DemoSwarm
A reusable SDLC pack for Claude Code: investigate a problem, build and challenge
a coherent candidate, carry executed evidence into review, qualify deliberately,
and make a separate integration decision.
The goal is useful software with less rework and operator effort. Faster code
generation alone does not establish quality; neither do green panels or receipts
without meaningful tests and current source.
Start
/customize-pack
/flow-1-signal "Add a health check endpoint"
Continue through the relevant flows, or enter an existing issue/PR at its first
missing or stale judgment. Read CLAUDE.md for the operating contract
and late qualification for migration
status. The installed consumer's workflow and protection remain authoritative;
this instruction update does not silently change their triggers.
The flows
| Entry | Outcome |
|---|
| Signal | Investigated problem, intended behavior and falsifiers |
| Plan | Challenged design and bounded acceptance/rollback claim |
| Build | One coherent candidate, focused proof and quality improvements |
| Review | Substantive findings, verified repairs and current dispositions |
| Gate | Explicit independent qualification and its actual result |
| Deploy | Fresh final judgment, protected merge and landed reconciliation |
| Wisdom | Evidence-backed product and operating-method improvement |
These are recurring questions and useful entrypoints, not a mandatory sequence
of fresh agents. Keep useful writer and build context warm. Different readers,
tools and oracles can challenge the same candidate concurrently.
A Draft exposes source and evidence. Draft/Ready is not a qualification request.
Source review can complete while independent CI is still NotRun. An explicit
request binds the candidate, reviewed evidence and selected obligations; an old
label cannot authorize a successor. Qualification does not merge or release.
The historical Deploy command name remains for compatibility, but merge, tag,
public release and production deployment are different authorized operations.
Review surface
The PR description should help a reviewer locate the claim, actual source,
executed proof, material findings, limitations and next action. It is not a
substitute for inspecting load-bearing code, real consumers and plausible wrong
behavior. A clean first review does not suppress later substantive investigation.
Git owns versioned source and decisions. GitHub owns current issue/PR/review/check
and merge facts. .runs/<run-id>/ retains useful local evidence and helper
compatibility; it is not a second live-state authority. Summaries do not multiply
the number of independent observations.
Flow Studio is the related
flow visualization/harness project. Its implementation and distribution roles
remain separate; updating this pack does not activate or release that system.
Layout and validation
| Location | Content |
|---|
.claude/commands/ | Flow entrypoints |
.claude/agents/ | Optional focused workers and reviewers |
.claude/skills/ | Native helpers and task procedures |
.claude/rules/ | Loaded operating guidance |
docs/ | References, teaching material and historical rationale |
bash .claude/scripts/pack-check.sh --no-color
Use the actual repository's validation requirements. Instruction/source checks,
harness behavior, downstream adoption and installed-product proof are different
acceptances. Issue #22 retains the unfinished historical-guide, helper and
multi-harness migration; no complete downstream CI cutover is claimed here.
Created by Steven Zimmerman (@EffortlessSteven). Licensed under Apache-2.0.
