name: generate description: >- Phase 2 of the prd-taskmaster pipeline: spec generation and task parsing. Loads a template (comprehensive|minimal), fills it with DISCOVER-phase constraints and answers, validates the spec (placeholders_found, grade thresholds), parses the PRD into tasks via task-master, runs TaskMaster's native complexity analysis, and expands every task into verifiable subtasks. Autonomous-safe. Declares GENERATE complete so HANDOFF can follow. user-invocable: false allowed-tools: - Read - Write - Edit - Bash - Skill - ToolSearch - mcp__atlas-engine - mcp__plugin_prd_go - mcp__plugin_prd-taskmaster_go - mcp__plugin_atlas-go_go
Phase 2: Generate
Declarative phase skill. Invoked by the prd-taskmaster orchestrator when
current_phase is GENERATE. Never called directly by a user.
The one rule: generate the spec, validate it catches placeholders, parse it into tasks, expand every task into subtasks. Quality over speed.
Entry gate
Call
mcp__plugin_prd_go__check_gate(phase="GENERATE", evidence={})for diagnostics.check_gateis an EXIT gate: it checkstask_count > 0,subtask_coverage >= 1.0, andvalidation_grade in (EXCELLENT, GOOD)— all of which are GENERATE's OWN OUTPUTS, i.e. evidence to advance, not preconditions to enter. On first entry none exist yet, so agate_passed: falsehere is EXPECTED — the state machine's legal transitions already guarantee only legal entry.- First entry (no evidence yet): note the result and continue with the Procedure.
- Re-entry: if the gate reports violations, report them and stop — it protects against re-running a completed phase or skipping ahead from DISCOVER.
Read the DISCOVER output (discovery summary +
CONSTRAINTS CAPTUREDblock- scale classification). If any of these are missing, report and stop — the gate should have caught this, but belt-and-braces.
Generate checklist
Copy into your response before running the procedure:
GENERATE CHECKLIST:
- [ ] Template loaded (comprehensive|minimal)
- [ ] Spec written with discovery answers (no bare placeholders remaining)
- [ ] CONSTRAINT CHECK: every DISCOVER constraint appears in the spec
- [ ] SCOPE CHECK: task count matches scale (Solo 8-12, Team 12-20, Enterprise 20-30)
- [ ] Validation score: ___ / ___ (grade: ___)
- [ ] placeholders_found: ___ (bare placeholders = 0 required)
- [ ] Warnings addressed or acknowledged
- [ ] Tasks parsed: ___ tasks created
- [ ] Complexity analyzed via TaskMaster: Y/N
- [ ] All tasks expanded into subtasks: Y/N
Step 1: Choose and load template
Decide based on discovery depth:
- Comprehensive: 4+ detailed answers, complex project, Team / Enterprise scale
- Minimal: thin answers, user wants speed, Solo scale
MCP (preferred): mcp__plugin_prd_go__load_template(type="comprehensive")
CLI fallback: python3 script.py load-template --type comprehensive
The template is the canonical shape — do not invent your own. If the template load fails, report and stop. Do not paper over with a home-rolled skeleton.
Step 2: Generate spec at .taskmaster/docs/prd.md
Fill the template with discovery answers. AI judgment required:
- Replace ALL placeholders with actual content pulled from DISCOVER.
- Expand with project-specific details — do not leave template prose verbatim.
- Add technical depth proportional to what the user provided in discovery.
- Generate domain-appropriate sections (pentest = threat model, app = user stories, business = success metrics, learning = assessment criteria).
- Document assumptions where discovery was thin — explicitly, not silently.
CONSTRAINT CHECK (MANDATORY)
Verify EVERY constraint from the DISCOVER phase CONSTRAINTS CAPTURED block
appears in the spec. If "must use Python" was a constraint, the spec MUST
reference Python. Missing constraints = spec bug.
Emit the check explicitly:
CONSTRAINT CHECK:
- Tech stack (Python): FOUND in spec section "Technical Stack"
- Timeline (MVP in 2 weeks): FOUND in spec section "Milestones"
- ...
Every constraint must be marked FOUND. If any are MISSING, loop back and fix the spec before proceeding.
SCOPE CHECK (MANDATORY)
Use the scale classification from DISCOVER to set task count range:
| Scale | Task Count | Subtask Depth |
|---|---|---|
| Solo | 8–12 | 2–3 subtasks each |
| Team | 12–20 | 3–5 subtasks each |
| Enterprise | 20–30 | 5–8 subtasks each |
If DISCOVER classified the project as Team but the spec implies 30 tasks, that's a scope bug — narrow the spec or re-classify explicitly.
Domain-neutral vocabulary
When the domain is unclear, default to neutral terms:
| Software term | Neutral equivalent | When to use neutral |
|---|---|---|
| tests | verification criteria | pentest, business, learning |
| code | deliverable | business, learning |
| deploy | execute / deliver | business, learning |
| repo | workspace | non-software |
| PR | output / submission | non-software |
If the domain IS software, use software terms. Neutral terms are for non-software goals.
Deferred decisions — the reason: convention
Every [placeholder], {{variable}}, [TBD], [TODO] must be either:
(a) Replaced with real content,
(b) Removed entirely, or
(c) Paired with a reason: explanation on the same line or the next line
documenting why the decision is deferred.
Per the v4 spec: placeholders with reason: attribution are allowed and
surfaced in the validation output as deferred_decisions. A bare placeholder
is a validation failure; an attributed one is a known deferred decision with
accountability.
Examples:
# BAD — bare placeholder, fails validation:
Target latency: {{TBD}}
# GOOD — attributed, appears in deferred_decisions:
Target latency: {{TBD}} reason: awaiting load-test results scheduled 2026-04-20
Write the final spec to .taskmaster/docs/prd.md. This is the canonical
path — downstream tools read from here.
Step 3: Validate spec quality
MCP (preferred): mcp__plugin_prd_go__validate_prd(input_path=".taskmaster/docs/prd.md")
CLI fallback: python3 script.py validate-prd --input .taskmaster/docs/prd.md
Returns: score, grade, checks, warnings, placeholders_found. The
validate call persists its result, so render the GENERATE scorecard and print
it: MCP render_status(phase="GENERATE") → print rendered; CLI
python3 script.py status --phase GENERATE.
Optional AI-augmented review (opt-in): pass --ai (CLI) or ai=True (MCP)
to additionally invoke TaskMaster's configured main model for a holistic
quality review. The deterministic regex checks always run first — AI review
is additive, never a replacement.
Grading thresholds:
- EXCELLENT: 91%+
- GOOD: 83–90%
- ACCEPTABLE: 75–82%
- NEEDS_WORK: <75%
Decision rules:
- If
placeholders_found > 0(bare placeholders, notreason:-attributed): fix before proceeding. No exceptions. - If grade is NEEDS_WORK: offer auto-fix or proceed-with-risk — do not silently advance. Surface the decision.
- If grade is ACCEPTABLE or better AND placeholders_found == 0: proceed to Step 4.
Step 4: Parse tasks via backend
Calculate task count first:
MCP: mcp__plugin_prd_go__calc_tasks(requirements_count=<count>)
CLI: python3 script.py calc-tasks --requirements <count>
Then parse through the normative backend operation:
backend op parse-prd: python3 script.py parse-prd --input .taskmaster/docs/prd.md --num-tasks <recommended>
TaskMaster backend direct methods (only when explicitly operating that backend):
- MCP:
mcp__task-master-ai__parse_prd(input=".taskmaster/docs/prd.md", numTasks=<recommended>) - MCP fallback:
mcp__plugin_prd_go__tm_parse_prd(input_path=".taskmaster/docs/prd.md", num_tasks=<recommended>) - CLI:
task-master parse-prd --input .taskmaster/docs/prd.md --num-tasks <recommended>
The backend operation writes to .taskmaster/tasks/tasks.json. Verify the file exists
and contains the expected number of tasks before continuing.
Step 5: Rate complexity via backend
Use the normative backend operation instead of home-rolled classification:
backend op rate: python3 script.py rate
TaskMaster backend direct methods (only when explicitly operating that backend):
- MCP:
mcp__task-master-ai__analyze_complexity(analyzes all tasks) - MCP fallback:
mcp__plugin_prd_go__tm_analyze_complexity(wraps the CLI) - CLI:
task-master analyze-complexity
Important — output location: the analyze-complexity step does NOT emit
JSON to stdout. It writes structured analysis to
.taskmaster/reports/task-complexity-report.json and prints a human-readable
table to stdout. To read the structured result, read the report file:
cat .taskmaster/reports/task-complexity-report.json | jq .
Do not try to parse the stdout table — it's colour-coded ASCII and will break consumers. TaskMaster's built-in analysis is more accurate than anything hand-rolled because it has full context of the task graph and dependencies.
Step 6: Expand tasks into subtasks (MANDATORY)
Every task MUST be expanded into subtasks before HANDOFF. Subtasks are verifiable checkpoints — without them, tasks are black boxes that either pass or fail with no intermediate proof.
Use backend op expand, NOT bare per-id parallel calls
Per-id parallel calls (e.g. task-master expand --id=1 & task-master expand --id=2 &) hit a non-atomic read-modify-write race on
.taskmaster/tasks/tasks.json: every parallel writer reads the same starting
snapshot, adds its own subtasks, and writes the whole file back. The last
writer wins and earlier writes are silently lost — the AI call reports
success, the subtasks were generated, but they never landed on disk.
Detected in the v4 Shade dogfood 2026-04-13.
backend op expand is the correct path:
python3 script.py expand
The native engine is the sole generator. script.py expand (backend op expand)
expands pending tasks via the native structured path — a keyless host CLI
(claude/codex/gemini) or a provider API key — running in parallel and
applying atomically. When no provider/CLI is available it falls back to
agent-parallel planning + atomic apply (the native/agent floor).
Patience under slow providers
Under claude-code (Claude Max rate-limited) or local ollama, --all
can run for 5–15 minutes on a 12-task project. Do NOT time out aggressively.
Use .taskmaster/tasks/tasks.json mtime as the liveness signal:
- mtime updated within last 60s → work is landing, keep waiting
- mtime stale for 120s+ → investigate (rate limit, provider crash, network)
- Never conclude STUCK from a single capture — always compare two snapshots 30–60s apart
Verify coverage (read tasks.json DIRECTLY, not task-master list)
task-master list --format json has been observed to return a different
top-level schema from tasks.json, causing consumers to report 0/N
coverage even when all tasks have subtasks on disk (v4 dogfood LEARNING
#15). Always read the canonical file directly:
python3 -c "
import json
d = json.load(open('.taskmaster/tasks/tasks.json'))
# tasks.json is tag-grouped (master, defaults, feature branches) — walk all tags
all_tasks = []
if 'master' in d and isinstance(d['master'], dict):
all_tasks = d['master'].get('tasks', [])
elif 'tasks' in d:
all_tasks = d['tasks']
else:
for v in d.values():
if isinstance(v, dict) and 'tasks' in v:
all_tasks.extend(v['tasks'])
counts = [len(t.get('subtasks', [])) for t in all_tasks]
covered = sum(1 for c in counts if c > 0)
total = len(all_tasks)
no_subs = [t['id'] for t in all_tasks if not t.get('subtasks')]
if no_subs:
print(f'WARNING: {covered}/{total} tasks expanded. Missing: {no_subs}. Re-run backend op expand.')
else:
print(f'OK: All {total} tasks expanded ({sum(counts)} subtasks total).')
"
Idempotent recovery
If any task still shows 0 subtasks after --all completes (rate-limit hiccup,
provider timeout, partial run), re-run the same command:
python3 script.py expand
The backend operation only re-expands tasks that are still in pending state
with 0 subtasks, so a second invocation is safe and recovers gracefully. Do NOT
work around it with parallel per-id calls — that is the exact pattern that
causes silent data loss.
Evidence gate
Gate: spec validation grade is ACCEPTABLE+ AND placeholders_found == 0 AND
tasks parsed AND complexity analyzed AND all tasks have subtasks in
.taskmaster/tasks/tasks.json.
Emit a compact one-block status:
Generate:
spec: .taskmaster/docs/prd.md (grade: <grade>, score: <n>/<total>)
placeholders_found: <n> (bare), <m> deferred_decisions
tasks parsed: <n>
complexity report: .taskmaster/reports/task-complexity-report.json
subtask coverage: <n>/<n> tasks expanded (<total> subtasks)
Exit gate
After the evidence gate passes:
- Call
mcp__plugin_prd_go__advance_phase(expected_current="GENERATE", target="HANDOFF", evidence={"validation_grade": "<EXCELLENT|GOOD|ACCEPTABLE>", "task_count": <int>, "subtask_coverage": <float 0-1>, "placeholders_found": <int>}). The call atomically transitionspipeline.jsonfrom GENERATE to HANDOFF. Theexpected_currentfield is the compare-and-swap guard;evidenceis stored underphase_evidence[HANDOFF]for audit. - Return control to the orchestrator (
prd-taskmasterskill). Do NOT invoke HANDOFF directly — the orchestrator re-readscurrent_phaseand routes.
Red flags (stop and report, do not paper over)
- "The validation says placeholders_found=3 but the content reads fine —
I'll advance anyway" → NO. Bare placeholders are a hard fail. Fix or
attribute with
reason:. - "
task-master expand --allis slow, let me runexpand_taskin parallel across IDs to speed it up" → NO. That is the exact race that silently drops subtasks. Serial--allor serial per-id only. - "A constraint from DISCOVER isn't in the spec — I'll add it to the handoff note instead" → NO. Constraints live in the spec. Fix the spec.
- "Complexity analyze output looked odd, I'll skip reading the JSON report"
→ NO. Read
.taskmaster/reports/task-complexity-report.jsondirectly; the stdout table is decoration. - "I can call advance_phase without check_gate" → NO. Gate first, always.
- "The template prose is close enough, I'll ship it verbatim" → NO. The template is a shape, not content. Fill every section with project-specific material.
Non-exits
This skill does not use explicit process termination. A hard block reports the reason and returns control to the orchestrator; the orchestrator decides whether to surface to the user.