conductor-new-track
Create a new track with specification and phased implementation plan
What this skill does
# New Track
Create a new track (feature, bug fix, chore, or refactor) with a detailed specification and phased implementation plan.
## Use this skill when
- Working on new track tasks or workflows
- Needing guidance, best practices, or checklists for new track
## Do not use this skill when
- The task is unrelated to new track
- You need a different domain or tool outside this scope
## Instructions
- Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs.
- Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes.
- Provide actionable steps and verification.
- If detailed examples are required, open `resources/implementation-playbook.md`.
## Pre-flight Checks
1. Verify Conductor is initialized:
- Check `conductor/product.md` exists
- Check `conductor/tech-stack.md` exists
- Check `conductor/workflow.md` exists
- If missing: Display error and suggest running `/conductor:setup` first
2. Load context files:
- Read `conductor/product.md` for product context
- Read `conductor/tech-stack.md` for technical context
- Read `conductor/workflow.md` for TDD/commit preferences
## Track Classification
Determine track type based on description or ask user:
```
What type of track is this?
1. Feature - New functionality
2. Bug - Fix for existing issue
3. Chore - Maintenance, dependencies, config
4. Refactor - Code improvement without behavior change
```
## Interactive Specification Gathering
**CRITICAL RULES:**
- Ask ONE question per turn
- Wait for user response before proceeding
- Tailor questions based on track type
- Maximum 6 questions total
### For Feature Tracks
**Q1: Feature Summary**
```
Describe the feature in 1-2 sentences.
[If argument provided, confirm: "You want to: {argument}. Is this correct?"]
```
**Q2: User Story**
```
Who benefits and how?
Format: As a [user type], I want to [action] so that [benefit].
```
**Q3: Acceptance Criteria**
```
What must be true for this feature to be complete?
List 3-5 acceptance criteria (one per line):
```
**Q4: Dependencies**
```
Does this depend on any existing code, APIs, or other tracks?
1. No dependencies
2. Depends on existing code (specify)
3. Depends on incomplete track (specify)
```
**Q5: Scope Boundaries**
```
What is explicitly OUT of scope for this track?
(Helps prevent scope creep)
```
**Q6: Technical Considerations (optional)**
```
Any specific technical approach or constraints?
(Press enter to skip)
```
### For Bug Tracks
**Q1: Bug Summary**
```
What is broken?
[If argument provided, confirm]
```
**Q2: Steps to Reproduce**
```
How can this bug be reproduced?
List steps:
```
**Q3: Expected vs Actual Behavior**
```
What should happen vs what actually happens?
```
**Q4: Affected Areas**
```
What parts of the system are affected?
```
**Q5: Root Cause Hypothesis (optional)**
```
Any hypothesis about the cause?
(Press enter to skip)
```
### For Chore/Refactor Tracks
**Q1: Task Summary**
```
What needs to be done?
[If argument provided, confirm]
```
**Q2: Motivation**
```
Why is this work needed?
```
**Q3: Success Criteria**
```
How will we know this is complete?
```
**Q4: Risk Assessment**
```
What could go wrong? Any risky changes?
```
## Track ID Generation
Generate track ID in format: `{shortname}_{YYYYMMDD}`
- Extract shortname from feature/bug summary (2-3 words, lowercase, hyphenated)
- Use current date
- Example: `user-auth_20250115`, `nav-bug_20250115`
Validate uniqueness:
- Check `conductor/tracks.md` for existing IDs
- If collision, append counter: `user-auth_20250115_2`
## Specification Generation
Create `conductor/tracks/{trackId}/spec.md`:
```markdown
# Specification: {Track Title}
**Track ID:** {trackId}
**Type:** {Feature|Bug|Chore|Refactor}
**Created:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Status:** Draft
## Summary
{1-2 sentence summary}
## Context
{Product context from product.md relevant to this track}
## User Story (for features)
As a {user}, I want to {action} so that {benefit}.
## Problem Description (for bugs)
{Bug description, steps to reproduce}
## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] {Criterion 1}
- [ ] {Criterion 2}
- [ ] {Criterion 3}
## Dependencies
{List dependencies or "None"}
## Out of Scope
{Explicit exclusions}
## Technical Notes
{Technical considerations or "None specified"}
---
_Generated by Conductor. Review and edit as needed._
```
## User Review of Spec
Display the generated spec and ask:
```
Here is the specification I've generated:
{spec content}
Is this specification correct?
1. Yes, proceed to plan generation
2. No, let me edit (opens for inline edits)
3. Start over with different inputs
```
## Plan Generation
After spec approval, generate `conductor/tracks/{trackId}/plan.md`:
### Plan Structure
```markdown
# Implementation Plan: {Track Title}
**Track ID:** {trackId}
**Spec:** spec.md
**Created:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Status:** [ ] Not Started
## Overview
{Brief summary of implementation approach}
## Phase 1: {Phase Name}
{Phase description}
### Tasks
- [ ] Task 1.1: {Description}
- [ ] Task 1.2: {Description}
- [ ] Task 1.3: {Description}
### Verification
- [ ] {Verification step for phase 1}
## Phase 2: {Phase Name}
{Phase description}
### Tasks
- [ ] Task 2.1: {Description}
- [ ] Task 2.2: {Description}
### Verification
- [ ] {Verification step for phase 2}
## Phase 3: {Phase Name} (if needed)
...
## Final Verification
- [ ] All acceptance criteria met
- [ ] Tests passing
- [ ] Documentation updated (if applicable)
- [ ] Ready for review
---
_Generated by Conductor. Tasks will be marked [~] in progress and [x] complete._
```
### Phase Guidelines
- Group related tasks into logical phases
- Each phase should be independently verifiable
- Include verification task after each phase
- TDD tracks: Include test writing tasks before implementation tasks
- Typical structure:
1. **Setup/Foundation** - Initial scaffolding, interfaces
2. **Core Implementation** - Main functionality
3. **Integration** - Connect with existing system
4. **Polish** - Error handling, edge cases, docs
## User Review of Plan
Display the generated plan and ask:
```
Here is the implementation plan:
{plan content}
Is this plan correct?
1. Yes, create the track
2. No, let me edit (opens for inline edits)
3. Add more phases/tasks
4. Start over
```
## Track Creation
After plan approval:
1. Create directory structure:
```
conductor/tracks/{trackId}/
├── spec.md
├── plan.md
├── metadata.json
└── index.md
```
2. Create `metadata.json`:
```json
{
"id": "{trackId}",
"title": "{Track Title}",
"type": "feature|bug|chore|refactor",
"status": "pending",
"created": "ISO_TIMESTAMP",
"updated": "ISO_TIMESTAMP",
"phases": {
"total": N,
"completed": 0
},
"tasks": {
"total": M,
"completed": 0
}
}
```
3. Create `index.md`:
```markdown
# Track: {Track Title}
**ID:** {trackId}
**Status:** Pending
## Documents
- Specification
- Implementation Plan
## Progress
- Phases: 0/{N} complete
- Tasks: 0/{M} complete
## Quick Links
- Back to Tracks
- Product Context
```
4. Register in `conductor/tracks.md`:
- Add row to tracks table
- Format: `| [ ] | {trackId} | {title} | {created} | {created} |`
5. Update `conductor/index.md`:
- Add track to "Active Tracks" section
## Completion Message
```
Track created successfully!
Track ID: {trackId}
Location: conductor/tracks/{trackId}/
Files created:
- spec.md - Requirements specification
- plan.md - Phased implementation plan
- metadata.json - Track metadata
- index.md - Track navigation
Next steps:
1. Review spec.md and plan.md, make any edits
2. Run /conductor:implement {trackId} to start implementation
3. Run /conductor:status to see project progress
```
## Error Handling
- If directory creation fails: Halt and report, do not register in tracks.md
- If any file write fails: Clean up partial track, report error
-Related in General
modeling-omnistudio-epc-catalog
IncludedSalesforce Industries CME EPC product-modeling skill for Product2-based catalog creation. Use when creating EPC products, configuring product attributes, building offer bundles with Product Child Items, or reviewing EPC DataPack JSON metadata for product catalog changes. TRIGGER when: user creates or updates Product2 EPC records, AttributeAssignment payloads, AttributeMetadata/AttributeDefaultValues, Offer bundles, or ProductChildItem relationships. DO NOT TRIGGER when: designing OmniScripts/FlexCards/Integration Procedures (use building-omnistudio-omniscript, building-omnistudio-flexcard, or building-omnistudio-integration-procedure), implementing Apex business logic (use generating-apex), or troubleshooting deployment pipelines (use deploying-metadata).
relationship-science-coach
IncludedUse this skill for direct, practical adult relationship coaching: couples conflict, repair, trust, marriage, dating, flirting, attachment patterns, emotional connection, sex, desire differences, eroticism, kink negotiation, affection, love languages, breakups, and long-term passion. Draw on Gottman, EFT and Hold Me Tight, attachment science, modern sex research, Perel, Nagoski, Kerner, Schnarch, Love and Stosny, and flexible love-language tools. Be concrete and low-hedge. Redirect only for imminent danger, abuse, coercive control, minors, non-consent, self-harm, stalking, or medical/legal/psychiatric decisions.
building-sf-integrations
IncludedSalesforce integration architecture and runtime plumbing with 120-point scoring. Use this skill to set up Named Credentials, External Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callout patterns, Platform Events, and Change Data Capture. TRIGGER when: user sets up Named Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callouts, Platform Events, CDC, or touches .namedCredential-meta.xml files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: Connected App/OAuth config (use configuring-connected-apps), Apex-only logic (use generating-apex), or data import/export (use handling-sf-data).
venue-templates
IncludedAccess comprehensive LaTeX templates, formatting requirements, and submission guidelines for major scientific publication venues (Nature, Science, PLOS, IEEE, ACM), academic conferences (NeurIPS, ICML, CVPR, CHI), research posters, and grant proposals (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA). This skill should be used when preparing manuscripts for journal submission, conference papers, research posters, or grant proposals and need venue-specific formatting requirements and templates.
let-fate-decide
IncludedDraws the 12 Houses of the Zodiac Tarot spread to inject entropy into planning when prompts are vague, ambiguous, or casually delegated. Interprets the spread to guide next steps. Use when the user says 'let fate decide', 'YOLO', 'whatever', 'idk', or other nonchalant phrases, makes Yu-Gi-Oh references, or when you are about to arbitrarily pick between multiple reasonable approaches. Prefer over ask-questions-if-underspecified when the user's tone is casual or playful rather than precision-seeking.
net-ops
IncludedCross-platform network troubleshooting (Windows, macOS, Linux) via local or remote shell. Use for: DNS broken, can't resolve hostnames, nslookup/dig works but apps fail, NRPT, WFP, scutil, /etc/resolver, systemd-resolved, /etc/resolv.conf, NetworkManager, VPN DNS leak residue (ProtonVPN/Mullvad/WireGuard/AnyConnect), AV/firewall blocking DNS or DoH, Tailscale DNS interaction, intermittent connectivity, remote diagnostics over SSH.