discord-manager: Skill for Claude Code

Subagents and Dynamic Workflows

Everything here documents the repository as it is on main. If main disagrees with this file, main wins: follow it and flag the drift.

The orchestrator delegates execution and keeps its own context lean. The two decisions that make delegation work are how big to make each subagent's task and which model runs it. Getting the size right matters more than anything else: it is the difference between coherent, trustworthy work and hallucinated, low-quality work.

This skill is self-improving. When a better sizing heuristic or a new calibration point emerges, update it.

The context budget: aim for ~33% of the 1M window

• Fable, Opus, and Sonnet all have 1,000,000-token context windows. So ~33% ≈ 330k tokens.
• These models begin degrading around 25–33% window fill. Past ~33%, distrust the output — that is where hallucinations, silently-dropped requirements, and quality regressions appear. Do not trust results from a context much fuller than a third.
• Design each task to LAND near 33% by the time it finishes — not to blow past it. The target is the end state of a healthy task, not a ceiling to race toward.
• Soft rule, not hard: if an agent is genuinely near the end of its task when it crosses 33%, let it finish — interrupting or compacting mid-task is worse than mild degradation at the finish line. What must be avoided is an agent still doing substantive work at 50%+.

Sizing: the tradeoff to balance

• Too small → over-parallelization. Many agents each holding a partial view produce fragmented, less coherent work with integration seams, duplicated context loading, and coordination overhead.
• Too big → the context overflows past ~33%, performance degrades, and either the quality drops (hallucinations, missed requirements) or the agent dies mid-task with its work wasted.
• Right-sized = one coherent deliverable an agent can hold entirely in a healthy (<~33%) context, including all the reading and gate-iteration the task requires.