The archetypes and shadows are distinctive enough — no need for a fancy name on top of the standard PDCA cycle terminology.
4.3 KiB
4.3 KiB
name, description
| name | description |
|---|---|
| workflow-design | Use when designing custom orchestration workflows — choosing which archetypes run in each PDCA phase, setting exit conditions, and configuring PDCA cycles. |
Workflow Design — PDCA Cycles
ArcheFlow's PDCA cycles spiral upward through iterations — each cycle incorporates feedback from the previous one, producing progressively better results. Each cycle incorporates feedback from the previous one.
╱ Act ──────────── Done ✓
╱ ↑
╱ Check (review)
╱ ↑
╱ Do (implement)
╱ ↑
╱ Plan (design) ← Cycle 2 (with feedback from Cycle 1)
╱ ↑
╱ Act ─┘ (issues found → feed back)
│ ↑
│ Check (review)
│ ↑
│ Do (implement)
│ ↑
│ Plan (design) ← Cycle 1 (initial)
Built-in Workflows
fast — Single Turn
Plan: Creator designs
Do: Maker implements (worktree)
Check: Guardian reviews
Act: Approve or reject (1 cycle max)
Use for: Bug fixes, small changes, low-risk tasks.
standard — Two Cycles
Plan: Explorer researches → Creator designs
Do: Maker implements (worktree)
Check: Guardian + Skeptic + Sage review (parallel)
Act: Approve or cycle (2 cycles max)
Use for: Features, refactors, moderate-risk changes.
thorough — Three Cycles
Plan: Explorer researches → Creator designs
Do: Maker implements (worktree)
Check: Guardian + Skeptic + Sage + Trickster (parallel)
Act: Approve or cycle (3 cycles max)
Use for: Security-critical, public APIs, infrastructure changes.
Designing Custom Workflows
Step 1: Identify the Concern
What's the primary risk?
| Primary Risk | Emphasize |
|---|---|
| Security | Guardian + Trickster in Check |
| Correctness | Skeptic + Sage in Check |
| Performance | Custom perf-tester archetype |
| Compliance | Custom compliance-auditor archetype |
| Data integrity | Custom db-specialist archetype |
| User experience | Custom ux-reviewer archetype |
Step 2: Assign Phases
Rules:
- Plan always includes Creator (someone must propose)
- Do always includes Maker (someone must build)
- Check needs at least one reviewer
- Max 3 archetypes per phase (diminishing returns beyond that)
- Explorer goes in Plan only (research before design)
- Maker goes in Do only (build from plan, not from scratch)
Step 3: Set Exit Conditions
| Condition | When Cycle Ends | Best For |
|---|---|---|
all_approved |
Every Check reviewer says APPROVED | Consensus-driven (default) |
no_critical |
No CRITICAL findings in Check output | Speed with safety net |
convergence |
No new issues vs. previous cycle | Diminishing returns detection |
always |
Runs all maxCycles unconditionally | Research, exploration |
Step 4: Set Max Cycles
- 1 cycle: Fast, low-risk (fast workflow)
- 2 cycles: Balanced — one shot + one fix (standard workflow)
- 3 cycles: Thorough — usually converges by cycle 3
- 4+ cycles: Rarely useful. If 3 cycles don't converge, the task needs human input.
Example Custom Workflows
Security-First
Plan: Explorer (threat modeling) → Creator
Do: Maker
Check: Guardian + Trickster (parallel)
Exit: all_approved, max 3 cycles
Research-Heavy
Plan: Explorer (deep research) → Creator
Do: Maker
Check: Skeptic + Sage (parallel)
Exit: all_approved, max 2 cycles
Domain-Specific (with custom archetypes)
Plan: Explorer → Creator
Do: Maker
Check: Guardian + db-specialist + compliance-auditor (parallel)
Exit: all_approved, max 2 cycles
Minimal Validation
Plan: Creator (no research)
Do: Maker
Check: Guardian
Exit: no_critical, max 1 cycle
Anti-Patterns
- Kitchen sink: Putting all 7 archetypes in Check. Most can't add value simultaneously.
- Runaway cycles: maxCycles > 4 burns tokens without convergence.
- Reviewerless Do: Skipping Check phase "to save time." You'll pay in bugs.
- Maker in Plan: Maker should implement from a proposal, not design on the fly.
- Solo orchestration: One archetype in every phase. That's just a single agent with extra steps.