---
description: Three-criteria evaluation framework for autonomous agent deployment
---

# Autonomous Agent Deployment

## Model Requirement

ALL agents MUST use Opus model. No exceptions, no fallbacks.

## Before EVERY Task: Three-Criteria Evaluation

Evaluate these three criteria before starting any task. If any criterion triggers, spawn the appropriate agent(s).

### Criterion 1: Research

**Question:** "Do I need to understand before I change?"

**Triggers:**
- 3+ files need reading to understand the change
- Working in an unfamiliar area of the codebase
- Change has architectural impact (new patterns, cross-feature, schema changes)
- Existing contracts or docs may be affected but you're not sure which ones

**Action:** Spawn a research subagent to map the affected area first. The subagent returns a summary of: files involved, contracts affected, patterns in use, risks identified.

### Criterion 2: Parallel Work

**Question:** "Are there independent pieces?"

**Triggers:**
- Multiple files need changes that don't depend on each other
- Multiple features or components can be built independently
- Tests, docs, and implementation can proceed in parallel

**Action:** Spawn 2-3 agents for parallel work. Each agent gets a clear scope:
- Define exact files each agent owns (no overlapping writes)
- Define the interface/contract between parallel work items
- Designate one agent as the integrator if work needs merging

### Criterion 3: Verification

**Question:** "Do I need to check my work separately?"

**Triggers:**
- Changes span 3+ files
- Cross-feature impact (changes in one feature affect another)
- Database schema or migration changes
- Contract or API boundary changes

**Action:** After implementation, spawn a reviewer subagent that:
- Runs type checking and build verification
- Checks contract/code/doc sync (see contracts-docs rule)
- Validates that no existing patterns were broken
- Reports issues back for fixing before commit

## When NOT to Use Agents

Skip the framework entirely when:
- Single-file change with clear, contained scope
- Simple bug fix with an obvious solution
- Task requires fewer than 3 tool calls total
- Context usage is already >60% (spawning agents adds context pressure)
- The user explicitly says "just do it" or similar

## Cost Awareness

Agents multiply cost. Use them deliberately, not reflexively.

| Pattern | Cost Multiplier | Justified When |
|---------|----------------|----------------|
| Research subagent | ~1.5x | Prevents wrong-direction implementation |
| Agent team (2-3) | ~3-4x | Saves wall-clock time on parallel work |
| Reviewer subagent | ~1.5x | Catches cross-file inconsistencies |
| Research + Team + Review | ~6-8x | Large features, multi-file refactors |

The cheapest agent is the one you don't spawn. If you can hold the full picture in your current context, just do the work.

## Intent Alignment

Before making design decisions, agents MUST check `INTENT.md` (if it exists) to verify alignment with documented project reasoning. If a task conflicts with documented intent, stop and ask the user before proceeding.

## Agent Communication

- Agents share context through files, not through prompt chaining.
- Research agents write findings to a structured summary, not raw dumps.
- Parallel agents must not write to the same file — partition ownership clearly.
- The main thread is responsible for final integration and committing.