ldy26098
/
BMAD-METHOD
mirror of https://github.com/bmad-code-org/BMAD-METHOD.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
BMAD-METHOD/.patch/821/PR-821-Summary.md

9.4 KiB
Raw Blame History

Pull Request #821 Summary

Title

Ready to use subagents for opencode/claude

Author

amrhas82

Status

  • State: Open
  • Created: 2025-10-26T16:42:18Z
  • Updated: 2025-10-27T20:55:08Z
  • Draft: No
  • Mergeable: Yes
  • Merged: No

Description

Using your sophisticated BMad Method I adapted, compacted them as subagents to save context and added ai-dev-tasks 3 simple steps subagents to give users full fledged 2 approaches to spec engineering through Simple (ai-dev-tasks) or BMad Method. Tested on both and can be invoked with @agent_name and has its extensive manual for easy install. Some correction to opencode bmad configurations as well

Statistics

  • Commits: 1
  • Additions: 27,699 lines
  • Deletions: 0 lines
  • Changed Files: 152 files

Branch Information

Key Changes

New Directory Structure

  • subagentic/claude-subagents/ - Main subagents directory
    • agents/ - Agent definitions (13 agents)
    • agent-teams/ - Team configurations (4 teams)
    • checklists/ - Quality checklists (5 checklists)
    • AGENTS.md - Main documentation file

Agent List (13 Total)

  1. 1-create-prd - Creates PRDs through structured discovery
  2. 2-generate-tasks - Converts PRDs into actionable task lists
  3. 3-process-task-list - Manages implementation with markdown task lists
  4. business-analyst - Strategic analysis and market research
  5. full-stack-dev - Story implementation and development
  6. holistic-architect - System design and architecture
  7. master - Universal task executor
  8. orchestrator - Workflow coordination
  9. product-manager - PRD creation and product strategy
  10. product-owner - Backlog management and story refinement
  11. qa-test-architect - Quality assessment and testing
  12. scrum-master - Story creation and agile guidance
  13. ux-expert - UI/UX design and specifications

Agent Teams (4 Total)

  1. team-all - All core system agents
  2. team-fullstack - Full stack development team
  3. team-ide-minimal - Minimal IDE team (PO, SM, Dev, QA)
  4. team-no-ui - Backend-only team

Checklists (5 Total)

  1. architect-checklist.md - Architecture validation
  2. change-checklist.md - Change navigation
  3. pm-checklist.md - Product requirements validation
  4. po-master-checklist.md - Product owner master validation
  5. story-dod-checklist.md - Story definition of done
  6. story-draft-checklist.md - Story draft validation

Notable Files

  • .idea/ - IntelliJ IDEA project files added
  • AGENTS.md - Main documentation (243 lines)
  • All agents use markdown frontmatter format with metadata

Review Comments

  • 7 comments on the PR
  • 0 review comments

Links

Notes

This PR introduces a comprehensive subagent system for Claude/OpenCode that provides an alternative approach to the BMad Method, focusing on context-saving and easy invocation through @agent_name syntax.

Extended Context Analysis

Related External Project: Agentic-Toolkit

Repository: https://github.com/amrhas82/agentic-toolkit

The author maintains a separate comprehensive toolkit that provides broader context for this PR:

What Agentic-Toolkit Offers

Four AI Workflow Approaches:

  1. Simple Workflow (ai/simple/)

    • 3-step process: Create PRD → Generate Tasks → Process Task List
    • Streamlined for features, small projects, quick iterations
    • Perfect for rapid development without complexity

  2. Claude Subagents (ai/claude-subagents/)

    • THIS IS WHAT'S IN PR #821
    • BMAD + Simple hybrid
    • Context-optimized and compacted
    • Production-ready, tested agents
    • Direct deployment: Copy entire folder to ~/.claude
    • Invokable via @agent_name syntax

  3. OpenCode Subagents (ai/opencode-subagents/)

    • Same agents optimized for OpenCode
    • Copy to ~/.config/opencode
    • Invoke naturally with role references

  4. BMAD Method (ai/bmad/)

    • Full BMAD framework with ready agents
    • Separate implementations for Claude and OpenCode
    • Shared core framework files
    • BMB (BMAD Builder) for custom agent creation

  5. Task Master (ai/README-task-master.md)

    • AI-powered task management system
    • PRD-to-tasks automation
    • MCP integration for Cursor, Windsurf, VS Code, Claude Code
    • Cross-platform CLI with multiple AI provider support

Additional Components:

  • Development Tools (tools/): Automated installation scripts for Tmux, Neovim, etc.
  • Environment Setup (env/): Complete Ubuntu/Debian dev environment configs
  • Integrations (integrations/): 200+ MCP servers documented
  • System Requirements: Ubuntu 20.04+, 4GB+ RAM, 10GB+ storage

Key Architectural Differences

Agentic-Toolkit Philosophy:

  • Static, pre-built agents ready for immediate use
  • Copy-paste deployment model
  • Multiple framework options (Simple, BMAD, Task Master)
  • Global installation approach (~/.claude, ~/.config/opencode)
  • Context optimization through compaction
  • Dual targeting: Both Claude and OpenCode

BMAD v6 Philosophy (from PR comments):

  • Dynamic generation via ./bmad CLI
  • Template-based agent creation
  • Sidecar pattern for customization
  • Project-level installation via npx
  • Living documentation that updates with method
  • Single source of truth architecture

The Core Issue

This PR represents a fundamental architectural divergence:

  1. PR #821 Approach: "Here are 13 fully-formed subagents you can use right now"
  2. v6 Approach: "Here's a system that generates agents dynamically from templates"

Why This Matters

Static Pre-built Agents (PR #821):

  • ✅ Immediate usability
  • ✅ Tested and optimized
  • ✅ No build step required
  • ❌ Become stale if BMAD evolves
  • ❌ Manual updates needed
  • ❌ Potential for divergence from main BMAD

Dynamic Generated Agents (v6):

  • ✅ Always in sync with BMAD updates
  • ✅ Single source of truth
  • ✅ Customizable via sidecar
  • ✅ Maintainable long-term
  • ❌ Requires build/generation step
  • ❌ More complex initial setup

Strategic Considerations

Option 1: Accept as Static "Snapshot" Module

  • Add as src/modules/subagent-snapshot/
  • Document as "v6-alpha compatible static agents"
  • Useful for users who want immediate deployment
  • Would need version locking and update strategy

Option 2: Use as Inspiration for Dynamic Generation

  • Extract the optimization patterns
  • Use compacted formats as templates
  • Build generator that creates similar output
  • Maintain through v6 build system

Option 3: Reference as External Alternative

  • Keep in agentic-toolkit repo
  • Link from BMAD docs as "alternative deployment"
  • Position as "quick start" vs "integrated approach"
  • No maintenance burden on BMAD

Option 4: Hybrid Approach

  • Accept simple 3-step agents (unique to this PR)
  • Use BMAD agents as template inspiration
  • Reference agentic-toolkit for full external toolkit
  • Build v6 dynamic generation with similar optimization

Missing from PR #821

Based on agentic-toolkit, the PR doesn't include:

  • Task Master framework
  • Development tools
  • Environment setup scripts
  • MCP integration documentation
  • Simple workflow documentation (only the agents)
  • Build/automation tooling

This suggests: PR #821 is a subset of agentic-toolkit, specifically the subagent definitions.

Critical Questions

  1. Does v6 want static pre-built agents at all?
  2. Is the Simple 3-step workflow worth integrating separately?
  3. Should BMAD officially support global subagent installation?
  4. How does this fit with the sidecar pattern vision?
  5. What's the long-term maintenance model?

Test Strategy Implications

Given this analysis, testing should focus on:

  1. Compatibility Testing

    • Do these static agents work with v6 structure?
    • Schema validation against v6 standards
    • Conflict detection with existing agents

  2. Architectural Alignment

    • Can these coexist with dynamic generation?
    • Do they create confusion for users?
    • Can they share templates/patterns?

  3. Value Proposition

    • What unique value beyond v6 capabilities?
    • User experience comparison
    • Maintenance cost analysis

  4. Integration Scenarios

    • As module: What changes needed?
    • As inspiration: What to extract?
    • As external: What to link/reference?

Recommendation

Based on the full context, this appears to be a well-intentioned but architecturally divergent contribution. The author has built a comprehensive external toolkit where this PR's content fits naturally. The best path forward likely involves:

  1. Declining the PR (respectfully)
  2. Acknowledging the valuable work
  3. Linking to agentic-toolkit as alternative
  4. Potentially extracting optimization patterns for v6's dynamic generation
  5. Considering the Simple 3-step workflow separately if it adds unique value

This allows both approaches to coexist without creating confusion or maintenance burden.