Workflow Tools

Work smarter with loop detection, parallel decisions, and file size analysis

workflow-tools (工具)

Unified skill for workflow utilities including open loop detection, parallel/serial decision framework, MCE file analysis, and subworkflow spawning. Consolidates 4 skills.

Trigger: 明示呼出 (explicit invocation)

Source skills: loop-closer, parallel-decision, MCE (minimal-context-engineering), subworkflow-spawner

Removed: pbd-strength-classifier (redundant with /fm classify)

Installation

bash

openclaw install leegitw/workflow-tools

Dependencies:

• leegitw/failure-memory (for loop context)
• leegitw/constraint-engine (for enforcement context)

bash

# Install with dependencies
openclaw install leegitw/context-verifier
openclaw install leegitw/failure-memory
openclaw install leegitw/constraint-engine
openclaw install leegitw/workflow-tools

Standalone usage: Loop detection, parallel decisions, and MCE analysis work independently. Full integration provides constraint-aware workflow recommendations.

Data handling: This skill operates within your agent's trust boundary. When triggered, it uses your agent's configured model for workflow analysis and decision support. No external APIs or third-party services are called. Results are written to output/ subdirectories in your workspace.

⚠️ File access: This skill reads user-specified directories and files for analysis:

• /wt loops [path] scans the specified directory (default: current working directory)
• /wt mce <file> reads the specified file for size analysis The metadata declares only config and output paths. See Security Considerations for details.

What This Solves

Workflows accumulate friction — loops that never close, decisions about parallel vs serial execution, files that grow too large. This skill provides utilities for common workflow problems:

1. Loop detection — find DEFERRED, PLACEHOLDER, and TODO markers before marking work complete
2. Parallel decisions — 5-factor framework for when to parallelize vs serialize
3. MCE analysis — identify files exceeding size thresholds, suggest splits

The insight: Small tools that do one thing well. Don't overthink the workflow — detect, decide, analyze, move on.

Usage

text

/wt <sub-command> [arguments]

Sub-Commands

Command	CJK	Logic	Trigger
/wt loops	循環	scan(DEFERRED∨PLACEHOLDER∨TODO)→openloop[]	Explicit
/wt parallel	並列	5因子→serial∨parallel	Explicit
/wt mce	極限	file.lines>200→split_suggestions[]	Explicit
/wt subworkflow	副流	task→spawn(clawhub.skill)	Explicit

Arguments

/wt loops

Argument	Required	Description
path	No	Directory to scan (default: current)
--pattern	No	Custom patterns to detect (comma-separated)
--exclude	No	Paths to exclude (comma-separated)

/wt parallel

Argument	Required	Description
task	Yes	Description of task to evaluate
--factors	No	Specific factors to evaluate (default: all 5)

/wt mce

Argument	Required	Description
file	Yes	File to analyze
--threshold	No	Line threshold (default: 200)
--suggest	No	Generate split suggestions

/wt subworkflow

Argument	Required	Description
task	Yes	Task description
--skill	No	Specific ClawHub skill to use
--background	No	Run in background

Configuration

Configuration is loaded from (in order of precedence):

1. .openclaw/workflow-tools.yaml (OpenClaw standard)
2. .claude/workflow-tools.yaml (Claude Code compatibility)
3. Defaults (built-in)

yaml

# .openclaw/workflow-tools.yaml
loops:
  patterns:                  # Patterns to detect as open loops
    - "TODO:"
    - "FIXME:"
    - "HACK:"
    - "XXX:"
    - "DEFERRED:"
    - "PLACEHOLDER:"
  exclude:                   # Paths to exclude from scanning
    - "vendor/"
    - "node_modules/"
mce:
  threshold: 200             # Line threshold for MCE compliance
  warning_threshold: 300     # Line threshold for warning
parallel:
  default_factors: 5         # Number of factors to evaluate

Core Logic

Open Loop Detection

Scans for unclosed work items:

Pattern	Type	Example
DEFERRED:	Postponed work	// DEFERRED: handle edge case
PLACEHOLDER:	Temporary code	// PLACEHOLDER: implement auth
TODO:	Task marker	// TODO: add error handling
FIXME:	Bug marker	// FIXME: race condition
HACK:	Technical debt	// HACK: workaround for bug
XXX:	Attention needed	// XXX: review this logic

Parallel vs Serial Decision Framework

Five factors determine parallel suitability:

Factor	Question	Parallel If	Serial If
Team	Can different people work on parts?	Independent parts	Shared expertise needed
Coupling	How connected are the tasks?	Loose coupling	Tight coupling
Interface	Are boundaries clear?	Well-defined	Fluid/evolving
Pattern	Is approach consistent?	Divergent exploration	Convergent refinement
Integration	How complex is merging?	Simple merge	Complex coordination

Decision matrix:

Factors favoring parallel	Recommendation
5/5	Strongly parallel
4/5	Parallel with coordination checkpoints
3/5	Consider case-by-case
2/5	Serial with parallel sub-tasks
0-1/5	Serial

MCE (Minimal Context Engineering)

File size thresholds for context efficiency:

Lines	Status	Action
≤200	✓ MCE compliant	No action needed
201-300	⚠ Approaching limit	Consider refactoring
>300	✗ Exceeds MCE	Split recommended

Split suggestions based on:

• Function/method boundaries
• Logical groupings
• Import dependencies
• Test coverage boundaries

Subworkflow Spawning

Delegate tasks to specialized ClawHub skills:

text

Task → Skill Selection → Spawn → Monitor → Collect Results

Available skill categories:

• research-*: Investigation and analysis
• generate-*: Content generation
• validate-*: Verification and testing
• transform-*: Data transformation

Example: Deployment Workflow Analysis

text

/wt parallel "Deploy new payment service to production"
[PARALLEL VS SERIAL ANALYSIS]
Task: "Deploy new payment service to production"

Factor Analysis:
1. Team: ✗ Serial - Single SRE team handles deploys
2. Coupling: ✗ Serial - Payment depends on auth service
3. Interface: ✓ Parallel - Clear API contracts defined
4. Pattern: ✗ Serial - Requires sequential rollout (canary → staging → prod)
5. Integration: ✗ Serial - Payment gateway integration must be verified

Score: 1/5 factors favor parallel
Recommendation: SERIAL deployment
Rationale: High-risk service requiring careful sequential verification.

Example: Infrastructure Loop Detection

text

/wt loops infra/ --pattern "MANUAL:,HARDCODED:"
[OPEN LOOPS DETECTED]
Scanned: ./infra
Files checked: 23

Infrastructure Issues (5):
  infra/terraform/main.tf:45  HARDCODED: AWS region
  infra/k8s/deployment.yaml:78  MANUAL: replica count
  infra/docker/Dockerfile:12  TODO: multi-stage build
  infra/scripts/deploy.sh:34  FIXME: rollback not implemented
  infra/helm/values.yaml:56  PLACEHOLDER: production secrets

Summary: 2 high, 2 medium, 1 low priority
Action: Address HARDCODED and FIXME before next release.

Output

/wt loops output

text

[OPEN LOOPS DETECTED]
Scanned: ./src
Files checked: 47

Open loops found (12):

High Priority (FIXME, XXX):
  src/auth/handler.go:45  FIXME: race condition in token refresh
  src/api/client.go:123   XXX: review error handling

Medium Priority (TODO):
  src/handlers/user.go:78  TODO: add input validation
  src/db/queries.go:234    TODO: optimize query
  src/utils/hash.go:12     TODO: add caching

Low Priority (DEFERRED, PLACEHOLDER):
  src/config/loader.go:89  DEFERRED: support YAML config
  src/templates/email.go:34 PLACEHOLDER: email templates
  ...

Summary: 2 high, 5 medium, 5 low priority loops
Action: Address high priority loops before release.

/wt parallel output

text

[PARALLEL VS SERIAL ANALYSIS]
Task: "Implement authentication and authorization"

Factor Analysis:

1. Team (独立性):
   ✓ Parallel - Auth and authz can be assigned separately

2. Coupling (結合度):
   ✗ Serial - Authz depends on auth tokens

3. Interface (境界):
   ✓ Parallel - Clear token interface between them

4. Pattern (手法):
   ✓ Parallel - Both follow established patterns

5. Integration (統合):
   ✗ Serial - Token format must match exactly

Score: 3/5 factors favor parallel

Recommendation: SERIAL with parallel sub-tasks
Rationale: Core dependency between auth and authz, but sub-components
           within each can be developed in parallel.

Suggested approach:
1. Define token interface (serial, required first)
2. Implement auth + authz (parallel, once interface stable)
3. Integration testing (serial, final step)

/wt mce output

text

[MCE ANALYSIS]
File: src/handlers/user.go
Lines: 347

Status: ✗ EXCEEDS MCE THRESHOLD (200 lines)

Complexity Analysis:
  Functions: 12
  Avg function length: 29 lines
  Max function length: 67 lines (HandleUserUpdate)
  Import groups: 4

Split Suggestions:

1. Extract CRUD handlers (lines 45-180):
   → src/handlers/user_crud.go (~135 lines)
   - CreateUser, GetUser, UpdateUser, DeleteUser

2. Extract validation (lines 181-250):
   → src/handlers/user_validation.go (~70 lines)
   - ValidateUserInput, ValidateEmail, ValidatePassword

3. Keep orchestration (remaining):
   → src/handlers/user.go (~142 lines)
   - Handler setup, middleware, routing

After split: 3 files, all ≤200 lines ✓

/wt subworkflow output

text

[SUBWORKFLOW SPAWNED]
Task: "Research competitor authentication implementations"
Skill: research-web-analysis
Status: Running in background

Job ID: SW-20260215-001
Monitor: /wt subworkflow --status SW-20260215-001

Expected completion: ~5 minutes
Results will be written to: output/subworkflows/SW-20260215-001/

Integration

• Layer: Extensions
• Depends on: failure-memory (for loop context), constraint-engine (for enforcement context)
• Used by: governance (for loop detection), review-orchestrator (for parallel decisions)

Failure Modes

Condition	Behavior
Invalid sub-command	List available sub-commands
File not found	Error: "File not found: {path}"
No patterns found	Info: "No open loops detected"
Skill not available	Error: "Skill not found: {skill}"

Next Steps

After invoking this skill:

Condition	Action
Loops found	Prioritize and address high-priority loops
Parallel recommended	Create parallel work streams
MCE exceeded	Apply split suggestions
Subworkflow complete	Review and integrate results

Workspace Files

This skill reads/writes:

text

output/
├── loops/
│   └── scan-YYYY-MM-DD.md    # Loop scan results
├── parallel-decisions/
│   └── task-YYYY-MM-DD.md    # Decision records
├── mce-analysis/
│   └── file-YYYY-MM-DD.md    # MCE analysis results
└── subworkflows/
    └── SW-YYYYMMDD-XXX/      # Subworkflow outputs
        ├── status.json
        └── results.md

Security Considerations

What this skill accesses:

• Configuration files in .openclaw/workflow-tools.yaml and .claude/workflow-tools.yaml
• User-specified directories via /wt loops [path] — scans for patterns (read-only)
• User-specified files via /wt mce <file> — reads for size analysis (read-only)
• Its own output directories (write):
  • output/loops/ — loop scan results
  • output/parallel-decisions/ — decision records
  • output/mce-analysis/ — file analysis results
  • output/subworkflows/ — subworkflow outputs

⚠️ IMPORTANT: The metadata declares only config and output paths. However, /wt loops and /wt mce read arbitrary user-specified paths beyond the declared metadata. This is by design — analysis requires reading the files/directories you want to analyze.

What this skill does NOT access:

• System environment variables
• Network resources or external APIs

What this skill does NOT do:

• Send data to external services
• Execute arbitrary code
• Modify source files (analysis is read-only)

⚠️ Path scanning (/wt loops): The /wt loops command accepts an arbitrary directory path argument. It will recursively scan the specified directory for loop patterns (TODO, FIXME, etc.). This is a read-only operation but can scan any directory you have filesystem access to. The skill does NOT restrict which paths can be scanned — use caution with sensitive directories. Consider using --exclude to skip sensitive paths.

Subworkflow spawning (/wt subworkflow): The /wt subworkflow command spawns other ClawHub skills installed in your environment.

• Scope: Can invoke any skill installed via openclaw install
• Permissions: Spawned skills execute with their own declared permissions (not elevated)
• Categories: Typically research-*, generate-*, validate-*, transform-* skills
• Risk: The effective permission footprint is the union of this skill plus any spawned skills

Review your installed skills (openclaw list) to understand the combined permission scope when using subworkflow spawning.

Provenance note: This skill is developed by Live Neon (https://github.com/live-neon/skills) and published to ClawHub under the leegitw account. Both refer to the same maintainer.

Acceptance Criteria

• /wt loops detects all standard loop patterns
• /wt loops categorizes by priority (high/medium/low)
• /wt parallel evaluates all 5 factors
• /wt parallel provides clear recommendation with rationale
• /wt mce identifies files exceeding threshold
• /wt mce --suggest generates actionable split suggestions
• /wt subworkflow spawns ClawHub skills correctly
• /wt subworkflow supports background execution
• Results written to workspace files

---

Consolidated from 4 skills as part of agentic skills consolidation (2026-02-15).