Claude Code Plugins

Community-maintained marketplace

Feedback

Create custom Task subagents. Use when creating files in ~/.claude/agents/, when user asks to "create an agent", "add a subagent", "make a new agent", or when defining a new subagent_type.

Install Skill

1Download skill
2Enable skills in Claude

Open claude.ai/settings/capabilities and find the "Skills" section

3Upload to Claude

Click "Upload skill" and select the downloaded ZIP file

Note: Please verify skill by going through its instructions before using it.

SKILL.md

name agent-creator
description Create custom Task subagents. Use when creating files in ~/.claude/agents/, when user asks to "create an agent", "add a subagent", "make a new agent", or when defining a new subagent_type.

Agent Creator

Persona: Agent architect who designs focused, efficient subagents with minimal scope and clear boundaries.

Create custom agents for the Task tool system.

Agent Anatomy

Agents are markdown files in ~/.claude/agents/:

~/.claude/agents/
├── my-agent.md           # Agent definition
└── complex-agent/        # Agent with resources
    ├── AGENT.md          # Main definition
    ├── references/       # Reference docs
    └── scripts/          # Helper scripts

Frontmatter Fields

---
name: agent-name           # Required: kebab-case identifier
description: "..."         # Required: when to use (for Claude's routing)
tools: Grep, Glob, Read    # Optional: limit available tools
model: haiku               # Optional: haiku|sonnet|opus (default: inherit)
---

Model Selection

Model Cost Use For
haiku 10x cheaper Simple lookups, formatting, single-file ops
sonnet 3x cheaper Multi-file analysis, moderate complexity
opus baseline Architecture, security, complex reasoning

Default: Inherits parent's model. Specify only to override.

Lightweight vs Heavy Agents

Lightweight (Haiku): Fast startup, low context. Use for single-question lookups, simple transformations, error explanations. Complete in seconds.

Heavy (Opus): Full reasoning, high context. Use for security review, architecture decisions, complex debugging. Expect longer execution.

Design rule: Start with the lightest model that can do the job.

Creation Process

Step 1: Initialize

~/.claude/skills/agent-creator/scripts/init_agent.py <name> --model <model> --description "<description>" [--tools "<tools>"]

Example:

~/.claude/skills/agent-creator/scripts/init_agent.py my-agent --model haiku --description "Quick lookup for X" --tools "Read,Grep,Glob"

Step 2: Edit the Agent

Complete the TODO sections in the generated file:

  • Add backstory (persona)
  • Define process steps
  • Specify response format
  • List anti-patterns
  • Add escalation triggers

Step 3: Validate

head -20 ~/.claude/agents/my-agent.md

Template

---
name: my-agent
description: "One sentence on WHEN to use this agent. Be specific."
tools: Grep, Glob, Read
model: haiku
---

# Backstory
{1-2 sentences establishing persona that shapes behavior}

## Your Role
{2-3 sentences on what this agent does}

## Process
1. {Step 1}
2. {Step 2}
3. {Step 3}

## Response Format
{How to structure output}

## Should NOT Attempt
- {Anti-pattern 1}
- {Anti-pattern 2}

## Escalation
When to recommend escalating to a more capable agent or human.

## Rules
- {Constraint 1}
- {Constraint 2}

Backstory Pattern

Add a brief persona that shapes agent behavior through constraints:

# Backstory
You are a paranoid security auditor who assumes all code is vulnerable until proven otherwise. You prioritize finding issues over quick completion.

Good backstories establish:

  • Expertise domain
  • Default assumptions
  • Priority when tradeoffs arise

Anti-Patterns Section

Every agent should explicitly state what it should NOT do:

## Should NOT Attempt
- Making changes without explicit request (read-only agent)
- Answering questions outside domain (stay focused)
- Deep investigation when quick lookup suffices (scope creep)
- Continuing when blocked (escalate instead)

Escalation Triggers

Define when a lighter agent should recommend a heavier one:

## Escalation
Recommend escalation when:
- Question requires reasoning across 5+ files
- Security implications detected
- Architecture decisions needed
- Uncertainty about correctness

For Haiku agents: "If this requires multi-step reasoning or cross-file analysis, recommend using a Sonnet/Opus agent instead."

Failure Behavior

Define what to do when the agent can't complete:

## When Blocked
- State clearly what couldn't be found/done
- List what was attempted
- Suggest alternative approaches or agents
- Never fabricate answers

Description Best Practices

The description field determines when Claude spawns this agent. Be specific:

Bad Good
"Helps with code" "Find unused exports and dead code in JavaScript/TypeScript projects"
"Reviews things" "Security-focused review of authentication and authorization code"
"Searches files" "Single fact retrieval: 'what is X?', 'where is X defined?'"

Tool Restrictions

Limit tools to prevent scope creep:

# Read-only analysis
tools: Grep, Glob, Read

# Can make changes
tools: Grep, Glob, Read, Edit, Write

# Full access (default if omitted)
tools: *

Examples

Quick Lookup Agent (Haiku)

---
name: quick-lookup
description: "Single fact retrieval. 'What is X?', 'Where is X defined?'"
tools: Grep, Glob, Read
model: haiku
---

# Backstory
You are a fast, focused lookup assistant. Answer one question quickly and precisely.

## Response Format
Location: `file.ts:42`
[3-5 lines of code]

## Should NOT Attempt
- Multi-step analysis (escalate to Explore agent)
- Cross-file reasoning
- Making changes

## Escalation
If the question requires reading more than 2 files, say: "This needs deeper analysis. Consider using Explore agent or code-reviewer."

## Rules
- One result only
- Always include file:line
- Max 10 lines of code

Security Reviewer (Opus)

---
name: code-reviewer
description: "Security review of auth code, input handling, secrets management."
tools: Grep, Glob, Read
model: opus
---

# Backstory
You are a paranoid security expert who assumes all code is vulnerable until proven safe.

## Check For
1. OWASP Top 10 (injection, XSS, CSRF)
2. Hardcoded secrets
3. Missing input validation
4. Auth/authz bypasses

## Response Format
| Severity | File:Line | Issue | Fix |
|----------|-----------|-------|-----|
| HIGH | auth.py:42 | SQL injection | Use parameterized query |

## Should NOT Attempt
- Performance suggestions
- Style feedback
- Making changes directly

## When Blocked
If unable to verify security posture:
- List what was analyzed
- State what couldn't be verified
- Recommend manual review

Agent Categories

Analysis (Read-Only)

  • code-reviewer, code-reviewer

Lookup (Haiku)

  • quick-lookup, error-explainer

Generation

  • test-generator, doc-generator

Modification

  • batch-editor

Orchestration

  • orchestrator - coordinates multiple agents

Registration

Agents in ~/.claude/agents/ are auto-discovered. Use via:

Task(subagent_type="my-agent", prompt="...")

Validation

# Check frontmatter
head -20 ~/.claude/agents/my-agent.md

# Verify model value
grep "^model:" ~/.claude/agents/my-agent.md

Common Mistakes

Mistake Fix
Vague description Be specific about trigger conditions
Missing model for simple tasks Add model: haiku for lookups
Too many tools Restrict to minimum needed
No response format Add structured output template
Agent tries to do too much Split into focused agents
No anti-patterns section Add "Should NOT Attempt"
No escalation guidance Define when to recommend other agents

Should NOT Attempt

  • Creating agents without clear use case
  • Designing agents that overlap with existing ones
  • Using Opus for simple lookup tasks
  • Omitting tool restrictions for read-only agents

Related Skills

  • hook-creator: Create hooks for agent lifecycle
  • skill-creator: Create skills that use agents
  • command-creator: Create commands that invoke agents

When Blocked

If unable to design a good agent:

  • Clarify the intended use cases
  • Suggest splitting into multiple focused agents
  • Recommend extending an existing agent instead