Skip to content
Back to skills

Fleet Orchestrate

ASecurity

Use when a controller must coordinate two or more agent sessions for parallel review, issue discovery, implementation, verification, dependency conflicts, or unattended progress that must survive context loss or session replacement.

  • 36 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 1 view
  • Added September 2, 2026
ai-agentsgorailsgitsecurity

Security analysis

A100/100

Pro scans all 4 files and shows the line behind each finding

Scanned September 2, 2026

npx -y skills add fagemx/edda --skill fleet-orchestrate --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Fleet Orchestrate?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Fleet Orchestrate
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/fagemx-fleet-orchestrate-edda/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/fagemx-fleet-orchestrate-edda)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: fleet-orchestrate
description: Use when a controller must coordinate two or more agent sessions for parallel review, issue discovery, implementation, verification, dependency conflicts, or unattended progress that must survive context loss or session replacement.
---

# Fleet Orchestrate

## Overview

Run a fleet as a durable control system, not a group chat. Divide context and
ownership only where work is genuinely independent; keep decisions, evidence,
and state recoverable when any session disappears.

This policy applies when `fleet-orchestrate` or its coord review/orchestration
companions are invoked. It guides those sessions; it is not an Edda runtime
rule imposed on every project.

**REQUIRED REFERENCE:** Read [references/playbook.md](references/playbook.md)
completely before assigning work. Every target session starts with zero
conversation context.

**REQUIRED PRESSURE TESTS:** Use
[references/review-scope-pressure-tests.md](references/review-scope-pressure-tests.md)
when changing or validating review policy.

## Controller sequence

1. Fix the goal, exclusions, evidence bar, issue-filing authority, merge
   authority, and stop conditions. “Keep going” does not expand scope.
2. Inspect repository instructions, current revision, dirty state, active
   peers, claims, decisions, issue/PR state, and available durable carriers.
3. Maintain two logical rails: read-only review/discovery and write-enabled
   delivery. A verified finding may cross rails; a suspicion may not.
4. Build a dependency and file-overlap graph. Parallelize only independent
   ready bundles; serialize the same code chain. Set worker WIP no higher than
   verifier capacity.
5. Keep one controller, independent workers, and a read-only verifier. From
   two concurrent workers onward, reserve a verifier seat.
6. Record tasks, claims, rulings, and acceptance criteria in the durable truth
   layer before ringing host messaging as a doorbell.
7. Give self-contained briefs (verification budget and cleanup authority
   always; an assigned build lane whenever the session builds locally),
   monitor compressed state, adjudicate conflicts, and close only against
   immutable full SHAs with proportional evidence.

## Non-negotiable invariants

- Ledger/issue first; message second.
- Never mark overlapping write bundles active together; keep every later
  bundle blocked and unassigned until ownership is released.
- Highest durable `d-NNN` ruling wins; changes say `SUPERSEDES d-NNN`.
- Reviewer/verifier does not fix the artifact it judges.
- Review verdicts bind one full SHA; any push voids the verdict.
- Every handoff freezes `IN SCOPE`: changed behavior/paths, direct
  callers/consumers, issue/spec acceptance, introduced or exposed
  security/data-loss regressions, and current-base integration. Everything
  adjacent, pre-existing, or speculative is an evidenced `FOLLOW-UP ISSUE`
  unless it invalidates that frozen surface.
- This is a bounded complete review, never a minimal review. Audit the entire
  frozen surface; every failure there is mandatory, and only findings
  genuinely outside it qualify for follow-up.
- Finish the whole scoped audit and batch all blocking P0/P1 before requesting
  changes. A later blocker must be fix-caused or previously unobservable.
- The issue/spec is the acceptance ceiling. Require extra evidence only when
  needed to prove a required fact or safety boundary.
- Gates follow code/product-blob, base, and toolchain changes. Docs/evidence-
  only heads reuse still-applicable code gates as `READ` and run relevant
  delta checks plus exact-head CI as `RAN`.
- Record available elapsed/token/tool cost. After two consecutive
  non-product/harness-only cycles without useful progress, or at diminishing
  returns, stop and route follow-up or request operator scope expansion.
- Verify once per frozen artifact: the full gate set runs once per frozen
  full SHA — in the assigned build lane where one applies — and leaves a gate
  receipt (SHA, gate set, toolchain, lane or n/a, result); reviewers READ that
  receipt and exact-head CI and RAN only what they do not cover, stating the
  reason for any full rerun. A status, label, or draft flip is not a push.
- Know what the project's CI actually covers before citing it as independent
  evidence; a real gap earns a focused check of the uncovered surface, never a
  full rerun. Deterministically
  red CI already blocks the artifact — audit and request changes instead of
  spending a full run; re-run only the failed job when the red is environmental.
- A reviewer re-derives; an implementer's verification counts are not evidence.
  Receipts and CI are artifacts to inspect, a reported grep is a claim about
  unseen work. Name what you could not corroborate.
- Where sessions build or cache locally, that environment is bounded: one
  assigned lane per session for its lifetime from a fixed pool named in the
  brief, never per round, SHA, or timestamp; lane build cache is disposable,
  worktrees and sources are not; the fleet stops and reports rather than let
  the pool grow without bound. This invariant is inert for work that produces
  no local build cache — it costs nothing to carry and binds nothing to invent.
  Size any ceiling from a measurement of the project’s own footprint, never
  from a number carried over from another project.
- A GitHub PR carries its visible review-fix loop: numbered SHA-pinned review,
  implementer response to every requested change, and final current-head LGTM.
  An internal verifier report does not replace these PR comments.
- Worker receipts prove execution, not acceptance or merge authority.
- Session death is recoverable from the board, task rail, claims, and Git.

## Related skills

When present, use repository `coord-sync` before editing, `coord-request` when
crossing ownership, `coord-review` before integration, and `coord-handoff` when
releasing work. They refine peer behavior; this skill remains the fleet-level
controller contract.

## Minimum controller output

Publish and keep current:

1. authority contract;
2. review charter and finding queue;
3. dependency graph and bundle ownership;
4. fleet board with task, owner, branch, full SHA, state, review, build lane,
   and next step;
5. acceptance matrix, review handoff (`IN SCOPE`, `FOLLOW-UP ISSUE`, blocking
   P0/P1, `RAN`/`READ`, lane, gate receipt, exact SHA, cost), PR review-loop
   state, and final merge recommendation with current-head P0=0/P1=0.

Files in this skill

  • SKILL.md6.4 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml218 B
  • references/playbook.md24.3 KB
  • references/review-scope-pressure-tests.md4.8 KB

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.