One attempt at a hard design locks in the first shape the model thought of. /architect settles types and boundaries before implementation. /arena runs several attempts at the same brief and merges the best parts. /interrogate has other models try to break the result. When the job is coverage rather than design synthesis, /swarm fans out slices or races and aggregates their results.
The two most common design mistakes are taking the agent's first design and polishing a plan that no code has tested. This page fixes both. You plan through code. Prototypes answer the open questions, a README or tutorial sets the target, and the written plan comes last.
/architect design the import pipeline before writing any code. i care most about how callers use it.
/architect grounds itself first, running /how over the code the design touches and /why when it moves ownership or layers. Then it runs /arena to produce competing design sketches, with the caller's usage written first in each, followed by types, signatures, and a module map.
By default it proceeds straight from the synthesized design into implementation. If you want to see the design first, say so:
/architect with checkpoint. stop and show me before implementing.
The design isn't sacred once code starts. If implementation shows the same workaround in unrelated places, or types that only compile with any or forced casts, /architect treats that as proof the design is wrong. It scraps the sketch and starts over instead of patching around it.
/arena take my prompt to the arena verbatim. i want to compare their proposals with yours.
/arena is the general tool underneath. N subagents attempt the same design or code brief in parallel, each writing to its own worktree or directory. A read-only judge from a different model family scores every candidate against a rubric. When no model from another family can run, the coordinator skips the judge and picks the base itself. The coordinator reads each candidate end to end, picks a base, grafts in the best ideas from the losers, and verifies the result.
flowchart LR
A[One task] --> B[Configured panel]
B --> C[Candidate 1]
B --> D[Candidate 2]
B --> E[Candidate N]
C --> F[Cross-judge]
D --> F
E --> F
F --> G[Pick a base]
G --> H[Graft the best parts]
H --> I[Verify]
The panel comes from your /setup-pstack configuration, and you can adjust it per task. Ask for more candidates when the decision matters, fewer when it doesn't:
/arena this, 5 candidates. the cache key format is expensive to change later.
/swarm check every package under packages/ against its check.sh. one worker per package. one report.
/swarm fans N workers across independent slices, coverage matrices, gauntlet lanes, exploration partitions, or declared race arms. Each worker gets its own scope and check, then reports PASS, ISSUES, or BLOCKED. The parent waits for the workers and returns one compact report with any gaps or dropouts.
Reach for it when parallelism buys coverage or lets independent checks race. /arena gives every worker the same design or code brief, then picks a base and grafts the best parts. /swarm covers slices or runs a race with a selection rule declared up front. It does not use the base-selection and grafting ceremony.
/interrogate the whole branch, but skeptically. no nitpicks unless it's an actual bug or regression.
/interrogate gives the change and its intent to adversaries on the configured models, and each tries to break it with a run against the real code. Adversaries find different failures. A finding survives only when rerunning its command shows a failure that breaks the intent. The report lists every verified finding with the adversaries that found it, then what each adversary dropped and why, and applies nothing.
Read the Dropped list too. You can override the verdict.
Never take the first design. Ask for a few, and pick from evidence you can see:
/poteto-mode prototype a few options for the new dropdown menu. take screenshots or videos for me to compare.
The Prototype playbook builds throwaway sketches in a scratch directory, puts the variants behind one switcher, drives each one, and captures screenshots or timings. It also works for behavior and algorithms, not just UI. Prototypes are planning with code. They let the agent answer its own open questions by running something instead of asking you, and they leave room for an option you wouldn't have thought of.
The same idea scales up to a real design. Pair /architect with prototypes and keep a review gate:
/poteto-mode we need rate limiting for external webhooks. /architect it first, and answer open questions with prototypes. let me review before proceeding.
Don't spend adversaries on an abstract plan. /interrogate drops every finding a run does not prove, so a plan with no code behind it gives them little to break. Let prototypes settle the questions, then review what got built.
For a package or API that other code will use, start with the doc a user would read:
/poteto-mode write a tutorial for how i would use the new config package first. then /teach me why it beats the current one.
Writing the tutorial first forces the caller's view. You describe the API to a hypothetical user and work back to the implementation. The doc also becomes a concrete target the agent checks its own work against. Name /technical-writing when the doc itself matters, so a tutorial stays a tutorial instead of drifting into reference and explanation at once.
pstack has no planning skill, on purpose. When you do want a written plan, ask for it once the design is settled:
/poteto-mode turn this design into a plan. small verifiable PRs, each with its own verification steps.
The Multi-phase plan playbook settles any remaining open questions by prototype, then writes one section per PR, each ending in proof that the change works. A passing test suite alone doesn't count as that proof. The plan is the deliverable. The playbook doesn't implement it, and it names which execution playbook should run it next.
For a migration, state the bar in the prompt:
/poteto-mode plan the migration of our ui library to the new styling system. small verifiable PRs, each with visual regression checks. the result must match the original exactly, bugs included.
"bugs included" keeps the migration from quietly fixing things on the way, which would make the old and new output impossible to compare. For a project that spans many days, you can commit the plan to the repo for a while so other agents see the work in progress. Delete it when the work lands.
You might be wondering whether every change needs this. No. Most changes need none of it. A rough ladder:
- A small, finished change you're unsure about needs
/interrogatealone. - A change that crosses function boundaries or moves ownership earns
/architect, which brings/arenawith it. - A standalone decision where independent attempts would help, like naming, formats, or an algorithm, is
/arenadirectly. - A coverage matrix, set of parallel checks, or race with declared arms is
/swarm. - An open question you could answer by running something, like a layout, a timing, or an approach, gets a prototype, not a debate.
- A contested design that's expensive to reverse gets
/architect, then/interrogatebefore shipping. - Work that spans several PRs gets a plan, written after the design settles.
/poteto-mode already applies this ladder. Boundary-crossing work triggers /architect on its own, so you reach for these directly mainly when you want more or less scrutiny than the default.
Next: Build and clean the change.