Claude Code
Five agents with role-scoped tools (only the implementer holds Edit) plus six commands.
/troopers:mission <task>/troopers:brainstorm <task>Five specialist subagents under one engineering constitution, run by a mission command that only briefs, reads handoffs, and decides. Every trooper deploys in fresh context, gathers its own evidence, and owns exactly one phase.
Every trooper writes its full output to a numbered artifact in .troopers/<date>-<slug>/ and replies with only its handoff. The next trooper reads the artifacts it needs directly from disk, so the commander's context never grows.
The brainstormer gets the task verbatim and nothing else, unanchored by anyone's opinion. It returns the framed problem, repository evidence, 2–4 materially distinct approaches, and one recommendation.
The planner receives the recommendation, the rejected alternatives with reasons, and open risks, then checks all of it against the code before writing scope, non-goals, file-by-file steps, and a definition of done.
The implementer gets scope and completion criteria, reads the full plan from disk itself, and produces the smallest repository-native diff: tests included, deviations recorded instead of absorbed.
The verifier judges the actual diff against the definition of done, re-runs the checks itself, and returns PASS, PASS WITH RISKS, or FAIL, fixing nothing. FAIL loops back as a defect-only brief, twice at most.
The auditor reads the whole chain and the final diff, and rules on erosion: CLEAN, ACCEPTABLE DEBT, or BLOCK. A clean result ends the mission with a twenty-line report.
Task: one-paragraph restatement of the user's task Mission dir: .troopers/2026-09-01-rate-limit-login/ (write your full output to 03-implement.md) Read first: 02-plan.md · src/auth/login.ts:41 (pointers, never pasted content) Locked decisions: token bucket over sliding window; reuse existing redis client Constraints / non-goals: no new dependencies; public API unchanged Definition of done: plan §7 criteria; regression test for burst traffic Open risks: clock skew across instances (carried from the 01-brainstorm handoff) Reply with only your ## Handoff section.
| Capability | Brainstorm | Plan | Implement | Verify | Audit |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Explore alternatives | Primary | Refine | No | No | No |
| Set implementation scope | Recommend | Primary | Escalate deviations | No | No |
| Edit production code | No | No | Primary | No | No |
| Run/inspect verification | Early risks | Define | Run own checks | Primary | Review evidence |
| Block for correctness | No | No | No | Yes | Yes |
| Block for erosion | No | No | No | Flag | Primary |
No trooper owns more truth than the task, the repository, and the constitution.
Rendered from core/, the single source of truth. Each deployed trooper is self-contained: its role, the shared protocol, and the constitution.
Five agents with role-scoped tools (only the implementer holds Edit) plus six commands.
/troopers:mission <task>/troopers:brainstorm <task>The mission runs each trooper as a fresh-context subprocess; briefs and artifacts carry the handoffs.
/troopers-mission <task>/troopers-plan <task>One skill; the first argument picks a lone trooper, anything else launches the full mission.
/troopers <task>/troopers verify <task>git clone https://github.com/balevdev/troopers && cd troopers && ./install.sh --all
github.com/balevdev/troopers · edit core/ · every theater stays in sync
Engineer behind Troopers. Writes the constitution, sets the doctrine, commands the mission, and never touches the diff. The system runs the same way he does: smallest safe change, evidence over confidence, stop when it's done.
The point of multiple agents is not more activity. It is separated judgement under command: explore broadly, plan narrowly, implement minimally, verify mechanically, audit for erosion, then stop.