feature-development skill
Runs a structured, policy-compliant feature development planning flow with multi-phase reviews.
- GitHub stars
- 13
- Files
- 1
- Last commit
- Feb 7, 2026
- License
- MIT
- Allowed tools
- —
What does the feature-development skill do?
feature-development runs a structured, policy-compliant feature development planning flow with multi-phase reviews.
Summary generated from the skill's SKILL.md.
About the feature-development skill
Planning complex software features through a structured, policy-compliant workflow is what this skill enables for engineering teams. It focuses exclusively on the preparation and review phases of development, producing a detailed markdown artifact in the cook directory rather than writing any source code. This ensures that every proposed change undergoes rigorous scrutiny before a single line of implementation begins.
Users can choose between two distinct modes: well-done for full governance and microwave for low-risk, speed-optimized changes. The well-done mode requires comprehensive reviews across product, UX, architecture, QA, and security domains. In contrast, microwave mode skips certain phases but is automatically blocked for sensitive topics like authentication, database migrations, or payment systems. The skill includes interactive management tools to validate, compare, or view the status of existing planning artifacts.
What an agent can do with it
- 1Plan a high-stakes featureGenerate a comprehensive development plan that includes security reviews and architectural trade-offs for a new system component.
- 2Preview a development planVerify the cooking plan and required chef configurations without actually creating any new files.
- 3Manage existing feature plansUse an interactive menu to compare different feature artifacts or check their current approval status.
- 4Execute rapid low-risk updatesPerform a streamlined planning process for minor changes that do not affect security or data schemas.
Written from the skill's SKILL.md. Every use case is checked against a quote from it.
How to install the feature-development skill
Each command copies the skill folder into the client's skills directory. Restart the client or start a new session to load it.Install the feature-development skill in Plugin
/plugin marketplace add PJuniszewski/cook /plugin install juni@juni-skills
Install the feature-development skill in Claude Code
~/.claude/skills/feature-development/SKILL.md
$ npx degit PJuniszewski/cook/skills/feature-development ~/.claude/skills/feature-developmentInstall the feature-development skill in Claude Code (project)
.claude/skills/feature-development/SKILL.md
$ npx degit PJuniszewski/cook/skills/feature-development .claude/skills/feature-developmentInstall the feature-development skill in Codex
~/.agents/skills/feature-development/SKILL.md
$ npx degit PJuniszewski/cook/skills/feature-development ~/.agents/skills/feature-developmentInstall the feature-development skill in Gemini CLI
~/.gemini/skills/feature-development/SKILL.md
$ npx degit PJuniszewski/cook/skills/feature-development ~/.gemini/skills/feature-developmentInstall the feature-development skill in Claude.ai
npx degit PJuniszewski/cook/skills/feature-development feature-development && zip -r feature-development.zip feature-development # claude.ai → Customize → Skills → + → Create skill → Upload a skill → feature-development.zip
SKILL.md
View on GitHubfeature-development skill
⛔ CRITICAL: PLANNING ONLY - NO CODE
/cook produces ONLY an artifact file. Do NOT implement any code.
- ❌ NO adding/modifying source files
- ❌ NO creating classes, functions, or components
- ❌ NO running implementation tests
- ❌ NO writing actual code beyond file path references
- ❌ NO "Implementation" step in todo list
- ✅ ONLY produce the artifact file (
cook/*.cook.md)
After cooking is complete, user will separately request implementation.
Correct todo list for /cook:
- Create artifact file (FIRST!)
- Product review - scope & acceptance criteria
- UX review - interaction design
- Architecture review - technical approach
- Security review - risk assessment
- QA review - test plan
- Finalize artifact
WRONG - do NOT include:
- ❌ Implementation
- ❌ Write code
- ❌ Any coding step
⚡ IMMEDIATE FIRST ACTION - EXECUTE NOW
Your VERY FIRST tool call MUST be Write to create the artifact file.
Execute this Write call IMMEDIATELY:
Write(
file_path="cook/<feature-slug>.<YYYY-MM-DD>.cook.md",
content="<full skeleton below>"
)
BLOCKED ACTIONS until artifact exists:
- ❌ Read (any file)
- ❌ Glob/Grep (any search)
- ❌ Task/Explore (any agent)
- ❌ Bash (any command)
ONLY ALLOWED first action: Write artifact file.
A PreToolUse hook will BLOCK other tools until artifact exists.
# Cooking Result
## Dish
<1-2 sentence description of what we're building>
## Status
raw
## Cooking Mode
well-done
## Current Phase
Step 0.0 - Artifact Created
## Ownership
- Decision Owner: _TBD_
- Reviewers: _TBD_
- Approved by: _TBD_
---
# Phase 0 - Project Policy & Context
## Sources Scanned
| File | Status | Key Rules |
|------|--------|-----------|
| CLAUDE.md | _Pending_ | |
| README.md | _Pending_ | |
| .claude/agents/*.md | _Pending_ | |
## Hard Rules (must not be violated)
_Pending..._
## Preferred Patterns
_Pending..._
## Detected Conflicts
_Pending..._
## Policy Alignment Risk
_Pending..._
---
# Step 1 - Read the Order
## Feature Summary
_Pending..._
## Affected Modules/Components
| Module | Impact | Risk Level |
|--------|--------|------------|
| | | |
## Dependencies
_Pending..._
## Microwave Blocker Check
_Pending..._
---
# Step 2 - Ingredient Approval (Product Review)
## Product Decision
_Pending: Approved / Rejected / Deferred_
## Scope
### In Scope
- _Pending..._
### Out of Scope
- _Pending..._
### Non-goals
- _Pending..._
## User Value
_Pending..._
## Assumptions
- _Pending..._
---
# Step 3 - Presentation Planning (UX Review)
## UX Decision
_Pending: Required / Not Required_
## User Flow
_Pending..._
## UI Components Affected
| Component | Change Type | Notes |
|-----------|-------------|-------|
| | | |
## Accessibility Considerations
_Pending..._
---
# Step 4 - Implementation Plan
## Architecture Decision
### Selected Approach
_Pending..._
### Alternatives Considered
| Option | Pros | Cons | Decision |
|--------|------|------|----------|
| Option A | | | Rejected: _reason_ |
| Option B | | | **Selected**: _reason_ |
### Trade-offs
- Sacrificing: _what we give up_
- Gaining: _what we get_
## Patch Plan
### Files to Modify
| File | Change | Risk |
|------|--------|------|
| | | |
### Commit Sequence
1. _commit message_
2. _commit message_
### High-risk Areas
- _area needing extra attention_
---
# Step 5 - QA Review
## Test Plan
### Test Cases
| # | Scenario | Given | When | Then |
|---|----------|-------|------|------|
| 1 | Happy path | | | |
| 2 | Edge case | | | |
| 3 | Error case | | | |
### Edge Cases
- _edge case 1_
- _edge case 2_
### Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] Given _context_, when _action_, then _result_
- [ ] Given _context_, when _action_, then _result_
### Regression Checks
- _existing feature to verify_
---
# Step 6 - Security Review
## Security Status
- Reviewed: _yes/no_
- Risk level: _low/medium/high_
## Security Checklist
| Check | Status | Notes |
|-------|--------|-------|
| Input validation | _Pending_ | |
| Auth/authz | _Pending_ | |
| Data exposure | _Pending_ | |
| Injection vectors | _Pending_ | |
## Issues Found
_Pending..._
---
# Step 7 - Documentation
## Documentation Updates
| File | Change Needed |
|------|---------------|
| | |
## New Documentation Needed
_Pending..._
---
# Risk Management
## Pre-mortem (3 scenarios required)
| # | What Could Go Wrong | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation |
|---|---------------------|------------|--------|------------|
| 1 | | | | |
| 2 | | | | |
| 3 | | | | |
## Rollback Plan
1. _step 1_
2. _step 2_
## Blast Radius
- Affected users/modules: _list_
- Feature flag: _yes/no (name)_
- Rollout strategy: _immediate/gradual/canary_
---
# Decision Log
| Date | Phase | Decision | Rationale |
|------|-------|----------|-----------|
| <today> | Step 0.0 | Artifact created | Starting cook flow |
DO NOT:
- Read CLAUDE.md first
- Explore codebase first
- Run any searches first
- Use Task/Explore agents first
FIRST action = Create artifact file. No exceptions.
Purpose
Cook features through a structured, multi-phase development flow.
The goal is not speed, but correctness, safety, and product discipline. Every dish must be properly prepared before serving.
Inputs
-
feature_description (string, required) Plain-language description of the feature or change (the order).
-
instruction_file (string, optional) Related specification or requirements file (the recipe).
-
mode (enum: well-done | microwave, default: well-done) Determines cooking thoroughness and review phases.
-
dry-run (boolean, default: false) Preview mode - shows what would happen without executing.
-
validate (string, optional) Path to existing artifact to validate without re-cooking. Example:
/cook --validate cook/feature.cook.md -
no-validate (boolean, default: false) Skip auto-validation after artifact generation.
-
interactive (boolean, default: false) Launch interactive menu for artifact management. Example:
/cook --interactive
Interactive Mode
Use --interactive to launch the artifact management menu:
/cook --interactive
What Interactive Mode Does
- Scans for artifacts in
cook/*.cook.md - Presents a picker with available artifacts
- Shows action menu:
- Validate artifact
- Compare artifacts (diff)
- View status summary
- Executes selected action
Interactive Flow
/cook --interactive
|
v
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Select artifact: │
│ > dry-run-validation.2026-01-10 │
│ user-auth.2026-01-09 │
│ payment-flow.2026-01-08 │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
|
v
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Select action: │
│ > Validate │
│ Compare with another artifact │
│ View status summary │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
|
v
[Executes selected action]
Actions Available
| Action | Description | Command Equivalent |
|---|---|---|
| Validate | Run validation checks | cook-validate <file> |
| Compare | Diff two artifacts | cook-diff <a> <b> |
| Status | Show artifact summary | Quick view of status, mode, owner |
Dry-Run Mode
Use --dry-run to preview the cooking process without producing artifacts.
/cook <feature> --dry-run
What dry-run does
-
Checks prerequisites
- Is CLAUDE.md present?
- Are project-specific chefs configured?
- Which system chefs will be used as fallback?
-
Shows cooking plan
- Lists all phases that would execute
- Shows which chefs will be consulted
- Identifies microwave blockers (if applicable)
-
Validates inputs
- Parses feature description
- Checks for instruction file (if specified)
- Identifies potential issues early
Dry-run output
# Dry-Run: /cook preview
## Feature
<parsed feature description>
## Mode
well-done | microwave
## Prerequisites Check
- CLAUDE.md: found | NOT FOUND (will use defaults)
- Project chefs: <list> | none (will use system chefs)
- System chefs available: <list>
## Cooking Plan
1. Phase 0 - Project Policy & Context
- Chef: <project or system>
2. Step 1 - Read the Order
3. Step 2 - Ingredient Approval (well-done only)
- Chef: product_chef
4. Step 3 - Presentation Planning (if UI changes)
- Chef: ux_chef
5. Step 4 - Cooking
- Chef: engineer_chef, architect_chef
6. Step 5 - Taste Testing
- Chef: qa_chef
7. Step 6 - Safety Inspection
- Chef: security_chef
8. Step 7 - Recipe Notes (if needed)
- Chef: docs_chef
## Microwave Blockers (if --microwave)
- <blocker topics detected> | none
## Potential Issues
- <early warnings> | none detected
## Ready to Cook
yes | no (reason: <why>)
When to use dry-run
- First time using
/cookon a project - Verifying chef configuration
- Checking if microwave mode is allowed
- Understanding what phases will run
Cooking Modes
well-done (default)
Full governance cooking. No shortcuts, no raw ingredients.
Cooking phases:
- Product scope check (ingredient approval)
- UX/Design review (presentation planning)
- Implementation (cooking)
- QA review (taste testing)
- Security review (safety inspection)
- Documentation (recipe notes)
Blocking allowed: YES
microwave
Speed-optimized cooking for low-risk changes.
Cooking phases:
- Implementation (quick heat)
- QA review (light taste test)
- Security review (only if API/auth touched)
Blocking allowed: YES (security only)
Rules:
- No scope expansion (no adding ingredients)
- No architecture changes (no changing the recipe)
- Should be followed by well-done cooking for verification
Cooking Statuses
Every feature progresses through these stages:
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
raw |
Feature requested, not yet evaluated |
cooking |
/cook in progress, review phases running |
blocked |
Specific blocker identified (requires owner + next step) |
needs-more-cooking |
Rejected, incomplete, or killed (+ reason field) |
well-done |
Approved and ready to implement |
ready-for-merge |
Post QA/Security, ready for merge |
plated |
Shipped to production |
Note: killed is NOT a separate status. Use needs-more-cooking with reason: killed - <why>
Microwave Blockers
Microwave mode is BLOCKED for these topics. Use --well-done instead:
- auth / permissions / crypto / network security - any authentication, authorization, encryption, or security-related changes
- schema / migrations / storage - database schema changes, migrations, storage layer modifications
- public API contracts - any changes to public-facing API signatures or behavior
- UI flow changes - even small changes to user flows or navigation
- payments / purchase / paywall - anything touching billing, payments, or monetization
If microwave mode is requested for a blocked topic, automatically escalate to well-done.
Definition of Done
Well-Done Mode Requirements
Reference: ~/.claude/templates/well-done-checklist.md
MUST include:
- Scope definition (in/out)
- Risks + mitigations (min 3)
- Test plan (min 3 test cases)
- Security checklist (all items addressed)
- Rollout/rollback plan
- Pre-mortem (3 failure scenarios)
- Trade-offs documented
- Ownership assigned
Microwave Mode Requirements
Reference: ~/.claude/templates/microwave-checklist.md
MUST include:
- Problem statement + reproduction steps
- Minimal fix plan
- Tests (1-2)
- "Why safe" (1 sentence)
- Pre-mortem (1 failure scenario)
Stop Rules (Kill Switch)
In Step 2 (Ingredient Approval), automatically set status to needs-more-cooking with reason: killed if:
- No measurable effect - feature has no clear, testable outcome
- Risk > value - implementation risk outweighs user benefit
- No owner (well-done mode) - no one assigned as Decision Owner
- No testable AC - acceptance criteria cannot be verified
When killed, document the specific reason and stop processing.
MANDATORY FIRST STEP: Create Artifact File
BEFORE ANY OTHER ACTION, you MUST create the artifact file with skeleton structure.
Why Artifact-First?
- Progress visibility - User can see cooking progress in real-time
- Interrupt safety - Partial results are preserved if execution stops
- Phase enforcement - Each phase MUST write to artifact before proceeding
- State machine - Artifact tracks which phases are complete
Step 0.0 - Create Artifact Skeleton (REQUIRED)
DO THIS IMMEDIATELY UPON /cook INVOCATION:
-
Generate artifact filename:
cook/<slug>.<YYYY-MM-DD>.cook.md<slug>= kebab-case of feature description (max 40 chars)<YYYY-MM-DD>= today's date
-
Create file with this skeleton:
# Cooking Result
## Dish
<feature description>
## Status
raw
## Cooking Mode
<well-done | microwave>
## Current Phase
Phase 0 - Starting...
---
## Phase 0 - Project Policy & Context
_Pending..._
## Step 1 - Read the Order
_Pending..._
## Step 2 - Ingredient Approval
_Pending..._
## Step 3 - Presentation Planning
_Pending..._
## Step 4 - Cooking
_Pending..._
## Step 5 - Taste Testing (QA)
_Pending..._
## Step 6 - Safety Inspection (Security)
_Pending..._
## Step 7 - Recipe Notes
_Pending..._
---
## Decision Log
| Date | Phase | Decision | Rationale |
|------|-------|----------|-----------|
- CONFIRM artifact file exists before proceeding
CRITICAL: Do NOT proceed to Phase 0 until artifact file is created and confirmed.
Cooking Steps
Phase 0 - Project Policy & Context (REQUIRED)
This phase runs BEFORE scope, UX, or implementation planning. No code, no design, no solutions are allowed in this phase. Project rules override user intent.
Step 0.1 - Discover Project Context Files
Search for and read the following files (do not fail if missing):
Priority order:
CLAUDE.md- project rules and constraintsPOLICY.md- explicit policiesENGINEERING.md- engineering standardsREADME.md- project overviewdocs/**/*.md- architecture, ADRs, decisions.claude/agents/*.md- project-specific chefs
Chef Resolution Order:
- Project-specific chefs in
<project>/.claude/agents/ - System-wide chefs in
~/.claude/agents/
System-Wide Chefs Available:
engineer.md- Head chef (implementation)product.md- Menu curator (scope decisions)designer.md- Presentation specialist (UX/flow)security.md- Health inspector (security audit)qa.md- Taste tester (quality assurance)architect.md- Kitchen designer (architecture)docs.md- Recipe writer (documentation)
Step 0.2 - Extract and Normalize Rules
From discovered files, extract and classify rules into:
A) Hard rules (MUST / MUST NOT)
- Non-negotiable constraints
- Security, architecture, legal, platform limitations
- Explicit "do not" statements
B) Preferred patterns
- Recommended libraries, architectures, conventions
- Style or process preferences
- Defaults the project expects
C) Explicit non-goals / forbidden approaches
- Deprecated patterns
- Known bad ideas
- Things intentionally avoided
D) Implicit assumptions (derived)
- Assumptions inferred due to missing or unclear documentation
- MUST be clearly marked as assumptions
Step 0.3 - Detect Conflicts
If user request conflicts with extracted rules:
- Do NOT resolve it yet
- Do NOT propose alternatives
- Record the conflict clearly
Step 0.4 - Risk Classification
Based on documentation completeness, classify alignment risk:
- LOW - clear policies found
- MEDIUM - partial policies
- HIGH - no meaningful policies found
Step 0.5 - Output Format (MANDATORY)
Produce this section in the cook artifact:
## Phase 0 - Project Policy & Context
### Sources scanned
- <file or "not found">
### Hard rules (must not be violated)
- <rule>
### Preferred patterns
- <pattern>
### Explicit non-goals / forbidden approaches
- <non-goal>
### Assumptions due to missing documentation
- <assumption>
### Detected conflicts with request
- None OR <conflict description>
### Policy alignment risk
- LOW | MEDIUM | HIGH
Step 0.6 - Blocking Rule
If ANY of these conditions are true:
- A hard rule directly blocks the requested feature
- Alignment risk is HIGH
Then:
- Set status:
needs-more-cooking - Document the blocking reason
- STOP - do not proceed to Step 1
The issue must be acknowledged before continuing.
This Phase 0 output informs ALL subsequent cooking steps.
GATE: Write Phase 0 to Artifact
STOP. Before proceeding to Step 1, you MUST:
- Update artifact file - replace
_Pending..._under## Phase 0with actual output - Update
## Current PhasetoPhase 0 - Complete - Update
## Statustocooking - Add entry to Decision Log
DO NOT proceed until artifact is updated.
Step 1 - Read the Order
- Restate feature in concrete terms (what dish are we making?)
- Identify affected modules/components (which stations are involved?)
- Identify risks and dependencies (allergens, timing)
- Note any project-specific constraints from Step 0
- Check Microwave Blockers: If microwave mode requested but touches blocked topics -> escalate to well-done
Status: raw -> cooking
GATE: Write Step 1 to Artifact
STOP. Before proceeding to Step 2, you MUST:
- Update artifact file - replace
_Pending..._under## Step 1with actual output - Update
## Current PhasetoStep 1 - Complete - Add entry to Decision Log
DO NOT proceed until artifact is updated.
Step 2 - Ingredient Approval (well-done only)
- Is this in scope for the project? (Is it on our menu?)
- Does it add user value? (Will customers order it?)
- Decision: Approve / Reject / Defer
If rejected -> Status: needs-more-cooking. STOP.
GATE: Write Step 2 to Artifact
STOP. Before proceeding to Step 3, you MUST:
- Update artifact file - replace
_Pending..._under## Step 2with actual output (or_Skipped (microwave mode)_) - Update
## Current PhasetoStep 2 - Complete - Add Product Decision to artifact header section
- Add entry to Decision Log
DO NOT proceed until artifact is updated.
Step 3 - Presentation Planning (conditional)
Triggered if:
- New UI components (new plating style)
- Changed user flow (changed service sequence)
- Risk of user confusion (unfamiliar dish)
Output:
- Flow description
- UX considerations
GATE: Write Step 3 to Artifact
STOP. Before proceeding to Step 4, you MUST:
- Update artifact file - replace
_Pending..._under## Step 3with actual output (or_Skipped (no UI changes)_) - Update
## Current PhasetoStep 3 - Complete - Add entry to Decision Log
DO NOT proceed until artifact is updated.
Step 4 - Implementation Plan (NO CODE YET)
- Implement only approved scope (follow the recipe)
- Respect existing patterns and architecture (house style)
- Follow project tech stack and conventions (use the right tools)
- Reference all changed files (ingredient list)
GATE: Write Step 4 to Artifact
STOP. Before proceeding to Step 5, you MUST:
- Update artifact file - replace
_Pending..._under## Step 4with Patch Plan - Update
## Current PhasetoStep 4 - Complete - Add Trade-offs section to artifact
- Add entry to Decision Log
DO NOT proceed until artifact is updated.
Step 5 - Taste Testing (QA)
- Validate acceptance criteria (does it taste right?)
- Identify edge cases (unusual orders)
- Flag potential regressions (did we break another dish?)
- Verify tests exist or are added (documented tasting notes)
Blockers must be resolved before proceeding.
If blocked -> Status: needs-more-cooking
GATE: Write Step 5 to Artifact
STOP. Before proceeding to Step 6, you MUST:
- Update artifact file - replace
_Pending..._under## Step 5with QA Status - Update
## Current PhasetoStep 5 - Complete - Add Pre-mortem section to artifact (min 3 scenarios for well-done, 1 for microwave)
- Add entry to Decision Log
DO NOT proceed until artifact is updated.
Step 6 - Safety Inspection (Security)
- Input validation (ingredient safety)
- Authentication/authorization (who can order this?)
- Data exposure risks (customer privacy)
- Injection vulnerabilities (contamination)
Security blockers override everything.
If blocked -> Status: needs-more-cooking
GATE: Write Step 6 to Artifact
STOP. Before proceeding to Step 7, you MUST:
- Update artifact file - replace
_Pending..._under## Step 6with Security Status - Update
## Current PhasetoStep 6 - Complete - Add Blast Radius & Rollout section to artifact
- Add entry to Decision Log
DO NOT proceed until artifact is updated.
Step 7 - Recipe Notes (conditional)
Triggered if:
- Assumptions were made
- Behavior changed
- New concepts introduced
GATE: Write Step 7 to Artifact (FINAL)
STOP. Before marking cooking complete, you MUST:
- Update artifact file - replace
_Pending..._under## Step 7with docs updates (or_Skipped (no docs needed)_) - Update
## Current PhasetoCooking Complete - Update
## Statustowell-doneorready-for-merge - Add Ownership section to artifact header
- Add Assumptions & Notes section
- Add Next Actions section
- Add final entry to Decision Log
Artifact is now complete. Proceed to validation.
Phase Rollback Rules
Cooking is NOT strictly linear. These rollback rules apply:
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| ROLLBACK FLOW |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| Step 2 (Scope) <-------------------------------------+ |
| | | |
| v | |
| Step 3 (UX) <------------------------------------+ | |
| | | | |
| v | | |
| Step 4 (Implementation) <--------------------+ | | |
| | | | | |
| v | | | |
| Step 5 (QA) --------- blocker ------------->| | | |
| | | | |
| v | | |
| Step 6 (Security) -- blocker ------------------>| | |
| | | | |
| | +-- scope change -------->+ |
| v |
| Step 7 (Docs) |
| |
+--------------------------------------------------------------+
Rollback Triggers:
| From | To | Trigger |
|---|---|---|
| Step 5 (QA) | Step 4 (Implementation) | Test failure, missing edge case |
| Step 5 (QA) | Step 2 (Scope) | Scope creep discovered |
| Step 6 (Security) | Step 4 (Implementation) | Security vulnerability found |
| Step 6 (Security) | Step 2 (Scope) | Fundamental design flaw |
| Step 3 (UX) | Step 2 (Scope) | UX requirements change scope |
When rollback occurs:
- Document the reason in Decision Log
- Update status to
blockedwith owner and next step - Re-execute from the rollback target step
Output Format (MANDATORY)
Two formats exist based on cooking mode. Use the appropriate one.
Files in this skill
1feature-development skill questions
How do I install the feature-development skill in Claude Code?
Run npx degit PJuniszewski/cook/skills/feature-development ~/.claude/skills/feature-development. Claude Code loads skills from ~/.claude/skills (all projects) or .claude/skills (one project) and uses a skill when its description matches the task.
Which clients can use the feature-development skill?
Any client that reads the Agent Skills format: Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI and claude.ai (upload as a ZIP). Scripts in the skill run only where the client allows code execution.
Does this skill write actual code?
No, the skill is strictly for planning and produces only an artifact file. Implementation must be requested separately.
When is microwave mode blocked?
Microwave mode is blocked for high-risk topics like authentication, database schema changes, public APIs, UI flows, and payments.
How can I preview the development process without creating files?
You can use the --dry-run flag to see the cooking plan, prerequisites check, and potential issues.