Agent skill
bond
Design agent team structure for a task. Use when "set up a team", "team for this", "should I use agents", "design a team", "bond a team", "how many agents", "agent team".
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/majiayu000/claude-skill-registry/tree/main/skills/skills/other/bond
SKILL.md
Role
COMPOSE. Assess whether a task benefits from parallel agents. Design roles, boundaries, coordination. Prevent merge conflicts over maximizing parallelism.
Principles
- User owns composition — Bond recommends team structure. The user approves, adjusts, or cancels before any team is created.
- Merge conflicts kill teams — Any Solo in File ownership → Solo verdict, regardless of other dimensions. Overlapping file boundaries are the #1 cause of wasted agent work.
- Not every task needs a team — Most tasks are better as solo or subagent work. Team overhead only pays off with genuine independence across multiple modules.
- Each role owns distinct files — No overlap in file ownership between teammates. If overlap is unavoidable, merge the roles.
- Coupling check before creation — For each pair of roles: "If role A changes X, does role B's work break?" If yes → merge or add explicit coordination checkpoint.
Process
-
Assess fitness — Score 4 dimensions from task description.
Dimension Team Subagent Solo Independence Workers don't need each other's output Tasks isolated, only results matter Sequential dependency chain File ownership Each role owns distinct areas Each task touches isolated files Same files need editing Coordination Must share findings or challenge each other Only report back One mind holds it all Scope Multi-module, 8+ story points Focused exploration or analysis Single file, 1-3 story points Majority column wins. Override: Any Solo in File ownership → Solo. Default when tied: Subagent (cheaper, less coordination overhead). Shape mode input: When shape recommended Colleague, bias toward Team — persistent dialogue preserves understanding better than fire-and-forget subagents. Tool-Review/Tool modes don't override fitness assessment.
Red flags — warn before proceeding:
Red Flag Suggest Instead All roles touch same files Single session or sequential subagents >5 teammates Reduce scope or phase the work Tasks have serial dependencies Single session with subagents for research Task is ≤3 story points Just do it in current session >3 teammates for Collab/Guided Reduce to 2-3 or phase sequentially If not Team → explain why, suggest subagent or solo approach, stop.
-
Design team — Decompose into independent workstreams.
Decision Heuristic Teammate count 1 per independent workstream (2-5, never more) Role names By responsibility ("auth-impl", "api-reviewer"), never generic File boundaries Each role owns distinct directories — flag any overlap Models Opus: architecture, review. Sonnet: implementation. Haiku: research Permission mode plan: risky changes.default: clear scopeTask count 5-6 per teammate, each self-contained Coupling check: for each role pair, ask "If A changes X, does B break?" If yes → merge roles or add coordination checkpoint.
-
Confirm + create — Present blueprint to user:
Team Blueprint: [name] | Roles: [N] | Coordination: [delegate/active-lead]Per role: name, model, focus, owned files/dirs. User: Yes → create team and spawn agents:TeamCreate(team_name="[name]", description="[objective from intent]")
Per role: Task(team_name="[name]", name="[role-name]", prompt="[SESSION marker + criteria[] + mustNot[] + ACCEPTANCE criteria] Role: [name]. Focus: [description]. Owned files: [dirs].
Execute using loop mechanics:
- Decompose your scope into atomic work items (one sentence each, no 'and'). Every criteria[] maps to ≥1 item.
- Execute in waves — reversible before irreversible.
- Per wave: report Done/Carry/Stall. Carry items retry with [VERIFY] FAIL: [reason]. Stall items → diagnose, revise.
- Verify against ACCEPTANCE and STOP conditions.
- mustNot violations are hard stops — surface immediately.
Retrieve facts with tools before asserting from memory.", subagent_type="[model from design table]", mode="[permission mode from design table]")
After creation, pipeline is complete — each member executes using loop mechanics independently.
Adjust → revise blueprint. Cancel → suggest solo or subagent approach.
Boundaries
Bond recommends team structure; user owns the final composition. Bond designs after explicit approval — Claude creates with native tools.
Handoff
Bond returns results to the calling phase:
- Team verdict → creates team with full context. Pipeline complete.
- Solo/Subagent verdict → returns recommendation. Caller proceeds to loop for execution.
Didn't find tool you were looking for?