| name | compound-engineering |
| description | Compound Engineering workflow for AI-assisted development. Use when planning features, executing work, reviewing code, or codifying learnings. Follows the Plan → Work → Review → Compound loop where each unit of engineering makes subsequent work easier. Triggers on: plan this feature, implement this, review this code, compound learnings, create implementation plan, systematic development. |
This skill implements Compound Engineering—a development methodology where each unit of work makes subsequent work easier, not harder. Inspired by Every.to's engineering approach.
Core Philosophy
Each unit of engineering work should make subsequent units of work easier—not harder.
Traditional development accumulates technical debt. Every feature adds complexity. Every change increases maintenance burden. Compound engineering inverts this by creating a learning loop where each bug, failed test, or problem-solving insight gets documented and used by future work.
The Compound Engineering Loop
Plan → Work → Review → Compound → (repeat)
- Plan (40%): Research approaches, synthesize information into detailed implementation plans
- Work (20%): Execute the plan systematically with continuous validation
- Review (20%): Evaluate output quality and identify learnings
- Compound (20%): Feed results back into the system to make the next loop better
80% of compound engineering is in planning and review. 20% is in execution.
Step 1: Plan
Before writing any code, create a comprehensive plan. Good plans start with research:
Research Phase
- Codebase Analysis: Search for similar patterns, conventions, and prior art in the codebase
- Commit History: Use
git logto understand how related features were built - Documentation: Check README, AGENTS.md, and inline documentation
- External Research: Search for best practices relevant to the problem
Plan Document Structure
Create a plan document (markdown) with:
# Feature: [Name]
## Context
- What problem does this solve?
- Who is affected?
- What's the current behavior vs desired behavior?
## Research Findings
- Similar patterns found in codebase: [list with file links]
- Relevant prior implementations: [commit references]
- Best practices discovered: [external references]
## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1 (testable)
- [ ] Criterion 2 (testable)
- [ ] Criterion 3 (testable)
## Technical Approach
1. Step 1: [specific action]
2. Step 2: [specific action]
3. Step 3: [specific action]
## Code Examples
[Include code snippets that follow existing patterns]
## Testing Strategy
- Unit tests: [what to test]
- Integration tests: [what to test]
- Manual verification: [steps]
## Risks & Mitigations
- Risk 1: [mitigation]
- Risk 2: [mitigation]
Detail Levels
- Minimal: Quick issues for simple features (1-2 hours work)
- Standard: Issues with technical considerations (1-2 days work)
- Comprehensive: Major features requiring architecture decisions (multi-day work)
Step 2: Work
Execute the plan systematically:
Execution Workflow
- Create isolated environment: Use feature branch or git worktree
- Break down into tasks: Create TODO list from plan
- Execute systematically: One task at a time
- Validate continuously: Run tests after each change
- Commit incrementally: Small, focused commits with clear messages
Working Principles
- Follow existing patterns discovered in research
- Run tests after every meaningful change
- If something fails, understand why before proceeding
- Keep changes focused—don't scope creep
Quality Checks During Work
# After each change, verify:
npm run typecheck # or equivalent
npm test # run affected tests
npm run lint # check code quality
Step 3: Review
Before merging, perform comprehensive review:
Review Checklist
Code Quality
- Follows existing codebase patterns and conventions
- No unnecessary complexity—prefer duplication over wrong abstraction
- Clear naming that matches project conventions
- No debug code or console.logs left behind
Security
- No secrets or sensitive data exposed
- Input validation where needed
- Safe handling of user data
Performance
- No obvious performance regressions
- Database queries are efficient (no N+1)
- Appropriate caching if applicable
Testing
- Tests cover acceptance criteria
- Edge cases considered
- Tests are maintainable, not brittle
Architecture
- Change is consistent with system design
- No unnecessary coupling introduced
- Follows separation of concerns
Multi-Perspective Review
Consider the code from different angles:
- Maintainer perspective: Will this be easy to modify in 6 months?
- Performance perspective: Any bottlenecks?
- Security perspective: Any vulnerabilities?
- Simplicity perspective: Can this be simpler?
Step 4: Compound
This is where the magic happens—capture learnings to make future work easier:
What to Compound
Patterns: Document new patterns discovered or created
## Pattern: [Name]
When to use: [context]
Implementation: [example code]
See: [file reference]
Decisions: Record why certain approaches were chosen
## Decision: [Choice Made]
Context: [situation]
Options considered: [alternatives]
Rationale: [why this choice]
Consequences: [trade-offs]
Failures: Turn every bug into a lesson
## Lesson: [What Went Wrong]
Symptom: [what was observed]
Root cause: [actual problem]
Fix: [solution]
Prevention: [how to avoid in future]
Where to Codify Learnings
- AGENTS.md: Project-wide guidance that applies everywhere
- Subdirectory AGENTS.md: Specific guidance for subsystems
- Inline comments: Only when the code isn't self-explanatory
- Test cases: Turn bugs into regression tests
Compounding in Practice
After completing work, ask:
- What did I learn that others should know?
- What mistake did I make that can be prevented?
- What pattern did I discover or create?
- What decision was made and why?
Document these in the appropriate location so future agents (and humans) benefit.
Practical Commands
Planning a Feature
Plan implementation for: [describe feature]
- Research the codebase for similar patterns
- Check git history for related changes
- Create a detailed plan with acceptance criteria
- Include code examples that match existing patterns
Executing Work
Execute this plan: [plan reference]
- Create feature branch
- Break into TODO list
- Work through systematically
- Run tests after each change
- Create PR when complete
Reviewing Code
Review this change: [PR/diff reference]
- Check for code quality issues
- Look for security concerns
- Evaluate performance implications
- Verify test coverage
- Suggest improvements
Compounding Learnings
Compound learnings from: [work just completed]
- What patterns were used or created?
- What decisions were made and why?
- What failures occurred and how to prevent them?
- Update AGENTS.md with relevant guidance
Key Principles
- Prefer duplication over wrong abstraction: Simple, clear code beats complex abstractions
- Document as you go: Every command generates documentation that makes future work easier
- Quality compounds: High-quality code is easier to modify
- Systematic beats heroic: Consistent processes beat individual heroics
- Knowledge should be codified: Learnings should be captured and reused
Success Metrics
You're doing compound engineering well when:
- Each feature takes less effort than the last similar feature
- Bugs become one-time events (documented and prevented)
- New team members can be productive quickly (institutional knowledge is accessible)
- Code reviews surface fewer issues (patterns are established and followed)
- Technical debt decreases over time (learnings compound)
Remember: You're not just building features—you're building a development system that gets better with each use.