--- name: parallel-feature-development description: Coordinate parallel feature development with file ownership strategies, conflict avoidance rules, and integration patterns for multi-agent implementation. Use this skill when decomposing features for parallel development, establishing file ownership boundaries, or managing integration between parallel work streams. version: 1.0.2 --- # Parallel Feature Development Strategies for decomposing features into parallel work streams, establishing file ownership boundaries, avoiding conflicts, and integrating results from multiple implementer agents. ## When to Use This Skill - Decomposing a feature for parallel implementation - Establishing file ownership boundaries between agents - Designing interface contracts between parallel work streams - Choosing integration strategies (vertical slice vs horizontal layer) - Managing branch and merge workflows for parallel development ## File Ownership Strategies ### By Directory Assign each implementer ownership of specific directories: ``` implementer-1: src/components/auth/ implementer-2: src/api/auth/ implementer-3: tests/auth/ ``` **Best for**: Well-organized codebases with clear directory boundaries. ### By Module Assign ownership of logical modules (which may span directories): ``` implementer-1: Authentication module (login, register, logout) implementer-2: Authorization module (roles, permissions, guards) ``` **Best for**: Feature-oriented architectures, domain-driven design. ### By Layer Assign ownership of architectural layers: ``` implementer-1: UI layer (components, styles, layouts) implementer-2: Business logic layer (services, validators) implementer-3: Data layer (models, repositories, migrations) ``` **Best for**: Traditional MVC/layered architectures. ## Conflict Avoidance Rules ### The Cardinal Rule **One owner per file.** No file should be assigned to multiple implementers. ### When Files Must Be Shared If a file genuinely needs changes from multiple implementers: 1. **Designate a single owner** — One implementer owns the file 2. **Other implementers request changes** — Message the owner with specific change requests 3. **Owner applies changes sequentially** — Prevents merge conflicts 4. **Alternative: Extract interfaces** — Create a separate interface file that the non-owner can import without modifying ### Interface Contracts When implementers need to coordinate at boundaries: ```typescript // src/types/auth-contract.ts (owned by team-lead, read-only for implementers) export interface AuthResponse { token: string; user: UserProfile; expiresAt: number; } export interface AuthService { login(email: string, password: string): Promise; register(data: RegisterData): Promise; } ``` Both implementers import from the contract file but neither modifies it. ## Integration Patterns ### Vertical Slice Each implementer builds a complete feature slice (UI + API + tests): ``` implementer-1: Login feature (login form + login API + login tests) implementer-2: Register feature (register form + register API + register tests) ``` **Pros**: Each slice is independently testable, minimal integration needed. **Cons**: May duplicate shared utilities, harder with tightly coupled features. ### Horizontal Layer Each implementer builds one layer across all features: ``` implementer-1: All UI components (login form, register form, profile page) implementer-2: All API endpoints (login, register, profile) implementer-3: All tests (unit, integration, e2e) ``` **Pros**: Consistent patterns within each layer, natural specialization. **Cons**: More integration points, layer 3 depends on layers 1 and 2. ### Hybrid Mix vertical and horizontal based on coupling: ``` implementer-1: Login feature (vertical slice — UI + API + tests) implementer-2: Shared auth infrastructure (horizontal — middleware, JWT utils, types) ``` **Best for**: Most real-world features with some shared infrastructure. ## Branch Management ### Single Branch Strategy All implementers work on the same feature branch: - Simple setup, no merge overhead - Requires strict file ownership to avoid conflicts - Best for: small teams (2-3), well-defined boundaries ### Multi-Branch Strategy Each implementer works on a sub-branch: ``` feature/auth ├── feature/auth-login (implementer-1) ├── feature/auth-register (implementer-2) └── feature/auth-tests (implementer-3) ``` - More isolation, explicit merge points - Higher overhead, merge conflicts still possible in shared files - Best for: larger teams (4+), complex features