Agent skill

Phase Wrap

by ZaxbyHub in ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm

Full execution protocol for MODE: PHASE-WRAP -- phase boundary evidence, drift and hallucination gates, retrospectives, phase completion, and final council.

MITAuto-check passedProduct & Project Management

Install Phase Wrap

skills CLI
$ npx skills add ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm --skill phase-wrap -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm phase-wrap --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/.opencode/skills/phase-wrap .claude/skills/phase-wrap && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
phase-wrap
GitHub stars
494
Token cost
~5.8k tokens
SKILL.md length
2,993 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
91
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

Full execution protocol for MODE: PHASE-WRAP -- phase boundary evidence, drift and hallucination gates, retrospectives, phase completion, and final council.

  • Works in 4 steps: the active swarm's explorer agent - Rescan → the active swarm's docs agent (the… → Update context.md → …
  • Tasks that involve Retrospectives
  • SKILL.md covers Graph-first evidence contract and ⛔ RETROSPECTIVE GATE
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md

What it does

Phase Wrap is an agent skill from ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm. Full execution protocol for MODE: PHASE-WRAP -- phase boundary evidence, drift and hallucination gates, retrospectives, phase completion, and final council.

Its SKILL.md is about 5.8k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

It sits in Product & Project Management, covering Retrospectives. The repository describes itself as: Architect-centric agentic swarm plugin for OpenCode. Hub-and-spoke orchestration with SME consultation, code generation, and QA review. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • Tasks that involve Retrospectives

Example prompts

  • “/phase-wrap”

Workflow steps

4 steps, taken from the first numbered list in SKILL.md.

  1. the active swarm's explorer agent - Rescan
  2. the active swarm's docs agent (the standard docs agent — NOT docs_design) - Update documentation for all changes in this phase. Provide
  3. Update context.md
  4. Write retrospective evidence: use the evidence manager (write_retro) to record phase, total_tool_calls, coder_revisions…

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit b63a4bd. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md.

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Phase Wrap loads about 5.8k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 42 tokens; SKILL.md has 2,993 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~42
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~5.8k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm at commit b63a4bd, republished under its MIT licence (© ZaxbyHub). 2,993 words, ~5,836 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/phase-wrap/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
phase-wrap
description
Full execution protocol for MODE: PHASE-WRAP -- phase boundary evidence, drift and hallucination gates, retrospectives, phase completion, and final council.
audience
swarm-plugin

Phase Wrap Protocol

This protocol is loaded on demand by the architect runtime. The architect prompt keeps only activation, action, and hard safety constraints; the full execution details live here.

Graph-first evidence contract

Before final phase judgment, use repo_map diff_context, impact_cone, and test_pack to audit the changed surface and likely tests. Graph evidence is advisory only. If freshness is stale or inconclusive, confidence is low, source is missing, the language is unsupported/dynamic, the graph is absent, or an action fails, inspect the direct source, Git diff, and executable test evidence.

⛔ RETROSPECTIVE GATE

MANDATORY before calling phase_complete. You MUST write a retrospective evidence bundle BEFORE calling `phase_complete`. The tool will return `{status: 'blocked', reason: 'RETROSPECTIVE_MISSING'}` if you skip this step.

How to write the retrospective:

Call the `write_retro` tool with the required fields:

  • `phase`: The phase number being completed (e.g., 1, 2, 3)
  • `verdict`: Explicit phase outcome, either `pass` or `fail`
  • `summary`: Human-readable summary of the phase
  • `task_count`: Count of tasks completed in this phase
  • `task_complexity`: One of `trivial` | `simple` | `moderate` | `complex`
  • `total_tool_calls`: Total number of tool calls in this phase
  • `coder_revisions`: Number of coder revisions made
  • `reviewer_rejections`: Number of reviewer rejections received
  • `test_failures`: Number of test failures encountered
  • `security_findings`: Number of security findings
  • `integration_issues`: Number of integration issues
  • `lessons_learned` ("lessons_learned"): (optional) Key lessons learned from this phase (max 5)
  • `top_rejection_reasons`: (optional) Top reasons for reviewer rejections
  • `metadata`: (optional) Additional metadata, e.g., `{ "plan_id": "<current plan title from .swarm/plan.json>" }`

The tool will automatically write the retrospective to `.swarm/evidence/retro-{phase}/evidence.json` with the correct schema wrapper. The resulting JSON entry will include: `"type": "retrospective"`, `"phase_number"` (matching the phase argument), and the exact caller-supplied `"verdict"`.

Required field rules:

  • `verdict` must be explicit on every write. Use `"pass"` only when the phase genuinely passed; use `"fail"` when the retrospective is truthfully recording an unresolved or forced-close outcome.
  • `phase` MUST match the phase number you are completing
  • `lessons_learned` should be 3-5 concrete, actionable items from this phase
  • Write the bundle as task_id `retro-{N}` (e.g., `retro-1` for Phase 1, `retro-2` for Phase 2)
  • `metadata.plan_id` should be set to the current project's plan title (from `.swarm/plan.json` header). This enables cross-project filtering in the retrospective injection system.
Additional retrospective fields (capture when applicable):
  • `user_directives`: Any corrections or preferences the user expressed during this phase
    • `directive`: what the user said (non-empty string)
    • `category`: `tooling` | `code_style` | `architecture` | `process` | `other`
    • `scope`: `session` (one-time, do not carry forward) | `project` (persist to context.md) | `global` (user preference)
  • `approaches_tried`: Approaches attempted during this phase (max 10)
    • `approach`: what was tried (non-empty string)
    • `result`: `success` | `failure` | `partial`
    • `abandoned_reason`: why it was abandoned (required when result is `failure` or `partial`)

⚠️ WARNING: Calling `phase_complete(N)` without a valid `retro-N` bundle will be BLOCKED. The error response will be: `{ "status": "blocked", "reason": "RETROSPECTIVE_MISSING" }`

MODE: PHASE-WRAP
  1. the active swarm's explorer agent - Rescan
  2. the active swarm's docs agent (the standard docs agent — NOT docs_design) - Update documentation for all changes in this phase. Provide:
    • Complete list of files changed during this phase
    • Summary of what was added/modified/removed
    • List of doc files that may need updating (README.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, docs/) Do NOT dispatch docs_design here. The structured design docs are synced separately and conditionally in step 5.58.
  3. Update context.md
  4. Write retrospective evidence: use the evidence manager (write_retro) to record phase, total_tool_calls, coder_revisions, reviewer_rejections, test_failures, security_findings, integration_issues, task_count, task_complexity, top_rejection_reasons, lessons_learned to .swarm/evidence/. Reset Phase Metrics in context.md to 0. 4.5. Run evidence_check to verify all completed tasks have required evidence (review + test). If gaps found, note in retrospective lessons_learned. Optionally run pkg_audit if dependencies were modified during this phase. Optionally run schema_drift if API routes were modified during this phase.
  5. Run sbom_generate with scope='changed' to capture post-implementation dependency snapshot (saved to .swarm/evidence/sbom/). This is a non-blocking step - always proceeds to summary. 5.5. Drift verification: Conditional on an EFFECTIVE spec existing (determined via /swarm sdd status or readEffectiveSpecSync — native .swarm/spec.md, OpenSpec openspec/, or Spec-Kit .specify/). If NO effective spec exists at all, skip silently. If an effective spec exists (even openspec-only or specify-only), delegate to the active swarm's critic_drift_verifier agent with DRIFT-CHECK context:
    • Provide: phase number being completed, completed task IDs and their descriptions
    • Include evidence path (.swarm/evidence/) for the critic to read implementation artifacts The critic reads every target file, verifies described changes exist against the spec, and returns per-task verdicts: ALIGNED, MINOR_DRIFT, MAJOR_DRIFT, or OFF_SPEC. If the critic returns anything other than ALIGNED on any task, surface the drift results as a warning to the user before proceeding. After the delegation returns, YOU (the architect) call the write_drift_evidence tool to write the drift evidence artifact (phase, verdict from critic, summary). The critic does NOT write files — it is read-only. Only then proceed to step 5.55. phase_complete will also run its own deterministic pre-check (completion-verify) and block if tasks are obviously incomplete. ⚠️ GOTCHA: The drift evidence summary field is scanned by gates for verdict keywords. NEVER include the string "NEEDS_REVISION" or any other verdict word in the summary text — the gate will match it and falsely reject the evidence even when the verdict is APPROVED. Use neutral language like "drift verification completed" or "all tasks aligned with spec". 5.55. Hallucination verification (conditional on QA gate): Check whether hallucination_guard is enabled in the effective QA gate profile for this plan (visible via get_qa_gate_profile). If disabled, skip silently and proceed to step 5.6. If hallucination_guard is enabled, delegate to the active swarm's critic_hallucination_verifier agent with HALLUCINATION-CHECK context:
    • Provide: phase number being completed, completed task IDs, every file touched this phase
    • Include evidence path (.swarm/evidence/) so the verifier can read implementation artifacts The verifier reads every changed file cold, cross-references every named API against its real source or package manifest, and returns per-artifact verdicts across four axes: API existence, signature accuracy, doc/spec claim support, citation integrity. If the verifier returns NEEDS_REVISION: STOP — do NOT call phase_complete. Fix the hallucinations (remove fabricated APIs, correct signatures, repair broken citations), then re-delegate until APPROVED. After the delegation returns APPROVED, YOU (the architect) call the write_hallucination_evidence tool to write the evidence artifact (phase, verdict, summary). The critic does NOT write files — it is read-only. NOTE: This step is enforced by the plugin. If hallucination_guard is enabled and .swarm/evidence/{phase}/hallucination-guard.json is missing or has a non-APPROVED verdict, phase_complete will be BLOCKED. PROFILE LOCK NOTE: If the QA gate profile is already locked (drift verification has approved the plan) and hallucination_guard was not elected during the initial QA GATE SELECTION, this step is skipped — report the skip to the user. A new plan cycle is required to enable the gate. 5.56. Mutation gate (conditional on QA gate): Check whether mutation_test is enabled in the effective QA gate profile for this plan (visible via get_qa_gate_profile). If disabled or turbo mode is active, skip silently and proceed to step 5.6. If mutation_test is enabled:
    1. Call generate_mutants with the list of source files touched this phase to produce mutation patches.
    2. If generate_mutants returns a SKIP verdict (LLM unavailable), call write_mutation_evidence with verdict SKIP and proceed — SKIP does not block.
    3. Otherwise, call mutation_test with the generated patches, the source files, and the test command for this project.
    4. Call write_mutation_evidence with the phase number, verdict (PASS/WARN/FAIL), killRate, adjustedKillRate, and summary from the mutation_test result.
    5. If verdict is FAIL: STOP — do NOT call phase_complete. Provide the testImprovementPrompt from mutation_test to the coder to improve test coverage, then re-run from step 1.
    6. If verdict is WARN: non-blocking — proceed to step 5.6 with a warning to the user.
    7. If verdict is PASS: proceed to step 5.6. NOTE: This step is enforced by the plugin. If mutation_test is enabled and .swarm/evidence/{phase}/mutation-gate.json is missing or has a 'fail' verdict, phase_complete will be BLOCKED. 5.58. Design-doc sync (conditional on design_docs.enabled — issue #1080): If design_docs.enabled is not true, skip silently. Otherwise: phase_complete runs a deterministic, non-blocking design-doc drift check and writes .swarm/doc-drift-phase-{phase}.json. If its verdict is DOC_STALE, enter MODE: DESIGN_DOCS in sync mode for the stale sections only — delegate to the active swarm's docs_design agent (NOT the standard docs agent) with the changed files + the stale section IDs, and have it update the affected docs and append a design-changelog.md entry. This is advisory and NON-BLOCKING — never hold up phase_complete on design-doc lag, and never write .swarm/spec.md, CHANGELOG.md, or docs/releases/pending/* here. 5.59. Required agent dispatch for phase_complete: Before calling phase_complete, the architect MUST have dispatched each of the active swarm's standard agents at least once during this phase. By default, phase_complete requires these agents:
AgentWhen requiredWhere dispatched during normal task execution
coderAlwaysTask implementation (coder)
reviewerAlwaysTask review (reviewer)
test_engineerWhen phase modifies source code/tests (unless explicitly waived)Test verification (test_engineer)
docsWhen phase_complete.require_docs: true in plugin configurationDocumentation updates

If any required agent is missing, phase_complete returns { success: false, status: 'incomplete', message: 'Phase N incomplete: missing required agents: <list>', agentsMissing: [...] } and the phase is not closed. Dispatch each agent during normal task execution (not only inside optional Phase/Final Councils in steps 5.65/5.7) so the closeout gate is satisfied.

The docs agent requirement is controlled by phase_complete.require_docs in plugin configuration, not by the QA gate profile returned by get_qa_gate_profile. It defaults to true. Set it to false only when the phase genuinely has no documentation obligation. A successful docs completion is persisted as plan- and phase-bound participation proof so phase_complete can recover it after a session restart; unrelated task-gate evidence does not count as docs participation.

Docs-attestation integrity (issue #1994 P2): when the docs agent concludes that a phase — especially a doc-only phase — needs no further documentation edits, that attestation is valid ONLY if the docs agent actually inspected the phase's changed files and recorded what it checked (files read, per-file verdict) in its completion report. A mechanical "no edits needed" reply dispatched only to satisfy agentsDispatched — without inspecting the phase's changes — is a process violation: the gate exists to catch documentation drift, not to be acknowledged past.

The coder and test_engineer agents are required because every phase that modifies source code or tests must have at least one implementation and one test-verification delegation. For pure documentation or retrospective phases, these may be waived by the user explicitly.

This is a hard enforcement mechanism, not a suggestion. phase_complete will not return status: success if any required agent is missing from agentsDispatched.

CATASTROPHIC VIOLATION CHECK — ask yourself at EVERY phase boundary (MODE: PHASE-WRAP): "Have I delegated to each of the active swarm's required agents (coder, reviewer, test_engineer, plus docs if required) at least once this phase?" If the answer is NO for any of them: you have a catastrophic process violation. STOP. Do not proceed to the next phase. Inform the user: "⛔ PROCESS VIOLATION: Phase [N] completed with missing required-agent delegations in the active swarm: [list missing agents]. All code changes in this phase are unreviewed/untested/undocumented. Recommend retrospective review before proceeding." This is not optional. Missing required-agent calls in a phase is always a violation. There is no project where code ships without review, tests, and required documentation.

Show full SKILL.md (1,181 more words)Show less

5.6. Mandatory gate evidence: Before calling phase_complete, ensure:

  • .swarm/evidence/{phase}/completion-verify.json exists (written automatically by the completion-verify gate) - .swarm/evidence/{phase}/drift-verifier.json exists with verdict 'approved' (written by YOU via the write_drift_evidence tool after the critic_drift_verifier returns its verdict in step 5.5) — required when an effective spec exists
  • .swarm/evidence/{phase}/hallucination-guard.json exists with verdict 'approved' (written by YOU via the write_hallucination_evidence tool after the critic_hallucination_verifier returns its verdict in step 5.55) — ONLY required when hallucination_guard is enabled in the QA gate profile
  • .swarm/evidence/{phase}/mutation-gate.json exists with verdict 'pass' or 'warn' (written by YOU via the write_mutation_evidence tool after step 5.56) — ONLY required when mutation_test is enabled in the QA gate profile
  • .swarm/evidence/{phase}/phase-council.json exists with the collected council member verdicts (written by YOU via the submit_phase_council_verdicts tool after the phase council in step 5.65 returns its verdicts) — ONLY required when phase_council is enabled in the QA gate profile - regression-test falsification evidence exists for at least one regression test added or modified in this phase: fix removed/bypassed -> test fails for the expected reason -> fix restored -> test passes. If the phase changed no regression tests, record not applicable with the changed-file evidence. If any required file is missing, run the missing gate first. Turbo mode skips all gates automatically. NOTE: Steps 5.5, 5.55, and 5.56 are enforced by runtime hooks. If hallucination_guard is enabled and you skip the critic_hallucination_verifier delegation (or fail to call write_hallucination_evidence), phase_complete will be BLOCKED by the plugin. Similarly, if mutation_test is enabled and you skip step 5.56 (or fail to call write_mutation_evidence), phase_complete will be BLOCKED. These are not suggestions — they are hard enforcement mechanisms. 5.65. Phase Council (conditional on QA gate — phase_council): Check whether phase_council is enabled in the effective QA gate profile (visible via get_qa_gate_profile). If disabled, skip silently and proceed to step 5.7. This gate is triggered by the phase_council QA gate, NOT by council_mode. (council_mode controls per-task Stage B replacement in MODE: EXECUTE; phase_council controls holistic phase-level review here in MODE: PHASE-WRAP.) If phase_council is enabled:
  1. Build a PHASE DOSSIER from all completed tasks in this phase, their evidence artifacts, changed-file summaries, and any drift/hallucination/mutation evidence.
  2. Dispatch the full 5-member council (the active swarm's critic agent, the active swarm's reviewer agent, the active swarm's sme agent, the active swarm's test_engineer agent, and the active swarm's explorer agent) in PARALLEL with phase-scoped context. Each member reviews the entire phase's work holistically and returns a CouncilMemberVerdict JSON object. → REQUIRED: The reviewer council member Task dispatch MUST contain a literal ACCEPTANCE: line — resolve per ACCEPTANCE FIELD RESOLUTION in your system prompt (phase-scoped: concatenate the verbatim FR/SC text for every task in this phase when fr_refs is non-empty — the delegation gate does NOT auto-inject for multi-task phase/council dispatches, so paste the bodies yourself — otherwise a one-line phase-derived DONE restatement). A missing line is BLOCKED by ACCEPTANCE_FIELD_REQUIRED. The other four members are not gated by this rule.
  3. Collect all 5 verdict objects. Do NOT fabricate or substitute verdicts.
  4. Act on the verdict: APPROVE → proceed. CONCERNS with success: false + reason: 'blocking_concerns_unresolved' → HIGH/CRITICAL findings are blocking, no evidence written, must resolve requiredFixes and re-council. CONCERNS with success: true → only MEDIUM/LOW advisory findings, phase may proceed per phaseConcernsAllowComplete flag. REJECT → surface required fixes to the user before proceeding.
  5. YOU (the architect) call the submit_phase_council_verdicts tool with the phase number and the collected council verdicts to persist the phase-council evidence. The council members do NOT write files — they are read-only. Only the submit_phase_council_verdicts tool writes .swarm/evidence/{phase}/phase-council.json (with plan binding, member verdicts, and quorum metadata). Do this BEFORE calling phase_complete. Requires council.enabled: true in config.

5.7. Final Council (conditional on QA gate - last phase only): Check whether final_council is enabled in the effective QA gate profile (visible via get_qa_gate_profile). If disabled, skip silently and proceed to step 6. If enabled AND this is the LAST phase in the plan (all other phases have status 'complete' and no more phases remain):

  1. Build a PROJECT DOSSIER from the completed plan, all phase summaries, changed-file summaries, and all relevant evidence artifacts. This is the full 5-member council (NOT the General Council) running a completed-project review.
  2. Dispatch the full 5-member council (the active swarm's critic agent, the active swarm's reviewer agent, the active swarm's sme agent, the active swarm's test_engineer agent, and the active swarm's explorer agent) in PARALLEL with project-scoped context. Each member must review the entire completed body of work and return a CouncilMemberVerdict JSON object using agent, verdict (APPROVE|CONCERNS|REJECT), confidence, findings[], criteriaAssessed[], criteriaUnmet[], and durationMs. → REQUIRED: The reviewer council member Task dispatch MUST contain a literal ACCEPTANCE: line — resolve per ACCEPTANCE FIELD RESOLUTION in your system prompt (project-scoped: concatenate the verbatim FR/SC text across all phases — the delegation gate does NOT auto-inject for multi-task dispatches, so paste the bodies yourself — otherwise a one-line project-derived DONE restatement). A missing line is BLOCKED by ACCEPTANCE_FIELD_REQUIRED. The other four members are not gated by this rule.
  3. Collect the five returned verdict objects. Do NOT fabricate, infer, or substitute verdicts. If a member does not return valid JSON, re-dispatch that member.
  4. Call write_final_council_evidence with phase, projectSummary, roundNumber, and the collected verdicts array. This writes .swarm/evidence/final-council.json with plan binding, member verdicts, and quorum metadata. ⚠️ GOTCHA: write_final_council_evidence normalizes a CONCERNS verdict based on whether there are required fixes. CONCERNS with requiredFixes > 0 → the tool writes NO evidence file (early-return blocking_concerns_unresolved) and phase_complete then blocks on the MISSING final-council.json. CONCERNS with zero required fixes → the tool writes a concerns verdict which is NON-blocking (advisory warning only). So: you MUST address required fixes from a CONCERNS verdict and re-council, or you will block on a missing evidence file. (Note: the phase-level council's phaseConcernsAllowComplete flag makes CONCERNS advisory at phase scope; the final council does not have that flag.)
  5. Do NOT call convene_general_council, do NOT dispatch council_generalist, council_skeptic, or council_domain_expert, and do NOT require council.general.enabled for this gate. final_council is the full 5-member council (NOT the General Council) rerun at project scope.
  6. Do NOT call phase_complete or /swarm close until .swarm/evidence/final-council.json exists with an approved, plan-bound, quorumed final-council verdict. When final_council is enabled, phase_complete will block until that evidence exists. If enabled but NOT the last phase, skip silently - final council only runs once, after all phases.
  7. Summarize to user
  8. Check the AUTO_PROCEED STATUS banner (injected into your context by the system-enhancer). The banner shows:
    • auto-proceed: <on|off> — the current effective value
    • source: <session|plan-or-default> — which side it came from
    • nudge: <true|false> — whether the FR-004 first-boundary nudge has already been done Then branch:
    • If auto-proceed: on: call phase_complete, then advance to the first task of the next phase. Do NOT ask the user.
    • If auto-proceed: off AND nudge: false: after the user confirms the phase transition, suggest enabling auto-proceed. Use the swarm_command tool to record the user's answer: swarm_command({ command: "auto-proceed", args: ["on"] }) for yes, swarm_command({ command: "auto-proceed", args: ["off"] }) for no. Either call sets nudge to true and prevents re-nudging.
    • If auto-proceed: off AND nudge: true: Ask "Ready for Phase [N+1]?" and wait for user confirmation before proceeding.
Blockers

Mark the task [BLOCKED] via update_task_status (do not hand-edit plan.md — it is a derived projection), skip to next unblocked task, inform user.

© ZaxbyHub, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in .opencode/skills/phase-wrap of ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit b63a4bd

Compare with similar skills

Phase Wrap next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Phase Wrap compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Phase Wrap this skillZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm494—~5.8kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Weekly Engineering Retrogarrytan/gstack136k—~2.4kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Dough Execute Planterryyin/lizard2.5k—~4.3kAutomated safety check: PassCustom licence
Oral Paper SkillAdkid-Zephyr/oral-paper-skill357—~1.9kAutomated safety check: PassNone
Deck Retroasheshgoplani/agent-deck1.1k—~1.8kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Dough Execution Retrospectiveterryyin/lizard2.5k—~4kAutomated safety check: PassCustom licence

Similar skills

  • Builds a weekly engineering retrospective from git history: commit counts, per-person contributions, work patterns and code quality numbers over a chosen window.

    136k GitHub stars~2.4k tokensUpdated today
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Dough Execute Plan

    terryyin/lizard

    Executes one selected story or bounded retrospective correction through an executable plan, or one authorized planless slice from a selected simple story or a contextual instruction, with…

    2.5k GitHub stars~4.3k tokensUpdated today
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Oral Paper Skill

    Adkid-Zephyr/oral-paper-skill

    Help authors learn from exemplary ICLR, ICML, and NeurIPS papers through source-linked manuscript comparisons, concrete writing and experiment suggestions, and guided reflection.

    357 GitHub stars~1.9k tokensUpdated 23 days ago
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Deck Retro

    asheshgoplani/agent-deck

    Run a fully local agent-deck retrospective over the user's own transcripts, Recall index and logs.

    1.1k GitHub stars~1.8k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Reviews planned, completed planless quick, or quick-to-planned execution against original intent, aggregate commits, current whole-product architecture, and tests, including after cleanup.

    2.5k GitHub stars~4k tokensUpdated today
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Criticism Self Criticism

    HughYau/qiushi-skill

    批评与自我批评:在工作完成、阶段验收、收到批评或同类错误反复出现时,对成果和过程做诚实、具体、基于事实的审视,输出可执行的改进项,并处理外来批评而不辩解。触发信号包括 review、复盘、审查、"帮我看看有没有问题"、"你确定吗";任务刚开始或只是单步查询时不触发。

    3.8k GitHub stars~423 tokensUpdated 10 days ago
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed

More from ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm

All 91 skills in this repo
  • Codebase Review Swarm

    ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm

    Runs an evidence-gated, quote-grounded audit of a codebase for security, QA, accessibility, performance and more, and writes a verified report without changing source files.

    496 GitHub stars~2.8k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Issue Tracer

    ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm

    Drives a bug report from validation and root-cause tracing through a critic-reviewed plan, an approved minimal fix and a PR-ready closure, never merging without recorded human approval.

    496 GitHub stars~4.4k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Commit and PR Publishing for Codex

    ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm

    Codex adapter for opencode-swarm that governs commits, pushes, draft PRs, PR body updates and CI closeout, deferring to the repo's canonical commit-pr protocol.

    496 GitHub stars~1.6k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Durable Session State

    ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm

    Keeps plans, decisions, evidence and reviewer verdicts in small files so long multi-phase tasks survive context compaction and session resumes.

    496 GitHub stars~896 tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Swarm PR Feedback Closer

    ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm

    Ingests existing pull request feedback such as review comments and CI failures, verifies each claim, fixes confirmed issues and reports closure status for every item.

    496 GitHub stars~14k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed
  • Swarm PR Subscribe

    ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm

    Monitor a pull request after creation and act autonomously on pushed PR activity.

    496 GitHub stars~2.2k tokensUpdated today
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Phase Wrap

What does Phase Wrap do?

Full execution protocol for MODE: PHASE-WRAP -- phase boundary evidence, drift and hallucination gates, retrospectives, phase completion, and final council. Phase Wrap is an agent skill from ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm. Full execution protocol for MODE: PHASE-WRAP -- phase boundary evidence, drift and hallucination gates, retrospectives, phase completion, and final council.

When should I use Phase Wrap?

Phase Wrap fits situations like: tasks that involve Retrospectives.

How do I install Phase Wrap in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm --skill phase-wrap -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (.opencode/skills/phase-wrap in ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm) into .claude/skills/phase-wrap in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Phase Wrap in Codex?

Run `npx skills add ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm --skill phase-wrap -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (.opencode/skills/phase-wrap in ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm) into .agents/skills/phase-wrap in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Phase Wrap in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm --skill phase-wrap -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/phase-wrap, .gemini/skills/phase-wrap, .github/skills/phase-wrap and .opencode/skills/phase-wrap in your project.

What does Phase Wrap need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Phase Wrap is instructions for the agent only.

Does Phase Wrap access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Phase Wrap safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Phase Wrap use?

Phase Wrap is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Phase Wrap use?

About 5.8k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 23k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Phase Wrap?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Phase Wrap: Weekly Engineering Retro (garrytan/gstack, 136k stars), Dough Execute Plan (terryyin/lizard, 2.5k stars), Oral Paper Skill (Adkid-Zephyr/oral-paper-skill, 357 stars) and Deck Retro (asheshgoplani/agent-deck, 1.1k stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Phase Wrap?

ZaxbyHub (a GitHub organization) maintains it in ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm, which has 494 GitHub stars. The repository holds 91 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 10, 2026.

Source: ZaxbyHub/opencode-swarm on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.