Autonomous Development

Description

Execute iterative development loops with automated quality gates, issue tracking integration, and intelligent remediation. Achieve 95/100 quality score before creating pull requests.

When to Use

• Large features broken into multiple issues
• Repetitive tasks that benefit from automation
• When consistent quality enforcement is needed
• Overnight/background development runs

Prerequisites

• GitHub or GitLab MCP configured
• Issues/epic created via /plan --issues
• .claude/autonomous.yml configured (or use defaults)

---

Quality Gates

Required Gates (Blockers)

Gate	Weight	Threshold	Remediation
/test	25	80% coverage, 0 failures	Auto-fix test failures
/security	25	0 critical/high vulns	Auto-fix vulnerabilities
/build	15	Build succeeds	/build-fix

Quality Gates

Gate	Weight	Threshold	Remediation
/review	20	< 3 smells	/cleanup
/mentor	10	No critical concerns	Create issues
/ux	5	A11y + responsive	Create issues

Scoring

Target: 95/100

Score = test + security + build + review + mentor + ux + bonus

Bonus:
  +2 for coverage > 90%
  +2 for zero code smells
  +1 for zero security issues

---

Workflow

Phase 1: Planning

# Create epic with child issues
/plan "User authentication system" --issues

# Result:
# Epic #100: "User Authentication System"
# ├── Issue #101: "Create User model"
# ├── Issue #102: "Login endpoint"
# ├── Issue #103: "Session management"
# └── Issue #104: "Password reset"

Phase 2: Autonomous Execution

# Start autonomous development
/autonomous --epic 100 --target 95

# Or for a single issue
/autonomous --issue 101

Phase 3: Monitoring

Watch progress via:

• Issue comments (real-time updates)
• GitHub/GitLab notifications
• /gate-status command

Phase 4: Review & Merge

• PRs created automatically when score >= 95
• Human reviews and approves
• On merge, loop continues to next issue

---

Configuration

Basic Config (.claude/autonomous.yml)

target_score: 95
max_iterations: 15

gates:
  test:
    weight: 25
    required: true
    thresholds:
      min_coverage: 80
      max_failures: 0

  security:
    weight: 25
    required: true
    thresholds:
      critical_vulns: 0
      high_vulns: 0

  review:
    weight: 20
    auto_fix: true

Presets

Preset	Target	Use Case
default	95	Standard development
prototype	80	Quick prototypes, MVPs
production	98	Production-critical code
frontend	95	UI components (UX required)

/autonomous --epic 100 --preset production

---

Issue Integration

Issue Lifecycle

OPEN → IN PROGRESS → PR CREATED → IN REVIEW → MERGED → CLOSED
                         ↓
                   (if blocked)
                         ↓
                     BLOCKED → (human intervention) → IN PROGRESS

Labels Applied

Label	Meaning
in-progress	Autonomous loop working on issue
blocked	Loop paused, human needed
ready-for-review	PR created, awaiting approval
auto-generated	Issue created by autonomous run
tech-debt	Deferred improvement

Sub-Issue Creation

Unresolved items become linked issues:

Issue #101: "Create User model" [CLOSED]
├── PR #110 [MERGED]
└── Sub-issues created:
    ├── #105: "[Security] Add rate limiting" (medium vuln)
    └── #106: "[Tech Debt] Consider caching" (mentor recommendation)

---

Human Intervention

Via Issue Comments

Command	Action
@claude [instruction]	Execute instruction
@pause	Pause loop
@resume	Resume loop
@skip-gate [gate] [reason]	Skip a gate
@target [score]	Change target score

Example

<!-- User comments -->
@claude Use bcrypt instead of argon2 for password hashing

<!-- Bot responds -->
@user Understood. Switching to bcrypt:
- Updated User model
- Modified password service
- Updated tests

Re-running quality gates...

---

Exit Conditions

Success (Create PR)

• Score >= 95 (or target)
• All required gates pass

Success with Review

• Score 85-94
• 10+ iterations attempted
• All required gates pass
• PR labeled needs-review

Blocked (Pause)

• Required gate fails after max retries
• Score < 85 after max iterations
• Human intervention requested

---

Best Practices

Do

• Break features into small, focused issues
• Set realistic acceptance criteria
• Review autonomous PRs carefully
• Address tech-debt issues promptly

Don't

• Create overly complex single issues
• Ignore blocked notifications
• Auto-merge PRs (always review)
• Skip security gates without justification

---

Troubleshooting

Problem	Solution
Loop stuck on same score	Check for flaky tests, review gate output
Too many sub-issues created	Adjust thresholds in config
PR has conflicts	Rebase branch, resume loop
Rate limited	Increase iteration_delay

---

Metrics

Track autonomous development effectiveness:

Metric	Target
Average score	> 90
Iterations per issue	< 5
Auto-fix success rate	> 80%
Human interventions	< 10% of issues

---

Related

• /plan - Create issues from feature request
• /orchestrate - Coordinate multiple autonomous runs
• /review - Code review gate
• /security - Security audit gate
• /mentor - Architecture review gate