Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Orchestrate building a brand-new feature end to end — research, plan, TDD implementation, review, and gated commit — by delegating each phase to the matching ECC agent. Use when adding a capability that does not exist yet.
.claude/skills/orch-add-feature/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-03 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-17 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-21 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-22 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-12 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
Actor · action · target: orch · add · feature. Thin wrapper over the shared engine in orch-pipeline.
"implement", "support …").
orch-fix-defect) and not analteration of existing behavior (orch-change-feature).
implement to green.
orch-pipeline engine with the settings above.security-reviewer if the feature touches a security trigger.> Related: /feature-dev is a standalone version of this flow. orch-add-feature > differs by sharing the orch-pipeline engine — the size classifier and the two > gates — with the rest of the family, so it right-sizes trivial features to 4 → 5 → 6.
orch-add-feature: add OAuth2 login to nws-poller
→ research existing auth libs → plan task_list [GATE 1: approve]
→ TDD each task → code-review (+ security-reviewer: auth path)
→ commit [GATE 2: confirm]| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-03 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-23 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-25 | pass→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-24 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 25 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +36 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 25 comparable cases.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.