフロー全体を自動で管理し、エラーからの回復や進捗管理も行い、高品質なコードを迅速に生成するSkill。
※ jpskill.com 編集部が日本のビジネス現場向けに補足した解説です。Skill本体の挙動とは独立した参考情報です。
下記のコマンドをコピーしてターミナル(Mac/Linux)または PowerShell(Windows)に貼り付けてください。 ダウンロード → 解凍 → 配置まで全自動。
mkdir -p ~/.claude/skills && cd ~/.claude/skills && curl -L -o end-to-end-orchestrator.zip https://jpskill.com/download/9419.zip && unzip -o end-to-end-orchestrator.zip && rm end-to-end-orchestrator.zip
$d = "$env:USERPROFILE\.claude\skills"; ni -Force -ItemType Directory $d | Out-Null; iwr https://jpskill.com/download/9419.zip -OutFile "$d\end-to-end-orchestrator.zip"; Expand-Archive "$d\end-to-end-orchestrator.zip" -DestinationPath $d -Force; ri "$d\end-to-end-orchestrator.zip"
完了後、Claude Code を再起動 → 普通に「動画プロンプト作って」のように話しかけるだけで自動発動します。
💾 手動でダウンロードしたい(コマンドが難しい人向け)
- 1. 下の青いボタンを押して
end-to-end-orchestrator.zipをダウンロード - 2. ZIPファイルをダブルクリックで解凍 →
end-to-end-orchestratorフォルダができる - 3. そのフォルダを
C:\Users\あなたの名前\.claude\skills\(Win)または~/.claude/skills/(Mac)へ移動 - 4. Claude Code を再起動
⚠️ ダウンロード・利用は自己責任でお願いします。当サイトは内容・動作・安全性について責任を負いません。
🎯 このSkillでできること
下記の説明文を読むと、このSkillがあなたに何をしてくれるかが分かります。Claudeにこの分野の依頼をすると、自動で発動します。
📦 インストール方法 (3ステップ)
- 1. 上の「ダウンロード」ボタンを押して .skill ファイルを取得
- 2. ファイル名の拡張子を .skill から .zip に変えて展開(macは自動展開可)
- 3. 展開してできたフォルダを、ホームフォルダの
.claude/skills/に置く- · macOS / Linux:
~/.claude/skills/ - · Windows:
%USERPROFILE%\.claude\skills\
- · macOS / Linux:
Claude Code を再起動すれば完了。「このSkillを使って…」と話しかけなくても、関連する依頼で自動的に呼び出されます。
詳しい使い方ガイドを見る →- 最終更新
- 2026-05-18
- 取得日時
- 2026-05-18
- 同梱ファイル
- 1
📖 Skill本文(日本語訳)
※ 原文(英語/中国語)を Gemini で日本語化したものです。Claude 自身は原文を読みます。誤訳がある場合は原文をご確認ください。
End-to-End Orchestrator
概要
end-to-end-orchestrator は、研究から本番環境へのデプロイまで、5つの multi-ai skills 全てを連携させ、単一のコマンドで完全な開発ワークフローを提供します。
目的: 自動化された skill 連携を通じて、「機能 X が欲しい」を本番環境で使用可能なコードに変換する
パターン: ワークフローベース (品質ゲートを備えた5段階のパイプライン)
主要なイノベーション: 失敗からの回復と品質ゲートを備えた、研究 → 計画 → 実装 → テスト → 検証の自動オーケストレーション
完全なパイプライン:
入力: 機能の説明
↓
1. 研究 (multi-ai-research) [オプション]
↓ [品質ゲート: 研究完了]
2. 計画 (multi-ai-planning)
↓ [品質ゲート: 計画 ≥90/100]
3. 実装 (multi-ai-implementation)
↓ [品質ゲート: テスト合格、カバレッジ ≥80%]
4. テスト (multi-ai-testing)
↓ [品質ゲート: カバレッジ ≥95%、検証済み]
5. 検証 (multi-ai-verification)
↓ [品質ゲート: スコア ≥90/100、全レイヤー合格]
出力: 本番環境で使用可能なコード
使用する場面
end-to-end-orchestrator は、以下の場合に使用します。
- 完全な機能を実装する場合 (クイックフィックスではない)
- 自動化されたワークフローが必要な場合 (手動での skill の連鎖ではない)
- 本番環境品質が要求される場合 (全てのゲートを通過する必要がある)
- 時間最適化が重要な場合 (可能な限り並列処理)
- 失敗からの回復が必要な場合 (自動再試行/ロールバック)
使用しない場面:
- クイックフィックス (30分未満)
- 探索的な作業 (不確かな要件)
- 手動制御が好ましい場合 (各フェーズをステップ実行)
前提条件
必須
- 5つの multi-ai skills 全てがインストールされていること:
- multi-ai-research
- multi-ai-planning
- multi-ai-implementation
- multi-ai-testing
- multi-ai-verification
オプション
- agent-memory-system (過去の作業から学習するため)
- hooks-manager (自動化のため)
- Gemini CLI, Codex CLI (tri-AI 研究のため)
完全なワークフロー
ステージ 1: 研究 (オプション)
目的: 実証済みのパターンに基づいて実装を構築する
プロセス:
-
研究が必要かどうかを判断する:
// 目的が既知かどうかを確認する const similarWork = await recallMemory({ type: 'episodic', query: objective }); if (similarWork.length === 0) { // 未知のドメイン → 研究が必要 needsResearch = true; } else { // 既知 → 研究をスキップし、過去の学習を利用できる needsResearch = false; } -
研究を実行する (必要な場合):
"[domain] の実装パターンとベストプラクティス" について multi-ai-research を使用する何を提供するのか:
- Claude research: 公式ドキュメント、コードベースのパターン
- Gemini research: Web のベストプラクティス、最新トレンド
- Codex research: GitHub のパターン、コード例
- 品質: 100% の引用で ≥95/100
-
品質ゲート: 研究完了:
✅ 研究結果が文書化されている ✅ パターンが特定されている (最低2つ) ✅ ベストプラクティスが抽出されている (最低3つ) ✅ 品質スコア ≥95/100失敗した場合: 研究が不完全 → 研究を再試行するか、(ユーザーが決定) なしで続行する
出力:
- 研究結果 (.analysis/ANALYSIS_FINAL.md)
- パターンとベストプラクティス
- 実装に関する推奨事項
時間: 30〜60分 (既知のドメインの場合はスキップ可能)
次: ステージ 2 に進む
ステージ 2: 計画
目的: 品質 ≥90/100 のエージェント実行可能な計画を作成する
プロセス:
-
研究コンテキストをロードする (研究が完了した場合):
let context = ""; if (researchDone) { context = await readFile('.analysis/ANALYSIS_FINAL.md'); } -
計画を呼び出す:
[objective] の計画を作成するために multi-ai-planning を使用する ${context ? `研究結果は .analysis/ANALYSIS_FINAL.md で利用可能です` : ''} 6ステップのワークフローに従って包括的な計画を作成します。何をするのか:
- 目的を分析する
- 階層的な分解 (8〜15個のタスク)
- 依存関係をマッピングし、並列処理を特定する
- 全てのタスクの検証を計画する
- 品質をスコアリングする (0〜100)
-
品質ゲート: 計画承認:
✅ 計画が作成された ✅ 品質スコア ≥90/100 ✅ 全てのタスクに検証がある ✅ 依存関係がマッピングされている ✅ 循環依存関係がない失敗した場合 (スコア <90):
- ギャップ分析を確認する
- 推奨される修正を適用する
- 再検証する
- 最大2回まで再試行する
- それでも <90 の場合: 人間のレビューにエスカレートする
-
計画を共有状態に保存する:
# 次のステージのために保存 cp plans/[plan-id]/plan.json .multi-ai-context/plan.json
出力:
- plan.json (機械可読)
- PLAN.md (人間可読)
- COORDINATION.md (実行ガイド)
- 品質 ≥90/100
時間: 1.5〜3時間
次: ステージ 3 に進む
ステージ 3: 実装
目的: TDD で計画を実行し、動作するコードを作成する
プロセス:
-
計画をロードする:
const plan = JSON.parse(readFile('.multi-ai-context/plan.json')); console.log(`📋 ロードされた計画: ${plan.objective}`); console.log(` タスク: ${plan.tasks.length}`); console.log(` 推定: ${plan.metadata.estimated_total_hours} 時間`); -
実装を呼び出す:
.multi-ai-context/plan.json の計画に従って multi-ai-implementation を使用する 次の6つのステップを全て実行します。 1. 調査とコンテキストの収集 2. アーキテクチャの計画 (計画は既に作成済み、必要に応じて改良) 3. TDD で段階的に実装 4. マルチエージェントの連携 (並列タスクの場合) 5. 統合と E2E テスト 6. コミット前の品質検証 計画からの成功基準。何をするのか:
- コードベースを調査する (段階的な開示)
- 段階的に実装する (コミットあたり <200 行)
- テスト駆動開発 (テストファースト)
- 並列タスクのためのマルチエージェント連携
- 実装中の継続的なテスト
- ドゥームループの防止 (最大3回の再試行)
-
品質ゲート: 実装完了:
✅ 全ての計画タスクが実装された ✅ 全てのテストが合格した ✅ カバレッジ ≥80% (ゲート)、理想的には ≥95% ✅ リグレッションがない ✅ ドゥームループが回避された (< 最大再試行回数)
(原文はここで切り詰められています)
📜 原文 SKILL.md(Claudeが読む英語/中国語)を展開
End-to-End Orchestrator
Overview
end-to-end-orchestrator provides single-command complete development workflows, coordinating all 5 multi-ai skills from research through production deployment.
Purpose: Transform "I want feature X" into production-ready code through automated skill coordination
Pattern: Workflow-based (5-stage pipeline with quality gates)
Key Innovation: Automatic orchestration of research → planning → implementation → testing → verification with failure recovery and quality gates
The Complete Pipeline:
Input: Feature description
↓
1. Research (multi-ai-research) [optional]
↓ [Quality Gate: Research complete]
2. Planning (multi-ai-planning)
↓ [Quality Gate: Plan ≥90/100]
3. Implementation (multi-ai-implementation)
↓ [Quality Gate: Tests pass, coverage ≥80%]
4. Testing (multi-ai-testing)
↓ [Quality Gate: Coverage ≥95%, verified]
5. Verification (multi-ai-verification)
↓ [Quality Gate: Score ≥90/100, all layers pass]
Output: Production-ready code
When to Use
Use end-to-end-orchestrator when:
- Implementing complete features (not quick fixes)
- Want automated workflow (not manual skill chaining)
- Production-quality required (all gates must pass)
- Time optimization important (parallel where possible)
- Need failure recovery (automatic retry/rollback)
When NOT to Use:
- Quick fixes (<30 minutes)
- Exploratory work (uncertain requirements)
- Manual control preferred (step through each phase)
Prerequisites
Required
- All 5 multi-ai skills installed:
- multi-ai-research
- multi-ai-planning
- multi-ai-implementation
- multi-ai-testing
- multi-ai-verification
Optional
- agent-memory-system (for learning from past work)
- hooks-manager (for automation)
- Gemini CLI, Codex CLI (for tri-AI research)
Complete Workflow
Stage 1: Research (Optional)
Purpose: Ground implementation in proven patterns
Process:
-
Determine if Research Needed:
// Check if objective is familiar const similarWork = await recallMemory({ type: 'episodic', query: objective }); if (similarWork.length === 0) { // Unfamiliar domain → research needed needsResearch = true; } else { // Familiar → can skip research, use past learnings needsResearch = false; } -
Execute Research (if needed):
Use multi-ai-research for "[domain] implementation patterns and best practices"What It Provides:
- Claude research: Official docs, codebase patterns
- Gemini research: Web best practices, latest trends
- Codex research: GitHub patterns, code examples
- Quality: ≥95/100 with 100% citations
-
Quality Gate: Research Complete:
✅ Research findings documented ✅ Patterns identified (minimum 2) ✅ Best practices extracted (minimum 3) ✅ Quality score ≥95/100If Fail: Research incomplete → retry research OR proceed without (user decides)
Outputs:
- Research findings (.analysis/ANALYSIS_FINAL.md)
- Patterns and best practices
- Implementation recommendations
Time: 30-60 minutes (can skip if familiar domain)
Next: Proceed to Stage 2
Stage 2: Planning
Purpose: Create agent-executable plan with quality ≥90/100
Process:
-
Load Research Context (if research done):
let context = ""; if (researchDone) { context = await readFile('.analysis/ANALYSIS_FINAL.md'); } -
Invoke Planning:
Use multi-ai-planning to create plan for [objective] ${context ? `Research findings available in: .analysis/ANALYSIS_FINAL.md` : ''} Create comprehensive plan following 6-step workflow.What It Does:
- Analyzes objective
- Hierarchical decomposition (8-15 tasks)
- Maps dependencies, identifies parallel
- Plans verification for all tasks
- Scores quality (0-100)
-
Quality Gate: Plan Approved:
✅ Plan created ✅ Quality score ≥90/100 ✅ All tasks have verification ✅ Dependencies mapped ✅ No circular dependenciesIf Fail (score <90):
- Review gap analysis
- Apply recommended fixes
- Re-verify
- Retry up to 2 times
- If still <90: Escalate to human review
-
Save Plan to Shared State:
# Save for next stage cp plans/[plan-id]/plan.json .multi-ai-context/plan.json
Outputs:
- plan.json (machine-readable)
- PLAN.md (human-readable)
- COORDINATION.md (execution guide)
- Quality ≥90/100
Time: 1.5-3 hours
Next: Proceed to Stage 3
Stage 3: Implementation
Purpose: Execute plan with TDD, produce working code
Process:
-
Load Plan:
const plan = JSON.parse(readFile('.multi-ai-context/plan.json')); console.log(`📋 Loaded plan: ${plan.objective}`); console.log(` Tasks: ${plan.tasks.length}`); console.log(` Estimated: ${plan.metadata.estimated_total_hours} hours`); -
Invoke Implementation:
Use multi-ai-implementation following plan in .multi-ai-context/plan.json Execute all 6 steps: 1. Explore & gather context 2. Plan architecture (plan already created, refine as needed) 3. Implement incrementally with TDD 4. Coordinate multi-agent (if parallel tasks) 5. Integration & E2E testing 6. Quality verification before commit Success criteria from plan.What It Does:
- Explores codebase (progressive disclosure)
- Implements incrementally (<200 lines per commit)
- Test-driven development (tests first)
- Multi-agent coordination for parallel tasks
- Continuous testing during implementation
- Doom loop prevention (max 3 retries)
-
Quality Gate: Implementation Complete:
✅ All plan tasks implemented ✅ All tests passing ✅ Coverage ≥80% (gate), ideally ≥95% ✅ No regressions ✅ Doom loop avoided (< max retries)If Fail:
- Identify failing task
- Retry with different approach
- If 3 failures: Escalate to human
- Save state for recovery
-
Save Implementation State:
# Save for next stage echo '{ "status": "implemented", "files_changed": [...], "tests_run": 95, "tests_passed": 95, "coverage": 87, "commits": ["abc123", "def456"] }' > .multi-ai-context/implementation-status.json
Outputs:
- Working code
- Tests passing
- Coverage ≥80%
- Commits created
Time: 3-10 hours (varies by complexity)
Next: Proceed to Stage 4
Stage 4: Testing (Independent Verification)
Purpose: Verify tests are comprehensive and prevent gaming
Process:
-
Load Implementation Context:
const implStatus = JSON.parse( readFile('.multi-ai-context/implementation-status.json') ); console.log(`🧪 Testing implementation:`); console.log(` Files changed: ${implStatus.files_changed.length}`); console.log(` Current coverage: ${implStatus.coverage}%`); -
Invoke Independent Testing:
Use multi-ai-testing independent verification workflow Verify: - Tests in: tests/ - Code in: src/ - Specifications in: .multi-ai-context/plan.json Workflows to execute: 1. Test quality verification (independent agent) 2. Coverage validation (≥95% target) 3. Edge case discovery (AI-powered) 4. Multi-agent ensemble scoring (if critical feature) Score test quality (0-100).What It Does:
- Independent verification (separate agent from impl)
- Checks tests match specifications (not just what code does)
- Generates additional edge case tests
- Multi-agent ensemble for quality scoring
- Prevents overfitting
-
Quality Gate: Testing Verified:
✅ Test quality score ≥90/100 ✅ Coverage ≥95% (target achieved) ✅ Independent verification passed ✅ No test gaming detected ✅ Edge cases coveredIf Fail:
- Review test quality issues
- Generate additional tests
- Re-verify
- Max 2 retries, then escalate
-
Save Testing State:
echo '{ "status": "tested", "test_quality_score": 92, "coverage": 96, "tests_total": 112, "edge_cases": 23, "gaming_detected": false }' > .multi-ai-context/testing-status.json
Outputs:
- Test quality ≥90/100
- Coverage ≥95%
- Independent verification passed
Time: 1-3 hours
Next: Proceed to Stage 5
Stage 5: Verification (Multi-Layer QA)
Purpose: Final quality assurance before production
Process:
-
Load All Context:
const plan = JSON.parse(readFile('.multi-ai-context/plan.json')); const implStatus = JSON.parse(readFile('.multi-ai-context/implementation-status.json')); const testStatus = JSON.parse(readFile('.multi-ai-context/testing-status.json')); console.log(`🔍 Final verification:`); console.log(` Objective: ${plan.objective}`); console.log(` Implementation: ${implStatus.status}`); console.log(` Testing: ${testStatus.coverage}% coverage`); -
Invoke Multi-Layer Verification:
Use multi-ai-verification for complete quality check Verify: - Code: src/ - Tests: tests/ - Plan: .multi-ai-context/plan.json Execute all 5 layers: 1. Rules-based (linting, types, schema, SAST) 2. Functional (tests, coverage, examples) 3. Visual (if UI: screenshots, a11y) 4. Integration (E2E, API compatibility) 5. Quality scoring (LLM-as-judge, 0-100) All 5 quality gates must pass.What It Does:
- Runs all 5 verification layers
- Each layer is independent
- LLM-as-judge for holistic assessment
- Agent-as-a-Judge can execute tools to verify claims
- Multi-agent ensemble for critical features
-
Quality Gate: Production Ready:
✅ Layer 1 (Rules): PASS ✅ Layer 2 (Functional): PASS, coverage 96% ✅ Layer 3 (Visual): PASS or SKIPPED ✅ Layer 4 (Integration): PASS ✅ Layer 5 (Quality): 92/100 ≥90 ✅ ALL GATES PASSED → PRODUCTION APPROVEDIf Fail:
- Review gap analysis from failed layer
- Apply recommended fixes
- Re-verify from failed layer (not all 5)
- Max 2 retries per layer
- If still failing: Escalate to human
-
Generate Final Report:
# Feature Implementation Complete **Objective**: [from plan] ## Pipeline Execution Summary ### Stage 1: Research - Status: ✅ Complete - Quality: 97/100 - Time: 52 minutes ### Stage 2: Planning - Status: ✅ Complete - Quality: 94/100 - Tasks: 23 - Time: 1.8 hours ### Stage 3: Implementation - Status: ✅ Complete - Files changed: 15 - Lines added: 847 - Commits: 12 - Time: 6.2 hours ### Stage 4: Testing - Status: ✅ Complete - Test quality: 92/100 - Coverage: 96% - Tests: 112 - Time: 1.5 hours ### Stage 5: Verification - Status: ✅ Complete - Quality score: 92/100 - All layers: PASS - Time: 1.2 hours ## Final Metrics - **Total Time**: 11.3 hours - **Quality**: 92/100 - **Coverage**: 96% - **Status**: ✅ PRODUCTION READY ## Commits - abc123: feat: Add database schema - def456: feat: Implement OAuth integration - [... 10 more ...] ## Next Steps - Create PR for team review - Deploy to staging - Production release -
Save to Memory (if agent-memory-system available):
await storeMemory({ type: 'episodic', event: { description: `Complete implementation: ${objective}`, outcomes: { total_time: 11.3, quality_score: 92, test_coverage: 96, stages_completed: 5 }, learnings: extractedDuringPipeline } });
Outputs:
- Production-ready code
- Comprehensive final report
- Commits created
- PR ready (if requested)
- Memory saved for future learning
Time: 30-90 minutes
Result: ✅ PRODUCTION READY
Failure Recovery
Failure Handling at Each Stage
Stage Fails → Recovery Strategy:
Research Fails:
- Retry with different sources
- Skip research (use memory if available)
- Escalate to human if critical gap
Planning Fails (score <90):
- Review gap analysis
- Apply fixes automatically if possible
- Retry planning (max 2 attempts)
- Escalate if still <90
Implementation Fails:
- Identify failing task
- Automatic rollback to last checkpoint
- Retry with alternative approach
- Doom loop prevention (max 3 retries)
- Escalate with full error context
Testing Fails (coverage <80% or quality <90):
- Generate additional tests for gaps
- Retry verification
- Max 2 retries
- Escalate with coverage report
Verification Fails (score <90 or layer fails):
- Apply auto-fixes for Layer 1-2 issues
- Manual fixes needed for Layer 3-5
- Re-verify from failed layer (not all 5)
- Max 2 retries per layer
- Escalate with quality report
Escalation Protocol
When to Escalate to Human:
- Any stage fails 3 times (doom loop)
- Planning quality <80 after 2 retries
- Implementation doom loop detected
- Verification score <80 after 2 retries
- Budget exceeded (if cost tracking enabled)
- Circular dependency detected
- Irrecoverable error (file system, permissions)
Escalation Format:
# ⚠️ ESCALATION REQUIRED
**Stage**: Implementation (Stage 3)
**Failure**: Doom loop detected (3 failed attempts)
## Context
- Objective: Implement user authentication
- Failing Task: 2.2.2 Token generation
- Error: Tests fail with "undefined userId" repeatedly
## Attempts Made
1. Attempt 1: Added userId to payload → Same error
2. Attempt 2: Changed payload structure → Same error
3. Attempt 3: Different JWT library → Same error
## Root Cause Analysis
- Tests expect `user.id` but implementation uses `user.userId`
- Mismatch in data model between test and implementation
- Auto-fix failed 3 times
## Recommended Actions
1. Review test specifications vs. implementation
2. Align data model (user.id vs. user.userId)
3. Manual intervention required
## State Saved
- Checkpoint: checkpoint-003 (before attempts)
- Rollback available: `git checkout checkpoint-003`
- Continue after fix: Resume from Task 2.2.2
Parallel Execution Optimization
Identifying Parallel Opportunities
From Plan:
const plan = readFile('.multi-ai-context/plan.json');
// Plan identifies parallel groups
const parallelGroups = plan.parallel_groups;
// Example:
// Group 1: Tasks 2.1, 2.2, 2.3 (independent)
// Can execute in parallel
Executing Parallel Tasks
Pattern:
// Stage 3: Implementation with parallel tasks
const parallelGroup = plan.parallel_groups.find(g => g.group_id === 'pg2');
// Spawn parallel implementation agents
const results = await Promise.all(
parallelGroup.tasks.map(taskId => {
const task = plan.tasks.find(t => t.id === taskId);
return task({
description: `Implement ${task.description}`,
prompt: `Implement task ${task.id}: ${task.description}
Specifications from plan:
${JSON.stringify(task, null, 2)}
Success criteria:
${task.verification.success_criteria.join('\n')}
Write implementation and tests.
Report completion status.`
});
})
);
// Verify all parallel tasks completed
const allSucceeded = results.every(r => r.status === 'complete');
if (allSucceeded) {
// Proceed to integration
} else {
// Handle failures
}
Time Savings: 20-40% faster than sequential execution
State Management
Cross-Skill State Sharing
Shared Context Directory: .multi-ai-context/
Standard Files:
.multi-ai-context/
├── research-findings.json # From multi-ai-research
├── plan.json # From multi-ai-planning
├── implementation-status.json # From multi-ai-implementation
├── testing-status.json # From multi-ai-testing
├── verification-report.json # From multi-ai-verification
├── pipeline-state.json # Orchestrator state
└── failure-history.json # For doom loop detection
Benefits:
- Skills don't duplicate work
- Later stages read earlier outputs
- Failure recovery knows full state
- Memory can be saved from shared state
Progress Tracking
Real-Time Progress:
{
"pipeline_id": "pipeline_20250126_1200",
"objective": "Implement user authentication",
"started_at": "2025-01-26T12:00:00Z",
"current_stage": 3,
"stages": [
{
"stage": 1,
"name": "Research",
"status": "complete",
"duration_minutes": 52,
"quality": 97
},
{
"stage": 2,
"name": "Planning",
"status": "complete",
"duration_minutes": 108,
"quality": 94
},
{
"stage": 3,
"name": "Implementation",
"status": "in_progress",
"started_at": "2025-01-26T13:48:00Z",
"tasks_total": 23,
"tasks_complete": 15,
"tasks_remaining": 8,
"percent_complete": 65
},
{
"stage": 4,
"name": "Testing",
"status": "pending"
},
{
"stage": 5,
"name": "Verification",
"status": "pending"
}
],
"estimated_completion": "2025-01-26T20:00:00Z",
"quality_target": 90,
"current_quality_estimate": 92
}
Query Progress:
# Check current status
cat .multi-ai-context/pipeline-state.json | jq '.current_stage, .stages[2].percent_complete'
# Output: Stage 3, 65% complete
Workflow Modes
Standard Mode (Full Pipeline)
All 5 Stages:
Research → Planning → Implementation → Testing → Verification
Time: 8-20 hours Quality: Maximum (all gates, ≥90) Use For: Production features, complex implementations
Fast Mode (Skip Research)
4 Stages (familiar domains):
Planning → Implementation → Testing → Verification
Time: 6-15 hours Quality: High (all gates except research) Use For: Familiar domains, time-sensitive features
Quick Mode (Essential Gates Only)
Implementation + Basic Verification:
Planning → Implementation → Testing (basic) → Verification (Layers 1-2 only)
Time: 3-8 hours Quality: Good (essential gates only) Use For: Internal tools, prototypes
Best Practices
1. Always Run Planning Stage
Even for "simple" features - planning quality ≥90 prevents issues
2. Use Memory to Skip Research
If similar work done before, recall patterns instead of researching
3. Monitor Progress
Check .multi-ai-context/pipeline-state.json to track progress
4. Trust the Quality Gates
If gate fails, there's a real issue - don't skip fixes
5. Save State Frequently
Each stage completion saves state (enables recovery)
6. Review Final Report
Complete understanding of what was built and quality achieved
Integration Points
With All 5 Multi-AI Skills
Coordinates:
- multi-ai-research (Stage 1)
- multi-ai-planning (Stage 2)
- multi-ai-implementation (Stage 3)
- multi-ai-testing (Stage 4)
- multi-ai-verification (Stage 5)
Provides:
- Automatic skill invocation
- Quality gate enforcement
- Failure recovery
- State management
- Progress tracking
- Final reporting
With agent-memory-system
Before Pipeline:
- Recall similar past work
- Load learned patterns
- Skip research if memory sufficient
After Pipeline:
- Save complete episode to memory
- Extract learnings
- Update procedural patterns
- Improve estimation accuracy
With hooks-manager
Session Hooks:
- SessionStart: Load pipeline state
- SessionEnd: Save pipeline progress
- PostToolUse: Track stage completions
Notification Hooks:
- Send telemetry on stage completions
- Alert on gate failures
- Track quality scores
Quick Reference
The 5-Stage Pipeline
| Stage | Skill | Time | Quality Gate | Output |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | multi-ai-research | 30-60m | ≥95/100 | Research findings |
| 2 | multi-ai-planning | 1.5-3h | ≥90/100 | Executable plan |
| 3 | multi-ai-implementation | 3-10h | Tests pass, ≥80% cov | Working code |
| 4 | multi-ai-testing | 1-3h | ≥95% cov, quality ≥90 | Verified tests |
| 5 | multi-ai-verification | 1-3h | ≥90/100, all layers | Production ready |
Total: 8-20 hours → Production-ready feature
Workflow Modes
| Mode | Stages | Time | Quality | Use For |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Standard | All 5 | 8-20h | Maximum | Production features |
| Fast | 2-5 (skip research) | 6-15h | High | Familiar domains |
| Quick | 2,3,4,5 (basic) | 3-8h | Good | Internal tools |
Quality Gates
- Research: ≥95/100, patterns identified
- Planning: ≥90/100, all tasks verifiable
- Implementation: Tests pass, coverage ≥80%
- Testing: Quality ≥90/100, coverage ≥95%
- Verification: ≥90/100, all 5 layers pass
end-to-end-orchestrator provides complete automation from feature description to production-ready code, coordinating all 5 multi-ai skills with quality gates, failure recovery, and state management - delivering enterprise-grade development workflows in a single command.
For examples, see examples/. For failure recovery, see Failure Recovery section.