Land eval-tuned combo: file handoffs, progress ledger, final-review package, REQUIRED model lines, reviewer risk budget

Validated 2026-06-10 (all gates pass): go-fractals 54.1-54.7 min / $12.81-14.31
(baseline 64.9 / $16.07); svelte-todo 55.0 min / 19.3M / $14.99 (baseline
79.7 / 27.3M / $20.98); planted-defect pass $2.77. Dispatch-model discipline
3/3 runs after moving model: into the templates as a REQUIRED line.
Full experiment log: evals docs/experiments/2026-06-10-sdd-cost-experiments.md

skills/subagent-driven-development/SKILL.md

@@ -54,15 +54,15 @@ digraph process {
         "Write diff file, dispatch task reviewer subagent (./task-reviewer-prompt.md)" [shape=box];
         "Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?" [shape=diamond];
         "Dispatch fix subagent for Critical/Important findings" [shape=box];
-        "Mark task complete in todo list" [shape=box];
+        "Mark task complete in todo list and progress ledger" [shape=box];
     }
 
-    "Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create todos" [shape=box];
+    "Read plan, note context and global constraints, create todos" [shape=box];
     "More tasks remain?" [shape=diamond];
     "Dispatch final code reviewer subagent (../requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md)" [shape=box];
     "Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];
 
-    "Read plan, extract all tasks with full text, note context, create todos" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
+    "Read plan, note context and global constraints, create todos" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
     "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" -> "Implementer subagent asks questions?";
     "Implementer subagent asks questions?" -> "Answer questions, provide context" [label="yes"];
     "Answer questions, provide context" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)";
@@ -71,8 +71,8 @@ digraph process {
     "Write diff file, dispatch task reviewer subagent (./task-reviewer-prompt.md)" -> "Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?";
     "Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?" -> "Dispatch fix subagent for Critical/Important findings" [label="no"];
     "Dispatch fix subagent for Critical/Important findings" -> "Write diff file, dispatch task reviewer subagent (./task-reviewer-prompt.md)" [label="re-review"];
-    "Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?" -> "Mark task complete in todo list" [label="yes"];
+    "Task reviewer reports spec ✅ and quality approved?" -> "Mark task complete in todo list and progress ledger" [label="yes"];
-    "Mark task complete in todo list" -> "More tasks remain?";
+    "Mark task complete in todo list and progress ledger" -> "More tasks remain?";
     "More tasks remain?" -> "Dispatch implementer subagent (./implementer-prompt.md)" [label="yes"];
     "More tasks remain?" -> "Dispatch final code reviewer subagent (../requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md)" [label="no"];
     "Dispatch final code reviewer subagent (../requesting-code-review/code-reviewer.md)" -> "Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch";
@@ -161,14 +161,74 @@ final whole-branch review. When you fill a reviewer template:
   the commit list, stat summary, and full diff with context in one Read
   call. Use the BASE you recorded before dispatching the implementer —
   never `HEAD~1`, which silently truncates multi-commit tasks.
+- A dispatch prompt describes one task, not the session's history. Do not
+  paste accumulated prior-task summaries ("state after Tasks 1-3") into
+  later dispatches — a real session's dispatch hit 42k chars of which 99%
+  was pasted history. A fresh subagent needs its task, the interfaces it
+  touches, and the global constraints. Nothing else.
 - Dispatch fix subagents for Critical and Important findings. Record Minor
-  findings and move on — then paste the accumulated Minor findings into the
+  findings in the progress ledger as you go, and point the final
-  final whole-branch review dispatch so it can triage which must be fixed
+  whole-branch review at that list so it can triage which must be fixed
   before merge. A roll-up nobody reads is a silent discard.
+- The final whole-branch review gets a package too: run
+  `scripts/review-package MERGE_BASE HEAD` (MERGE_BASE = the commit the
+  branch started from, e.g. `git merge-base main HEAD`) and include the
+  printed path in the final review dispatch, so the final reviewer reads
+  one file instead of re-deriving the branch diff with git commands.
 - Every fix dispatch carries the implementer contract: the fix subagent
-  re-runs the tests covering its change and reports the results. A fix
+  re-runs the tests covering its change and reports the results. Name the
-  report without test evidence is incomplete — do not re-review on top of
+  covering test files in the dispatch — a one-line fix does not need the
-  it.
+  whole suite. A fix report without test evidence is incomplete — do not
+  re-review on top of it.
+- If the final whole-branch review returns findings, dispatch ONE fix
+  subagent with the complete findings list — not one fixer per finding.
+  Per-finding fixers each rebuild context and re-run suites; a real
+  session's final-review fix wave cost more than all its tasks combined.
+
+## File Handoffs
+
+Everything you paste into a dispatch prompt — and everything a subagent
+prints back — stays resident in your context for the rest of the session
+and is re-read on every later turn. Hand artifacts over as files:
+
+- **Task brief:** before dispatching an implementer, run this skill's
+  `scripts/task-brief PLAN_FILE N` — it extracts the task's full text to a
+  uniquely named file and prints the path. Compose the dispatch so the
+  brief stays the single source of requirements. Your dispatch should
+  contain: (1) one line on where this task fits in the project; (2) the
+  brief path, introduced as "read this first — it is your requirements,
+  with the exact values to use verbatim"; (3) interfaces and decisions
+  from earlier tasks that the brief cannot know; (4) your resolution of
+  any ambiguity you noticed in the brief; (5) the report-file path and
+  report contract. Exact values (numbers, magic strings, signatures, test
+  cases) appear only in the brief.
+- **Report file:** name the implementer's report file after the brief
+  (brief `…/task-N-brief.md` → report `…/task-N-report.md`) and put it in
+  the dispatch prompt. The implementer writes the full report there and
+  returns only status, commits, a one-line test summary, and concerns.
+- **Reviewer inputs:** the task reviewer gets three paths — the same brief
+  file, the report file, and the review package — plus the global
+  constraints that bind the task.
+- Fix dispatches append their fix report (with test results) to the same
+  report file and return a short summary; re-reviews read the updated file.
+
+## Durable Progress
+
+Conversation memory does not survive compaction. In real sessions,
+controllers that lost their place have re-dispatched entire completed task
+sequences — the single most expensive failure observed. Track progress in
+a ledger file, not only in todos.
+
+- At skill start, check for a ledger:
+  `cat "$(git rev-parse --git-path sdd)/progress.md"`. Tasks listed there
+  as complete are DONE — do not re-dispatch them; resume at the first task
+  not marked complete.
+- When a task's review comes back clean, append one line to the ledger in
+  the same message as your other bookkeeping:
+  `Task N: complete (commits <base7>..<head7>, review clean)`.
+- The ledger is your recovery map: the commits it names exist in git even
+  when your context no longer remembers creating them. After compaction,
+  trust the ledger and `git log` over your own recollection.
 
 ## Prompt Templates
 
@@ -182,13 +242,11 @@ final whole-branch review. When you fill a reviewer template:
 You: I'm using Subagent-Driven Development to execute this plan.
 
 [Read plan file once: docs/superpowers/plans/feature-plan.md]
-[Extract all 5 tasks with full text and context]
 [Create todos for all tasks]
 
 Task 1: Hook installation script
 
-[Get Task 1 text and context (already extracted)]
+[Run task-brief for Task 1; dispatch implementer with brief + report paths + context]
-[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]
 
 Implementer: "Before I begin - should the hook be installed at user or system level?"
 
@@ -209,8 +267,7 @@ Task reviewer: Spec ✅ - all requirements met, nothing extra.
 
 Task 2: Recovery modes
 
-[Get Task 2 text and context (already extracted)]
+[Run task-brief for Task 2; dispatch implementer with brief + report paths + context]
-[Dispatch implementation subagent with full task text + context]
 
 Implementer: [No questions, proceeds]
 Implementer:
@@ -256,8 +313,8 @@ Done!
 - Review checkpoints automatic
 
 **Efficiency gains:**
-- No file reading overhead (controller provides full text)
+- Controller curates exactly what context is needed; bulk artifacts move
-- Controller curates exactly what context is needed
+  as files, not pasted text
 - Subagent gets complete information upfront
 - Questions surfaced before work begins (not after)
 
@@ -281,7 +338,8 @@ Done!
 - Skip task review, or accept a report missing either verdict (spec compliance AND task quality are both required)
 - Proceed with unfixed issues
 - Dispatch multiple implementation subagents in parallel (conflicts)
-- Make subagent read plan file (provide full text instead)
+- Make a subagent read the whole plan file (hand it its task brief —
+  `scripts/task-brief` — instead)
 - Skip scene-setting context (subagent needs to understand where task fits)
 - Ignore subagent questions (answer before letting them proceed)
 - Accept "close enough" on spec compliance (reviewer found spec issues = not done)
@@ -294,6 +352,8 @@ Done!
   (`scripts/review-package BASE HEAD`) and name the printed path in the
   prompt
 - Move to next task while the review has open Critical/Important issues
+- Re-dispatch a task the progress ledger already marks complete — check
+  the ledger (and `git log`) after any compaction or resume
 
 **If subagent asks questions:**
 - Answer clearly and completely

skills/subagent-driven-development/implementer-prompt.md

@@ -5,12 +5,15 @@ Use this template when dispatching an implementer subagent.
 ```
 Subagent (general-purpose):
   description: "Implement Task N: [task name]"
+  model: [MODEL — REQUIRED: choose per SKILL.md Model Selection; an omitted
+         model silently inherits the session's most expensive one]
   prompt: |
     You are implementing Task N: [task name]
 
     ## Task Description
 
-    [FULL TEXT of task from plan - paste it here, don't make subagent read file]
+    Read your task brief first: [BRIEF_FILE]
+    It contains the full task text from the plan.
 
     ## Context
 
@@ -104,13 +107,12 @@ Subagent (general-purpose):
     ## After Review Findings
 
     If a reviewer finds issues and you fix them, re-run the tests that cover
-    the amended code and include the results in your fix report. Reviewers
+    the amended code and append the results to your report file. Reviewers
     will not re-run tests for you — your report is the test evidence.
 
     ## Report Format
 
-    When done, report:
+    Write your full report to [REPORT_FILE]:
-    - **Status:** DONE | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT
     - What you implemented (or what you attempted, if blocked)
     - What you tested and test results
     - **TDD Evidence** (if TDD was required for this task):
@@ -120,6 +122,17 @@ Subagent (general-purpose):
     - Self-review findings (if any)
     - Any issues or concerns
 
+    Then report back with ONLY (under 15 lines — the detail lives in the
+    report file):
+    - **Status:** DONE | DONE_WITH_CONCERNS | BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT
+    - Commits created (short SHA + subject)
+    - One-line test summary (e.g. "14/14 passing, output pristine")
+    - Your concerns, if any
+    - The report file path
+
+    If BLOCKED or NEEDS_CONTEXT, put the specifics in the final message
+    itself — the controller acts on it directly.
+
     Use DONE_WITH_CONCERNS if you completed the work but have doubts about correctness.
     Use BLOCKED if you cannot complete the task. Use NEEDS_CONTEXT if you need
     information that wasn't provided. Never silently produce work you're unsure about.

skills/subagent-driven-development/scripts/task-brief

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
+#!/usr/bin/env bash
+# Extract one task's full text from an implementation plan into a file the
+# implementer reads in one call, so the task text never has to be pasted
+# through the controller's context.
+#
+# Usage: task-brief PLAN_FILE TASK_NUMBER [OUTFILE]
+# Default OUTFILE: <git-dir>/sdd/task-<N>-brief.md — unique per repo
+# instance, so concurrent sessions cannot collide.
+set -euo pipefail
+
+if [ $# -lt 2 ] || [ $# -gt 3 ]; then
+  echo "usage: task-brief PLAN_FILE TASK_NUMBER [OUTFILE]" >&2
+  exit 2
+fi
+
+plan=$1
+n=$2
+[ -f "$plan" ] || { echo "no such plan file: $plan" >&2; exit 2; }
+
+if [ $# -eq 3 ]; then
+  out=$3
+else
+  dir=$(git rev-parse --git-path sdd)
+  mkdir -p "$dir"
+  dir=$(cd "$dir" && pwd)
+  out="$dir/task-${n}-brief.md"
+fi
+
+awk -v n="$n" '
+  /^```/ { infence = !infence }
+  !infence && /^#+[ \t]+Task[ \t]+[0-9]+/ {
+    intask = ($0 ~ ("^#+[ \t]+Task[ \t]+" n "([^0-9]|$)"))
+  }
+  intask { print }
+' "$plan" > "$out"
+
+if [ ! -s "$out" ]; then
+  echo "task ${n} not found in ${plan} (no heading matching 'Task ${n}')" >&2
+  exit 3
+fi
+
+echo "wrote ${out}: $(wc -l < "$out" | tr -d ' ') lines"

skills/subagent-driven-development/task-reviewer-prompt.md

@@ -10,6 +10,8 @@ more, nothing less) and is well-built (clean, tested, maintainable)
 ```
 Subagent (general-purpose):
   description: "Review Task N (spec + quality)"
+  model: [MODEL — REQUIRED: choose per SKILL.md Model Selection; an omitted
+         model silently inherits the session's most expensive one]
   prompt: |
     You are reviewing one task's implementation: first whether it matches its
     requirements, then whether it is well-built. This is a task-scoped gate,
@@ -18,11 +20,14 @@ Subagent (general-purpose):
 
     ## What Was Requested
 
-    [TASK_REQUIREMENTS]
+    Read the task brief: [BRIEF_FILE]
+
+    Global constraints from the spec/design that bind this task:
+    [GLOBAL_CONSTRAINTS]
 
     ## What the Implementer Claims They Built
 
-    [DESCRIPTION]
+    Read the implementer's report: [REPORT_FILE]
 
     ## Diff Under Review
 
@@ -32,14 +37,17 @@ Subagent (general-purpose):
 
     Read the diff file once — it contains the commit list, a stat summary,
     and the full diff with surrounding context, and it is your view of the
-    change. Do not re-run git commands or re-read the files it already
+    change. The diff's context lines ARE the changed files: do not Read a
-    shows. If the diff file is missing, fetch the diff yourself:
+    changed file separately unless a hunk you must judge is cut off
+    mid-function — and say so in your report. Do not re-run git commands.
+    If the diff file is missing, fetch the diff yourself:
     `git diff --stat [BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]` and `git diff [BASE_SHA]..[HEAD_SHA]`.
-    Only read files in this diff. Do not crawl the broader codebase. Inspect
+    Do not crawl the broader codebase. Inspect code outside the diff only
-    code outside the diff only to evaluate a concrete risk you can name — and
+    to evaluate a concrete risk you can name — one focused check per named
-    name it in your report. Cross-cutting changes are legitimate named risks:
+    risk, and name both the risk and what you checked in your report.
-    if the diff changes lock ordering, a function or API contract, or shared
+    Cross-cutting changes are legitimate named risks: if the diff changes
-    mutable state, checking the call sites is the right method.
+    lock ordering, a function or API contract, or shared mutable state,
+    checking the call sites is the right method.
 
     Your review is read-only on this checkout. Do not mutate the working
     tree, the index, HEAD, or branch state in any way.
@@ -147,10 +155,13 @@ Subagent (general-purpose):
 ```
 
 **Placeholders:**
-- `[TASK_REQUIREMENTS]` — full task text plus the spec/design's global
+- `[MODEL]` — REQUIRED: reviewer model per SKILL.md Model Selection
-  constraints that bind it (version floors, naming and copy rules, platform
+- `[BRIEF_FILE]` — REQUIRED: the task brief file (`scripts/task-brief PLAN N`
-  requirements)
+  prints the path; same file the implementer worked from)
-- `[DESCRIPTION]` — what the implementer reports they built
+- `[GLOBAL_CONSTRAINTS]` — the spec/design's global constraints that bind
+  this task (version floors, naming and copy rules, platform requirements)
+- `[REPORT_FILE]` — REQUIRED: the file the implementer wrote its detailed
+  report to
 - `[BASE_SHA]` — commit before this task
 - `[HEAD_SHA]` — current commit
 - `[DIFF_FILE]` — REQUIRED: the path the controller wrote the review