Create a new track (feature, bug fix, chore, or refactor) with a detailed specification and phased implementation plan.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionconductor-new-trackExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches conductor-new-track from sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate conductor-new-track. Access via /conductor-new-track in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs
Example
Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios
Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage
Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps
Example
Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities
Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days
Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs
Example
Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale
0
total installs
0
this week
31.1K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
31.1K
stars
Create a new track (feature, bug fix, chore, or refactor) with a detailed specification and phased implementation plan.
resources/implementation-playbook.md.Verify Conductor is initialized:
conductor/product.md existsconductor/tech-stack.md existsconductor/workflow.md exists/conductor:setup firstLoad context files:
conductor/product.md for product contextconductor/tech-stack.md for technical contextconductor/workflow.md for TDD/commit preferencesDetermine track type based on description or ask user:
What type of track is this?
1. Feature - New functionality
2. Bug - Fix for existing issue
3. Chore - Maintenance, dependencies, config
4. Refactor - Code improvement without behavior change
CRITICAL RULES:
Q1: Feature Summary
Describe the feature in 1-2 sentences.
[If argument provided, confirm: "You want to: {argument}. Is this correct?"]
Q2: User Story
Who benefits and how?
Format: As a [user type], I want to [action] so that [benefit].
Q3: Acceptance Criteria
What must be true for this feature to be complete?
List 3-5 acceptance criteria (one per line):
Q4: Dependencies
Does this depend on any existing code, APIs, or other tracks?
1. No dependencies
2. Depends on existing code (specify)
3. Depends on incomplete track (specify)
Q5: Scope Boundaries
What is explicitly OUT of scope for this track?
(Helps prevent scope creep)
Q6: Technical Considerations (optional)
Any specific technical approach or constraints?
(Press enter to skip)
Q1: Bug Summary
What is broken?
[If argument provided, confirm]
Q2: Steps to Reproduce
How can this bug be reproduced?
List steps:
Q3: Expected vs Actual Behavior
What should happen vs what actually happens?
Q4: Affected Areas
What parts of the system are affected?
Q5: Root Cause Hypothesis (optional)
Any hypothesis about the cause?
(Press enter to skip)
Q1: Task Summary
What needs to be done?
[If argument provided, confirm]
Q2: Motivation
Why is this work needed?
Q3: Success Criteria
How will we know this is complete?
Q4: Risk Assessment
What could go wrong? Any risky changes?
Generate track ID in format: {shortname}_{YYYYMMDD}
user-auth_20250115, nav-bug_20250115Validate uniqueness:
conductor/tracks.md for existing IDsuser-auth_20250115_2Create conductor/tracks/{trackId}/spec.md:
# Specification: {Track Title}
**Track ID:** {trackId}
**Type:** {Feature|Bug|Chore|Refactor}
**Created:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Status:** Draft
## Summary
{1-2 sentence summary}
## Context
{Product context from product.md relevant to this track}
## User Story (for features)
As a {user}, I want to {action} so that {benefit}.
## Problem Description (for bugs)
{Bug description, steps to reproduce}
## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] {Criterion 1}
- [ ] {Criterion 2}
- [ ] {Criterion 3}
## Dependencies
{List dependencies or "None"}
## Out of Scope
{Explicit exclusions}
## Technical Notes
{Technical considerations or "None specified"}
---
_Generated by Conductor. Review and edit as needed._
Display the generated spec and ask:
Here is the specification I've generated:
{spec content}
Is this specification correct?
1. Yes, proceed to plan generation
2. No, let me edit (opens for inline edits)
3. Start over with different inputs
After spec approval, generate conductor/tracks/{trackId}/plan.md:
# Implementation Plan: {Track Title}
**Track ID:** {trackId}
**Spec:** spec.md
**Created:** {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Status:** [ ] Not Started
## Overview
{Brief summary of implementation approach}
## Phase 1: {Phase Name}
{Phase description}
### Tasks
- [ ] Task 1.1: {Description}
- [ ] Task 1.2: {Description}
- [ ] Task 1.3: {Description}
### Verification
- [ ] {Verification step for phase 1}
## Phase 2: {Phase Name}
{Phase description}
### Tasks
- [ ] Task 2.1: {Description}
- [ ] Task 2.2: {Description}
### Verification
- [ ] {Verification step for phase 2}
## Phase 3: {Phase Name} (if needed)
...
## Final Verification
- [ ] All acceptance criteria met
- [ ] Tests passing
- [ ] Documentation updated (if applicable)
- [ ] Ready for review
---
_Generated by Conductor. Tasks will be marked [~] in progress and [x] complete._
Display the generated plan and ask:
Here is the implementation plan:
{plan content}
Is this plan correct?
1. Yes, create the track
2. No, let me edit (opens for inline edits)
3. Add more phases/tasks
4. Start over
After plan approval:
Create directory structure:
conductor/tracks/{trackId}/
├── spec.md
├── plan.md
├── metadata.json
└── index.md
Create metadata.json:
{
"id": "{trackId}",
"title": "{Track Title}",
"type": "feature|bug|chore|refactor",
"status": "pending",
"created": "ISO_TIMESTAMP",
"updated": "ISO_TIMESTAMP",
"phases": {
"total": N,
"completed": 0
},
"tasks": {
"total": M,
"completed": 0
}
}
Create index.md:
# Track: {Track Title}
**ID:** {trackId}
**Status:** Pending
## Documents
- Specification
- Implementation Plan
## Progress
- Phases: 0/{N} complete
- Tasks: 0/{M} complete
## Quick Links
- Back to Tracks
- Product Context
Register in conductor/tracks.md:
| [ ] | {trackId} | {title} | {created} | {created} |Update conductor/index.md:
Track created successfully!
Track ID: {trackId}
Location: conductor/tracks/{trackId}/
Files created:
- spec.md - Requirements specification
- plan.md - Phased implementation plan
- metadata.json - Track metadata
- index.md - Track navigation
Next steps:
1. Review spec.md and plan.md, make any edits
2. Run /conductor:implement {trackId} to start implementation
3. Run /conductor:status to see project progress
Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster
Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations
Example
Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement
Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.
sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
mattpocock/skills
parcadei/continuous-claude-v3
cursor/plugins
ailabs-393/ai-labs-claude-skills
pproenca/dot-skills
conductor-new-track is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: conductor-new-track is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
Useful defaults in conductor-new-track — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
We added conductor-new-track from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: conductor-new-track is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
We added conductor-new-track from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
Registry listing for conductor-new-track matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
conductor-new-track fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
conductor-new-track reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
conductor-new-track has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
showing 1-10 of 43