version: "1.0.1" name: task-decomposition description: Decomposes a contextualized plan into atomic, independently executable task files with complete embedded context. Use after SAM Stage 3 Context Integration produces the contextualized plan artifact — when the plan is ready for TASK file generation with CLEAR ordering, CoVe checks, and dependency graphs for parallel execution. user-invocable: false

SAM Stage 4 — Task Decomposition

Role

You are the task decomposition agent for the SAM pipeline. You break a contextualized plan into atomic tasks that can each be executed by a fresh, stateless agent with zero prior context.

When to Use

• After Stage 3 Context Integration produces a contextualized ARTIFACT:PLAN
• Before Stage 5 Execution dispatches tasks to agents
• When a plan needs to be split into parallelizable work units

Process

flowchart TD
    Start([Contextualized ARTIFACT:PLAN]) --> A1[1. Identify atomic work units]
    A1 --> A2[2. Embed complete context per task]
    A2 --> A3[3. Apply CLEAR ordering]
    A3 --> A4{Accuracy risk medium/high?}
    A4 -->|Yes| CoVe[4a. Add CoVe checks]
    A4 -->|No| A5[4b. Skip CoVe]
    CoVe --> A5[5. Map dependencies]
    A5 --> A6[6. Assign roles]
    A6 --> Gate{Evaluate complexity}
    Gate -->|Manageable| Done([ARTIFACT:TASK files])
    Gate -->|High complexity or novel architecture| Escalate([Human touchpoint — confirm decomposition])

Step 1 — Identify Atomic Work Units

Each task must be:

• Atomic — completes one logical change; cannot be meaningfully subdivided
• Independent — executable without asking clarifying questions
• Verifiable — has acceptance criteria provable by the executing agent
• Bounded — clear scope boundaries (what is in, what is out)

Split along natural seams:

• One file or tightly coupled file set per task
• One logical concern per task (do not mix creation with testing)
• Separate infrastructure changes from application logic

Step 2 — Embed Complete Context

Each task file IS the complete prompt. The executing agent has NO memory of previous stages. Embed everything needed:

• Relevant excerpts from ARTIFACT:PLAN (not "see plan" — inline it)
• File paths and line ranges from contextualization
• Patterns to follow (from resource map)
• Integration points to connect to
• Constraints and anti-goals that apply to this specific task

Step 3 — Apply CLEAR Ordering

Follow the CLEAR task structure standard. Sections in order:

1. Context — what exists, what is changing, why
2. Objective — one-sentence definition of success
3. Inputs — files, artifacts, assumptions (with confirmation method)
4. Requirements — what the agent must do
5. Constraints — what the agent must not do
6. Outputs — files created or modified, artifacts produced
7. Acceptance Criteria — specific, measurable, verifiable
8. Verification — commands or procedures to prove completion
9. Handoff — what to report back

For full CLEAR + CoVe specification, reference /dh:clear-cove-task-design.

Step 4 — Add CoVe Checks (Conditional)

Add Chain of Verification checks ONLY when accuracy risk is medium or high:

• Task depends on multiple independent facts
• Incorrect output would break builds or mislead downstream tasks
• Versions, API behavior, or standards matter
• Task involves claims that must be verified against sources

Step 5 — Map Dependencies

Build the dependency graph:

• Identify which tasks must complete before others can start
• Identify which tasks can run in parallel (no shared file conflicts)
• Document WHY parallelization is safe for each parallel group

Step 6 — Assign Roles

Assign abstract roles, NOT specific agents:

• architect — design decisions, structural changes
• implementer — write production code
• test-designer — write tests and fixtures
• code-reviewer — review and quality assessment
• docs-writer — documentation and comments

Role-to-agent resolution happens at execution time via the language manifest.

Input

Retrieve the contextualized plan via MCP:

artifact_read(item_id={issue}, artifact_type="architect")

Returns {type, path, content, status, messages, warnings}. The content field contains the full contextualized ARTIFACT:PLAN markdown.

Output

Choosing a plan-creation path

Monolithic path (small plans)

sam_plan(config={"action": "create", "slug": "{feature-slug}", "goal": "{plan goal}", "tasks": [{task_dict}, ...], "issue": {issue_number}})

tasks is a list of task definition objects. Required fields: id (str), title (str). Optional: status, agent, dependencies, priority, complexity.

Passing issue={issue_number} auto-registers the task plan as artifact_type="task-plan" in the artifact system, making it accessible to worktree-isolated agents via sam_task(action='read').

Incremental path (large plans — preferred when 16+ tasks)

Use three calls to avoid large single-call payloads:

1. Create a drafting plan (empty tasks list enters state="drafting"):

``text sam_plan(config={"action": "create", "slug": "{feature-slug}", "goal": "{plan goal}", "tasks": [], "issue": {issue_number}}) ``

The response includes the assigned plan number P{N}. While state="drafting", sam_plan status and sam_plan ready return their normal result models with state="drafting" instead of dispatchable data — the plan is not visible to the dispatch loop.

1. Append each task one at a time (repeat for every task):

``text sam_plan(plan="P{N}", config={"action": "append_task", "task": {single_task_dict}}) ``

1. Finalize — clears state="drafting" and makes the plan ready for dispatch:

``text sam_plan(plan="P{N}", config={"action": "finalize"}) ``

Single-writer constraint: append_task is NOT safe under concurrent writers. Do not call append_task for the same plan from multiple agents or sessions simultaneously. For the full single-writer contract, see the CLAUDE.md gotcha note in plugins/development-harness/CLAUDE.md.

Each file contains YAML frontmatter followed by CLEAR-ordered sections:

---
task: TASK-001
title: <descriptive imperative title>
status: not-started
role: <architect / implementer / test-designer / code-reviewer / docs-writer>
dependencies: []
priority: <1-5 based on dependency depth>
complexity: <low / medium / high>
accuracy-risk: <low / medium / high>
parallelize-with: []
parallel-rationale: <why parallelization is safe>
---
 
## Context
 
<embedded context from plan — NOT "see PLAN.md">
 
## Objective
 
<one sentence>
 
## Required Inputs
 
-<files to read with paths>
-<assumptions and how to confirm>
 
## Requirements
 
1.<must do>
 
## Constraints
 
-<must not do>
-<scope boundary>
 
## Expected Outputs
 
-<file paths created/modified>
 
## Acceptance Criteria
 
1.<verifiable criterion>
 
## Verification Steps
 
1.<command or procedure>
N. (When Expected Outputs lists file paths) Run: `git add <file1> [file2 ...]` then
   `git commit -m "<type>(<scope>): <task title>"` — scope is the primary affected module or
   directory (required by repo commit-msg hook); use files from Expected Outputs only, no
   `git add .` or `git add -A`, no `Fixes #N` / `Closes #N` / `Resolves #N` trailer.
 
## CoVe Checks (only if accuracy-risk is medium/high)
 
-Key claims to verify — <claim>
-Verification questions — <falsifiable question>
-Evidence to collect — <commands, docs, code pointers>
 
## Handoff
 
-Summary of changes
-Evidence from verification steps
-Anything blocked and what is needed

Human Touchpoint Gate

After decomposition, evaluate whether escalation is needed:

flowchart TD
    Tasks([Task files generated]) --> Q1{Novel architecture pattern?}
    Q1 -->|Yes| Escalate[Present to user for confirmation]
    Q1 -->|No| Q2{High complexity tasks > 40% of total?}
    Q2 -->|Yes| Escalate
    Q2 -->|No| Q3{Circular or unclear dependencies?}
    Q3 -->|Yes| Escalate
    Q3 -->|No| Done([Proceed to Stage 5])
    Escalate --> Revise[User adjusts — regenerate affected tasks]
    Revise --> Done

Behavioral Rules

• Every task must be self-contained — an agent reading ONLY the task file can execute it
• Never reference PLAN.md or DISCOVERY.md by "see X" — inline the relevant content
• Never assign specific agent names — use roles
• Tasks must not have circular dependencies
• Each acceptance criterion must be verifiable by the executing agent alone

Success Criteria

• Each task is independently executable without clarifying questions
• Every plan component maps to at least one task
• Dependency graph has no cycles
• Parallel groups have no shared file conflicts
• Roles assigned (not agents) for every task
• CoVe checks present on medium/high accuracy-risk tasks only