Agent skill
rlm-mode
Detect requests for recursive decomposition and large-scale operations that benefit from RLM processing
Install this agent skill to your Project
npx add-skill https://github.com/jmagly/aiwg/tree/main/agentic/code/addons/rlm/skills/rlm-mode
SKILL.md
RLM Mode Skill
You detect when users need large-scale operations that would benefit from recursive decomposition and route to RLM commands instead of attempting to load everything into context.
Triggers
Alternate expressions and non-obvious activations (primary phrases are matched automatically from the skill description):
- "RLM" / "recursive language model" → explicit RLM mode activation
- "process in chunks" → chunk-based decomposition request
- "decompose and process" → explicit decomposition shorthand
- "fan out" → parallel fan-out processing across files or modules
Core Problem
Loading entire codebases or directory trees into context causes:
- Context window overflow: Exceeding model limits
- Degraded quality: Agent struggles with too much information
- Poor performance: Slow processing, truncated responses
- Memory exhaustion: System crashes on large repos
RLM solution: Decompose → Process in chunks → Aggregate results
Trigger Patterns Reference
| Pattern | Example | Why RLM? |
|---|---|---|
analyze all files |
"analyze all TypeScript files for security issues" | Scope exceeds context window |
search the entire codebase |
"search the entire codebase for authentication logic" | Need to traverse full tree |
review every module |
"review every module for proper error handling" | Many independent reviews |
find all instances |
"find all instances of deprecated API usage" | Requires exhaustive search |
summarize the whole repository |
"summarize the whole repository structure" | Hierarchical decomposition |
check every file |
"check every file for missing tests" | File-by-file evaluation |
scan all directories |
"scan all directories for outdated dependencies" | Directory tree traversal |
across the entire project |
"find TODOs across the entire project" | Project-wide aggregation |
throughout the repository |
"identify duplicated code throughout the repository" | Cross-file comparison |
recursively process |
"recursively process src/ and generate docs" | Explicit recursion request |
batch process |
"batch process all markdown files for formatting" | Parallel batch operation |
apply to all |
"apply linting rules to all JavaScript files" | Bulk transformation |
update every |
"update every component to use new API" | Mass refactoring |
generate for each |
"generate tests for each module in lib/" | Templated generation |
Detection Logic
High Confidence (Auto-Suggest)
Patterns that almost always need RLM:
- Quantifiers: "all", "every", "entire", "whole", "throughout"
- Scope words: "codebase", "repository", "project-wide"
- Recursive terms: "recursively", "nested", "hierarchical", "tree"
- Batch terms: "batch", "bulk", "mass", "apply to multiple"
Heuristics:
- User mentions directory paths (
src/,lib/,test/) - User wants aggregated output ("list all", "summarize", "generate report")
- Task involves file count estimation >20 files
- User explicitly says "this might be a lot" or "there are many files"
Medium Confidence (Suggest with Alternatives)
Patterns that might need RLM:
- User asks about "multiple files" without quantity
- User wants to "find patterns" without specifying scope
- Task could be done with grep but user phrases it as analysis
In these cases: Ask user to clarify scope before recommending RLM
Low Confidence (Don't Suggest)
Patterns that DON'T need RLM:
- Single file operations: "analyze this file", "refactor login.ts"
- Specific file list: "check auth.ts, user.ts, and session.ts"
- Interactive exploration: "show me the auth module"
- Already scoped: "in this directory" (with small directory)
Decomposition Strategies
When RLM is appropriate, suggest the right strategy:
Strategy 1: Recursive Query (rlm-query)
Use when: User wants to find, list, or aggregate information
Example triggers:
- "find all functions that use deprecated API"
- "list all files missing tests"
- "identify all TODO comments"
- "show me all error handling patterns"
Suggested command:
/rlm-query "{query}" --path {directory} --pattern "{glob}" --depth {N}
Example:
User: "find all TODO comments across the entire codebase"
Decomposition:
Query: "Extract TODO comments with file:line locations"
Path: "." (whole repo)
Pattern: "**/*.{js,ts,jsx,tsx}" (all code files)
Suggested: /rlm-query "Extract TODO comments" --path . --pattern "**/*.{js,ts,jsx,tsx}"
Strategy 2: Batch Processing (rlm-batch)
Use when: User wants to transform, update, or generate for multiple files
Example triggers:
- "update every component to use new prop types"
- "add JSDoc comments to all functions"
- "refactor all API calls to use new client"
- "generate tests for each module"
Suggested command:
/rlm-batch "{operation}" --path {directory} --pattern "{glob}" --parallel {N}
Example:
User: "add TypeScript types to every JavaScript file in src/"
Decomposition:
Operation: "Add TypeScript type annotations"
Path: "src/"
Pattern: "**/*.js"
Parallel: 4 (concurrent workers)
Suggested: /rlm-batch "Add TypeScript type annotations" --path src/ --pattern "**/*.js" --parallel 4
Strategy 3: Hierarchical Summary (rlm-summarize)
Use when: User wants to understand large-scale structure or relationships
Example triggers:
- "summarize the entire repository structure"
- "explain the architecture of this codebase"
- "show me the dependency tree"
- "what are the main modules?"
Suggested command:
/rlm-summarize --path {directory} --depth {N} --output-format {markdown|json}
Example:
User: "summarize the whole repository so I can understand the architecture"
Decomposition:
Path: "." (whole repo)
Depth: 3 (top 3 levels)
Format: markdown
Suggested: /rlm-summarize --path . --depth 3 --output-format markdown
Response Templates
When RLM is Clearly Needed
This request involves processing {N estimated} files, which exceeds comfortable
context window usage.
I recommend using RLM (Recursive Language Model) processing:
**Suggested approach:**
{command}
This will:
1. Decompose the task into manageable chunks
2. Process files independently (avoiding context overflow)
3. Aggregate results into a coherent summary
Would you like me to proceed with this RLM approach, or would you prefer a
different strategy?
When Scope is Unclear
This could involve processing many files. To choose the right approach:
1. How many files are we talking about?
- A few (1-5): I can handle directly
- Several (5-20): Borderline, depends on size
- Many (20+): RLM processing recommended
2. What's the scope?
- Specific directory: {suggest path}
- Whole repository: Definitely use RLM
- Filtered by pattern: {suggest glob pattern}
Please clarify and I'll recommend the best approach.
When User Insists on Direct Processing (Warning)
I can attempt to load {estimated files} directly, but I should warn you:
⚠️ Risks:
- Context window overflow (may truncate output)
- Degraded quality (too much information to process well)
- Slow response time
- Possible incomplete results
**Recommended**: Use RLM processing instead via:
{command}
Do you want to proceed with direct loading anyway, or use the recommended
RLM approach?
Parameter Extraction
Path Extraction
From explicit mention:
- "in src/" →
--path src/ - "under lib/components/" →
--path lib/components/ - "the test directory" →
--path test/
From implicit context:
- No mention →
--path .(whole repo) - "the codebase" →
--path . - "source files" →
--path src/(if src/ exists)
Pattern Extraction
From file type mention:
- "TypeScript files" →
--pattern "**/*.ts" - "React components" →
--pattern "**/*.{jsx,tsx}" - "test files" →
--pattern "**/*.test.{js,ts}" - "markdown docs" →
--pattern "**/*.md"
From explicit pattern:
- "files matching *.config.js" →
--pattern "**/*.config.js"
Default:
- No mention →
--pattern "**/*"(all files)
Depth Extraction
From explicit mention:
- "top-level only" →
--depth 1 - "two levels deep" →
--depth 2 - "recursively" →
--depth -1(infinite)
From implicit context:
- Summary request →
--depth 3(reasonable overview) - Search request →
--depth -1(exhaustive) - Transform request →
--depth -1(all matches)
Parallelism Extraction
For batch operations:
- Default:
--parallel 4(balanced) - User mentions "fast" →
--parallel 8(aggressive) - User mentions "careful" →
--parallel 2(conservative)
Clarification Prompts
If Query is Ambiguous
To set up RLM processing, I need to clarify:
1. **Scope**: Which directories?
- [ ] Entire repository (.)
- [ ] Specific directory: _______
- [ ] Multiple directories: _______
2. **Files**: Which file types?
- [ ] All files
- [ ] Code files only (*.js, *.ts, etc.)
- [ ] Specific pattern: _______
3. **Operation**: What should I do with each file?
- [ ] Extract information (use rlm-query)
- [ ] Transform/update (use rlm-batch)
- [ ] Summarize structure (use rlm-summarize)
Please provide these details.
If Scope Seems Too Large
This request would process approximately {N estimated} files.
**Options:**
1. **Narrow the scope** (recommended):
- Specific directory: {suggest path}
- File type filter: {suggest pattern}
- Depth limit: {suggest depth}
2. **Proceed with full scope** using RLM:
- Command: {command}
- Estimated time: {estimate}
- This will process in chunks to avoid overflow
3. **Sample first**:
- Process a subset to verify approach
- Then expand to full scope
Which option do you prefer?
Invocation Examples
Example 1: Find Pattern Across Codebase
User: "find all instances of console.log across the entire project"
Detection:
- Trigger: "all instances", "across the entire project"
- Strategy: rlm-query (finding information)
Extraction:
- Query: "Find all console.log statements"
- Path: "." (entire project)
- Pattern: "**/*.{js,ts,jsx,tsx}" (JavaScript/TypeScript files)
Response:
This requires searching across the entire codebase. I'll use RLM processing:
/rlm-query "Find all console.log statements with file and line number" \
--path . \
--pattern "**/*.{js,ts,jsx,tsx}"
This will:
1. Recursively scan all JavaScript/TypeScript files
2. Extract console.log locations
3. Aggregate results into a summary report
Proceeding...
Example 2: Batch Update
User: "update every React component to use the new useAuth hook instead of the old AuthContext"
Detection:
- Trigger: "update every", "React component"
- Strategy: rlm-batch (transformation)
Extraction:
- Operation: "Replace AuthContext with useAuth hook"
- Path: "src/" (source code)
- Pattern: "**/*.{jsx,tsx}" (React components)
- Parallel: 4 (default)
Response:
This is a batch refactoring task that will affect multiple components. Using RLM:
/rlm-batch "Replace AuthContext with useAuth hook pattern" \
--path src/ \
--pattern "**/*.{jsx,tsx}" \
--parallel 4
This will:
1. Identify all React components using AuthContext
2. Refactor each to use useAuth hook
3. Process 4 files concurrently for efficiency
4. Verify changes compile before proceeding to next
Proceeding with batch operation...
Example 3: Repository Summary
User: "summarize the whole repository structure so I can understand what this project does"
Detection:
- Trigger: "summarize the whole repository"
- Strategy: rlm-summarize (hierarchical understanding)
Extraction:
- Path: "." (entire repo)
- Depth: 3 (good overview depth)
- Format: markdown
Response:
I'll create a hierarchical summary of the repository using RLM:
/rlm-summarize --path . --depth 3 --output-format markdown
This will:
1. Analyze the top 3 levels of directory structure
2. Identify main modules and their purposes
3. Map dependencies and relationships
4. Generate a markdown summary document
Proceeding...
Example 4: Ambiguous Scope (Clarification Needed)
User: "check for missing error handling"
Detection:
- No scope quantifiers ("all", "every", "entire")
- Could be single file or entire codebase
Response:
I can check for missing error handling. To choose the right approach:
**Scope unclear**:
1. Current file only? (I can do this directly)
2. Specific module/directory? (Please specify path)
3. Entire codebase? (I'll use RLM processing)
**If entire codebase, I recommend:**
/rlm-query "Identify functions missing try-catch or error handling" \
--path . \
--pattern "**/*.{js,ts}"
Which scope did you have in mind?
Integration Notes
- Priority: Medium (yields to agent-loop for explicit iteration requests)
- Exclusivity: Partial (suggest RLM, but user can override)
- Confirmation: Always confirm strategy before invoking RLM commands
- Fallback: If user rejects RLM, warn about context limits but proceed if insisted
Performance Heuristics
File Count Estimation
Quick heuristics for estimating whether RLM is needed:
| Directory | Typical File Count | RLM Recommended? |
|---|---|---|
src/ (small project) |
10-50 | Maybe (depends on size) |
src/ (medium project) |
50-200 | Yes |
src/ (large project) |
200+ | Definitely |
node_modules/ |
10,000+ | Always (if user really wants this) |
test/ |
Usually ~50-100 | Probably |
| Single directory | <10 | No |
| Single directory | 10-30 | Maybe |
| Single directory | 30+ | Yes |
Context Window Budgeting
Rule of thumb: If estimated total file size exceeds 50% of context window, use RLM.
Estimates:
- TypeScript file: ~200 lines avg = ~8,000 tokens
- Test file: ~100 lines avg = ~4,000 tokens
- Config file: ~50 lines avg = ~2,000 tokens
Context windows:
- Claude Opus 4.6: 200k tokens → Safe limit ~100k tokens → ~12 large TS files
- GPT-5.3-Codex: 128k tokens → Safe limit ~64k tokens → ~8 large TS files
Related
/rlm-querycommand - recursive information extraction/rlm-batchcommand - parallel batch processing/rlm-summarizecommand - hierarchical summarization@$AIWG_ROOT/agentic/code/addons/rlm/schemas/rlm-config.yaml- RLM configuration schema@$AIWG_ROOT/agentic/code/addons/rlm/docs/rlm-architecture.md- RLM system design@.aiwg/research/findings/REF-087-recursive-decomposition.md- Decomposition research
Version History
- 1.0.0: Initial implementation for RLM mode detection and routing
References
- @$AIWG_ROOT/agentic/code/addons/rlm/README.md — RLM addon overview and architecture
- @$AIWG_ROOT/agentic/code/addons/rlm/schemas/rlm-config.yaml — RLM configuration schema
- @$AIWG_ROOT/agentic/code/addons/rlm/docs/rlm-architecture.md — RLM system design and decomposition strategy
- @$AIWG_ROOT/agentic/code/addons/aiwg-utils/rules/subagent-scoping.md — Subagent scoping and context budget rules
- @$AIWG_ROOT/agentic/code/addons/aiwg-utils/rules/context-budget.md — Context window budgeting for parallel subagents
- @$AIWG_ROOT/docs/cli-reference.md — CLI reference for rlm commands
Recommended Agent Skills
Expand your agent's capabilities with these related and highly-rated skills.
research-document
Generate summaries and literature notes from research papers
research-archive
Package research artifacts for long-term archival
research-cite
Format citations and generate bibliographies
induct-research
Induct research sources into a research repository. Point at an issue, a single file, a directory of papers, or a URI and the skill reads, annotates, and files structured induction tasks — one per source. Similar to address-issues but for research corpora instead of code backlogs.
research-provenance
Query provenance chains and artifact relationships
research-quality
Assess source quality using GRADE methodology
Didn't find tool you were looking for?