recipe-design-b114e4 — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited recipe-design-b114e4 (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.
Execute Skill: llm-friendly-context before writing Agent prompts, handoffs, or generated artifacts.
Context: Dedicated to the design phase.
Core Identity: "I am an orchestrator." (see subagents-orchestration-guide skill)
Execution Protocol:
subagents-orchestration-guide usage: Reference the guide only for orchestration principles (Delegation Boundary, Decision precedence, permitted tools), the Scale Determination table, and handoff contracts HC-02 onward. This recipe defines its own start order and subagent prompts. The guide's requirement-analyzer-origin flow, First Action Rule, HC-01, and Call Examples do not apply to this recipe.
CRITICAL: Execute document-reviewer, design-sync (for Design Docs), and all stopping points — each serves as a quality gate. Skipping any step risks undetected inconsistencies.
Requirements → scope bootstrap → codebase-analyzer → [Stop: Scope confirmation]
↓
technical-designer
↓
code-verifier → document-reviewer
↓
design-sync → [Stop: Design approval]Included in this skill:
Responsibility Boundary: This skill completes with design document (ADR/Design Doc) approval. Work planning and beyond are outside scope.
Requirements: $ARGUMENTS
codebase-analyzer requires a populated requirement_analysis.affectedFiles. Build that seed with a lightweight, orchestrator-local pass — locating files only, with no deep reading and no design decisions:
rg, or grep when rg is unavailable) for files matching those keywords.affectedFiles.affectedFiles before invoking codebase-analyzer. If the user confirms no related code exists, report that codebase-grounded design does not apply and confirm with the user how to proceed.affectedFiles before invoking codebase-analyzer.This step locates seed files only. Reading files in full, tracing dependencies, and analysis remain codebase-analyzer's responsibility.
Invoke codebase-analyzer with its existing schema. The orchestrator constructs requirement_analysis from the Step 1 seed.
subagent_type: "dev-workflows:codebase-analyzer", description: "Codebase analysis"prompt: includerequirements: the user requirements verbatimrequirement_analysis: a JSON object with all four fields — affectedFiles (Step 1 seed), purpose (the user requirements), scale (provisional value from the Scale Determination table applied to the seed file count), technicalConsiderations ({ constraints: [], risks: [], dependencies: [] } — the bootstrap performs no analysis, so the object is present with empty lists)After codebase-analyzer returns, confirm the design scope with the user before any design work. This is a recipe-local confirmation step. Use AskUserQuestion.
Present, sourced from the codebase-analyzer JSON:
analysisScope.filesAnalyzed and the modules they belong toanalysisScope.categoriesDetected and focusAreaslimitations plus any assumptions codebase-analyzer recordedAsk the user to choose one:
After the user confirms the scope, count the confirmed target files and set the scale from the subagents-orchestration-guide Scale Determination table. This confirmed scale supersedes the Step 2 provisional value and determines the design document.
[STOP]: Wait for the user's choice before proceeding.
Pass the full codebase-analyzer JSON to technical-designer (handoff contract HC-02). technical-designer presents at least two design alternatives with trade-offs for each.
subagent_type: "dev-workflows:technical-designer", description: "Design Doc creation", prompt: "Create Design Doc based on the requirements. Requirements: [user requirements verbatim]. Codebase analysis: [codebase-analyzer JSON from Step 2]. Confirmed scope: [Step 3 confirmed scope]. Apply the code: prefix to codebase-analyzer fact_ids when filling the Fact Disposition Table. Present at least two architecture alternatives with trade-offs."subagent_type: "dev-workflows:technical-designer", description: "ADR creation", prompt: "Create ADR for [technical decision]. Requirements: [user requirements verbatim]. Codebase analysis: [codebase-analyzer JSON from Step 2]. Confirmed scope: [Step 3 confirmed scope]. Present at least two alternatives with trade-offs."subagent_type: "dev-workflows:code-verifier", description: "Design Doc verification", prompt: "doc_type: design-doc document_path: [Design Doc path] Verify Design Doc against existing code."subagent_type: "dev-workflows:document-reviewer", description: "Document review", prompt: "Review [document path] for consistency and completeness. codebase_analysis: [codebase-analyzer JSON from Step 2]. code_verification: [code-verifier output from this step] (Design Doc only)"subagent_type: "dev-workflows:design-sync", description: "Design consistency check", prompt: "Check consistency across all Design Docs in docs/design/. Report conflicts and overlaps."[STOP]: Present the design document, plus design-sync results for a Design Doc, and obtain user approval.
requirement_analysisDesign phase completed.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.