rlm-orchestrator — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited rlm-orchestrator (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Implement the orchestrator pattern from RLM research to handle arbitrarily large contexts and complex multi-part tasks. The main conversation acts as the recursive coordinator, spawning depth-1 subagents and aggregating results.
"No single language model call should require handling a huge context." — RLM Research (arXiv:2512.24601)
Since Claude Code subagents cannot spawn children (architectural limit), the main conversation becomes the "recursion stack," enabling functional depth >1.
Ideal for:
Not ideal for:
Main Session (orchestrator/recursion stack)
│
├─[DECOMPOSE]─ Analyze task, identify independent partitions
│
├─[SPAWN BATCH 1]──┬── Subagent A (fresh 200K context) → summary
│ ├── Subagent B (fresh 200K context) → summary
│ └── Subagent C (fresh 200K context) → summary
│
├─[AGGREGATE]─ Combine results, identify gaps
│
├─[SPAWN BATCH 2]──┬── Subagent D (uses batch 1 results) → summary
│ └── Subagent E (uses batch 1 results) → summary
│
├─[AGGREGATE]─ Final combination
│
└─[COMPLETE]─ Return unified resultBefore spawning any subagents, analyze the task:
For each batch of partitions:
references/subagent-prompt-template.md Task(subagent_type="general-purpose", description="[partition description]", prompt="...")
Task(subagent_type="Explore", description="[research partition]", prompt="...")Explore - For read-only research, file discoverygeneral-purpose - For tasks requiring code changesPlan - For architecture/design workrun_in_background=true for long-running tasksTaskOutput or Read on output fileWhen subagents complete:
If gaps exist:
Encode these strategies in subagent prompts:
Sample the beginning of context to understand structure before deep processing.
Before analyzing fully, first peek at the structure:
1. Read first 50 lines of each file
2. Identify file types and organization
3. Then proceed with targeted analysisUse pattern-based filtering to narrow context before semantic processing.
Use Grep to filter before reading:
1. Search for relevant patterns: `Grep(pattern="error|exception|fail")`
2. Read only matching files fully
3. This reduces context consumption by 80%+Break context into chunks, process in parallel, then aggregate.
This task uses partition+map strategy:
1. You handle partition [X] of [N]
2. Your partition covers: [specific scope]
3. Return findings in this format: [format spec]
4. Orchestrator will aggregate all partition resultsExtract condensed information for parent decision-making.
Return a structured summary, not raw data:
- Key findings (3-5 bullet points)
- Specific file:line references
- Confidence level (high/medium/low)
- Gaps or uncertaintiesTrack token consumption across the orchestration:
| Component | Estimated Tokens | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| Main conversation | 200K max | Reserve 50K for orchestration |
| Per subagent | 200K max | Fresh context each |
| Subagent overhead | ~20K | System prompt + tools |
| Summary return | ~2-5K | Per subagent result |
Budget formula:
Effective capacity = (Main 150K usable) + (N subagents × 180K usable each)
For 5 subagents: 150K + 900K = ~1M effective tokensThis skill works with:
# Task: Analyze security vulnerabilities across 500 files
## Phase 1: Decomposition
- Partition by directory: src/, lib/, tests/, config/
- Each partition: ~125 files, ~50K tokens
- Aggregation: Union of findings with deduplication
## Phase 2: Dispatch (Batch 1)
- Subagent A: src/ directory - authentication code
- Subagent B: lib/ directory - utility functions
- Subagent C: config/ directory - configuration files
- Subagent D: tests/ directory - test coverage gaps
## Phase 3: Aggregate
- Combine all vulnerability findings
- Cross-reference duplicates
- Prioritize by severity
## Phase 4: Follow-up (if needed)
- Deep dive on critical findings
- Verify false positivesSubagent returns incomplete results:
Aggregation produces conflicts:
Context still rotting in main session:
Hitting concurrent subagent limit:
For any large task, start with:
I'll use RLM orchestration for this task.
**Task Analysis:**
- Total scope: [X files / Y sources / Z components]
- Estimated tokens: [rough estimate]
- Natural partitions: [list 3-7 independent parts]
**Orchestration Plan:**
1. Batch 1: [partitions A, B, C] - parallel Explore subagents
2. Aggregate: [strategy]
3. Batch 2 (if needed): [follow-up partitions]
**Subagent assignments:**
- Subagent A: [specific scope and instructions]
- Subagent B: [specific scope and instructions]
...
Proceeding with Phase 1...~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.