Official References: Best Practices · Subagents · Worktrees
Intermediate delivery fails at rhythm
At this stage, teams usually write fine code. What breaks is delivery rhythm: unclear lane ownership, stale evidence, and messy handoffs.
Recommended lane model
Use three lanes by default:
- implementation lane
- verification lane
- review/release lane
Add exploration lane only when uncertainty is still high.
Weekly operating pattern
- Mon: lock scope and lane owners
- Tue–Wed: implementation + daily verification checkpoints
- Thu: branch-vs-base review pass
- Fri: merge decision and cleanup
Consistency is more valuable than aggressive speed.
Daily evidence snapshot contract
Every lane leaves one daily snapshot:
- current goal status
- commands run + results
- diff scope
- blockers
- next owner
No snapshot means no reliable handoff.
Merge packet template
### Merge Packet
- Scope summary:
- Risk class:
- Verification summary:
- Diff scope confirmation:
- Residual risks:
- Rollback path:
- Final owner:Treat the merge packet as the minimum release artifact for intermediate projects.
Intermediate anti-patterns
Parallelizing dependent tasks
If tasks are sequentially coupled, splitting lanes slows delivery.
Evidence only at the end
Late verification compresses risk into one fragile step.
Reviewer assigned after coding is complete
Ownership should be declared before implementation starts.
Quick checklist
Before merge:
- lane ownership explicit
- daily evidence snapshots present
- verifier lane reran checks
- merge packet complete
Intermediate maturity is a process discipline problem, not a prompting problem.