tandem-engineering-workflow
Engineering discipline for development work orchestrated through Tandem, regardless of whether the worker is Claude, Codex, or another supported engine. Trigger for implementation, debugging, review,
Files1
View on GitHubSKILL.mdskills/tandem-engineering-workflow/SKILL.md
GitHubTandem engineering workflow
📋📋📋📋📋 The engineering workflow is active.
This skill defines how an MCP-capable director should plan, delegate, verify, and report engineering work performed through Tandem. It is engine-neutral. Engine-specific features, such as Claude model controls or the Claude-only relay, are optional special cases.
Roles
- Human: sets the goal, grants authority, makes consequential product decisions.
- Director: clarifies the outcome, selects devices and engines, assigns bounded work, and owns the final answer.
- Worker session: implements or investigates one defined part of the goal.
- Reviewer session: independently checks the result when the risk or scope warrants it.
One session may hold several roles on a small task. Keep ownership explicit on larger work.
Workflow
Understand
- Restate the concrete outcome and definition of done.
- Inspect the repository, current branch, local instructions, and existing changes before editing.
- Identify what is unknown and research only what affects the decision.
- Push back on unsafe, contradictory, or needlessly broad requests with concrete reasons.
Plan
- Break work into phases with clear file ownership and tests.
- Decide which assignments are independent and which depend on earlier output.
- Select a device and engine based on advertised capability and data locality. Do not route by guesswork.
- Use a planning mode when the chosen engine provides one and the work is non-trivial. Otherwise ask the worker for a written plan before implementation.
- Review the plan before authorizing broad writes. Correct scope drift before code is changed.
Build
- Give each worker a bounded assignment, the relevant context, and a measurable completion condition.
- Preserve user changes and avoid unrelated refactors.
- Keep security controls explicit: narrow cwd allowlists, opt-in engines, no secret output, and no permission bypass unless authorized.
- Poll a running turn instead of resending its prompt.
- Read the worker's actual result. A completion claim is not verification.
Verify
- Inspect the diff or resulting artifact directly.
- Run focused tests first, then the full relevant suite.
- Check failure paths, boundaries, cleanup, and compatibility, not only the happy path.
- Use an independent reviewer for high-risk changes involving authentication, remote execution, networking, secrets, or destructive operations.
- Fix findings and repeat verification until no required work remains.
Report
- Lead with the outcome.
- State what changed, what was verified, and what remains limited.
- Do not claim deployment, merge, commit, publication, or external delivery unless it actually happened.
- Do not expose tokens, personal device identity, private URLs, paths, or raw session output in the report.
Multi-device rules
- Call
list_devicesbefore choosing a remote target. - Preserve global names such as
studio:reviewexactly. - A disconnected device is a recoverable operational state, not evidence that its work failed or succeeded.
- Re-run selection only for new sessions. Existing global names remain pinned.
- Integrate cross-device work in one explicitly owned place.
Quality gate
The work is ready only when:
- the requested behavior exists;
- tests pass in proportion to risk;
- security and privacy boundaries still hold;
- documentation matches actual behavior;
- the diff contains no unexplained unrelated changes;
- the director can explain remaining limitations without relying on a worker's unsupported claim.