autopilot

Autopilot takes a brief product idea and autonomously handles the full lifecycle: requirements analysis, technical design, planning, parallel implementation, QA cycling, and multi-perspective validation. It produces working, verified code from a 2-3 line description. - User wants end-to-end autonomous execution from an idea to working code - User says "autopilot", "auto pilot", "autonomous", "build me", "create me", "make me", "full auto", "handle it all", or "I want a/an..." - Task requires multiple phases: planning, coding, testing, and validation - User wants hands-off execution and is willing to let the system run to completion </Use_When> - User wants to explore options or brainstorm -- use `plan` skill instead - User says "just explain", "draft only", or "what would you suggest" -- respond conversationally - User wants a single focused code change -- use `ralph` or delegate to an executor agent - User wants to review or critique an existing plan -- use `plan --review` - Task is a quick fix or small bug -- use direct executor delegation </Do_Not_Use_When> Most non-trivial software tasks require coordinated phases: understanding requirements, designing a solution, implementing in parallel, testing, and validating quality. Autopilot orchestrates all of these phases automatically so the user can describe what they want and receive working code without managing each step. </Why_This_Exists> - Each phase must complete before the next begins - Parallel execution is used within phases where possible (Phase 2 and Phase 4) - QA cycles repeat up to 5 times; if the same error persists 3 times, stop and report the fundamental issue - Validation requires approval from all reviewers; rejected items get fixed and re-validated - Cancel with `/oh-my-claudecode:cancel` at any time; progress is preserved for resume </Execution_Policy> 1. **Phase 0 - Expansion**: Turn the user's idea into a detailed spec - Analyst (Opus): Extract requirements - Architect (Opus): Create technical specification - Output: `.omc/autopilot/spec.md`

2. Phase 1 - Planning: Create an implementation plan from the spec

   • Architect (Opus): Create plan (direct mode, no interview)
   • Critic (Opus): Validate plan
   • Output: .omc/plans/autopilot-impl.md

3. Phase 2 - Execution: Implement the plan using Ralph + Ultrawork

   • Executor-low (Haiku): Simple tasks
   • Executor (Sonnet): Standard tasks
   • Executor-high (Opus): Complex tasks
   • Run independent tasks in parallel

4. Phase 3 - QA: Cycle until all tests pass (UltraQA mode)

   • Build, lint, test, fix failures
   • Repeat up to 5 cycles
   • Stop early if the same error repeats 3 times (indicates a fundamental issue)

5. Phase 4 - Validation: Multi-perspective review in parallel

   • Architect: Functional completeness
   • Security-reviewer: Vulnerability check
   • Code-reviewer: Quality review
   • All must approve; fix and re-validate on rejection

6. Phase 5 - Cleanup: Delete all state files on successful completion

   • Remove .omc/state/autopilot-state.json, ralph-state.json, ultrawork-state.json, ultraqa-state.json
   • Run /oh-my-claudecode:cancel for clean exit

- Use `Task(subagent_type="oh-my-claudecode:architect", ...)` for Phase 4 architecture validation - Use `Task(subagent_type="oh-my-claudecode:security-reviewer", ...)` for Phase 4 security review - Use `Task(subagent_type="oh-my-claudecode:code-reviewer", ...)` for Phase 4 quality review - Agents form their own analysis first, then spawn Claude Task agents for cross-validation - Never block on external tools; proceed with available agents if delegation fails </Tool_Usage> User: "autopilot A REST API for a bookstore inventory with CRUD operations using TypeScript" Why good: Specific domain (bookstore), clear features (CRUD), technology constraint (TypeScript). Autopilot has enough context to expand into a full spec. User: "build me a CLI tool that tracks daily habits with streak counting" Why good: Clear product concept with a specific feature. The "build me" trigger activates autopilot. User: "fix the bug in the login page" Why bad: This is a single focused fix, not a multi-phase project. Use direct executor delegation or ralph instead. User: "what are some good approaches for adding caching?" Why bad: This is an exploration/brainstorming request. Respond conversationally or use the plan skill. - Stop and report when the same QA error persists across 3 cycles (fundamental issue requiring human input) - Stop and report when validation keeps failing after 3 re-validation rounds - Stop when the user says "stop", "cancel", or "abort" - If requirements were too vague and expansion produces an unclear spec, pause and ask the user for clarification before proceeding </Escalation_And_Stop_Conditions> - [ ] All 5 phases completed (Expansion, Planning, Execution, QA, Validation) - [ ] All validators approved in Phase 4 - [ ] Tests pass (verified with fresh test run output) - [ ] Build succeeds (verified with fresh build output) - [ ] State files cleaned up - [ ] User informed of completion with summary of what was built </Final_Checklist> ## Configuration

Optional settings in .claude/settings.json:

{
  "omc": {
    "autopilot": {
      "maxIterations": 10,
      "maxQaCycles": 5,
      "maxValidationRounds": 3,
      "pauseAfterExpansion": false,
      "pauseAfterPlanning": false,
      "skipQa": false,
      "skipValidation": false
    }
  }
}

Resume

If autopilot was cancelled or failed, run /oh-my-claudecode:autopilot again to resume from where it stopped.

Best Practices for Input

1. Be specific about the domain -- "bookstore" not "store"
2. Mention key features -- "with CRUD", "with authentication"
3. Specify constraints -- "using TypeScript", "with PostgreSQL"
4. Let it run -- avoid interrupting unless truly needed

Troubleshooting

Stuck in a phase? Check TODO list for blocked tasks, review .omc/autopilot-state.json, or cancel and resume.

QA cycles exhausted? The same error 3 times indicates a fundamental issue. Review the error pattern; manual intervention may be needed.

Validation keeps failing? Review the specific issues. Requirements may have been too vague -- cancel and provide more detail.