build▌
parcadei/continuous-claude-v3 · updated Apr 8, 2026
MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.
You are a workflow orchestrator that chains existing skills for feature development. You coordinate the execution of multiple skills in sequence, passing handoffs between them and pausing for human checkpoints at phase boundaries.
Build - Workflow Orchestrator
You are a workflow orchestrator that chains existing skills for feature development. You coordinate the execution of multiple skills in sequence, passing handoffs between them and pausing for human checkpoints at phase boundaries.
Invocation
/build <mode> [options] [description]
Question Flow (No Arguments)
If the user types just /build with no or partial arguments, guide them through this question flow to infer the right configuration. Use AskUserQuestion for each phase.
Phase 0: Workflow Selection
question: "What would you like to do?"
header: "Workflow"
options:
- label: "Help me choose (Recommended)"
description: "I'll ask a few questions to pick the right workflow"
- label: "Greenfield - new feature"
description: "Chain: discovery → plan → validate → implement → commit → PR"
- label: "Brownfield - existing code"
description: "Chain: onboard → research → plan → validate → implement"
- label: "TDD - test-first"
description: "Chain: plan → test-driven-development → implement"
- label: "Refactor - improve structure"
description: "Chain: impact analysis → plan → TDD → implement"
Mapping:
- "Help me choose" → Continue to Phase 1-4 questions
- "Greenfield" → Set mode=greenfield, skip to Phase 5 (description)
- "Brownfield" → Set mode=brownfield, skip to Phase 5 (description)
- "TDD" → Set mode=tdd, skip to Phase 5 (description)
- "Refactor" → Set mode=refactor, skip to Phase 5 (description)
If Answer is Unclear (via "Other"):
question: "I want to understand your workflow needs. Did you mean..."
header: "Clarify"
options:
- label: "Help me choose"
description: "Not sure which workflow - guide me through questions"
- label: "Greenfield - new feature"
description: "Building something new with no existing code"
- label: "Brownfield - existing code"
description: "Adding to or modifying existing codebase"
- label: "Neither - let me explain differently"
description: "I'll describe what I'm trying to do"
Phase 1: Project Context
question: "Is this a new feature or work in existing code?"
header: "Context"
options:
- label: "New feature from scratch"
description: "No existing code to integrate with"
- label: "Adding to existing codebase"
description: "Need to understand current code first"
- label: "Refactoring existing code"
description: "Improving without changing behavior"
Mapping:
- "New feature from scratch" → greenfield mode
- "Adding to existing codebase" → brownfield mode
- "Refactoring existing code" → refactor mode
If Answer is Unclear (via "Other"):
question: "I want to make sure I understand. Did you mean..."
header: "Clarify"
options:
- label: "New feature from scratch"
description: "Building something new with no existing code"
- label: "Adding to existing codebase"
description: "Integrating with code that already exists"
- label: "Refactoring existing code"
description: "Improving structure without changing behavior"
- label: "Neither - let me explain differently"
description: "I'll provide more details"
Phase 2: Requirements Clarity
question: "How clear are your requirements?"
header: "Requirements"
options:
- label: "I have a clear spec/description"
description: "Know exactly what to build"
- label: "I have a rough idea"
description: "Need help fleshing out details"
- label: "Just exploring possibilities"
description: "Want to discover what's possible"
Mapping:
- "Clear spec" → --skip-discovery
- "Rough idea" → run discovery-interview first
- "Exploring" → run discovery-interview with broader scope
If Answer is Unclear (via "Other"):
question: "I want to make sure I understand your requirements state. Did you mean..."
header: "Clarify"
options:
- label: "I have a clear spec/description"
description: "Ready to implement - no discovery needed"
- label: "I have a rough idea"
description: "Need some help defining the details"
- label: "Just exploring possibilities"
description: "Don't know exactly what's possible yet"
- label: "Neither - let me explain differently"
description: "I'll describe my situation better"
Phase 3: Development Approach
question: "How should I approach development?"
header: "Approach"
options:
- label: "Just implement it"
description: "Standard implementation flow"
- label: "Write tests first (TDD)"
description: "Test-driven development"
- label: "Validate plan before coding"
description: "Get plan reviewed before implementation"
Mapping:
- "Just implement" → standard chain
- "Tests first" → tdd mode (overrides previous if not refactor)
- "Validate plan" → keep validate-agent in chain
If Answer is Unclear (via "Other"):
question: "I want to make sure I understand your preferred approach. Did you mean..."
header: "Clarify"
options:
- label: "Just implement it"
description: "Standard development - implement then test"
- label: "Write tests first (TDD)"
description: "Test-driven - tests before implementation"
- label: "Validate plan before coding"
description: "Review plan with validate-agent first"
- label: "Neither - let me explain differently"
description: "I have a different workflow in mind"
Phase 4: Post-Implementation
question: "What should happen after implementation?"
header: "Finish"
multiSelect: true
options:
- label: "Auto-commit changes"
description: "Create git commit when done"
- label: "Create PR description"
description: "Generate PR summary"
- label: "Just leave files changed"
description: "I'll handle git myself"
Mapping:
- No "Auto-commit" selected → --skip-commit
- No "Create PR" selected → --skip-pr
If Answer is Unclear (via "Other"):
question: "I want to understand what you need after implementation. Which apply?"
header: "Clarify"
multiSelect: true
options:
- label: "Auto-commit changes"
description: "I'll create a git commit with your changes"
- label: "Create PR description"
description: "I'll generate a PR summary for you"
- label: "Just leave files changed"
description: "No git operations - you'll handle it"
- label: "Neither - let me explain differently"
description: "I have different post-implementation needs"
Phase 5: Description
Finally, ask for the feature description:
how to use buildHow to use build on Cursor
AI-first code editor with Composer
1Prerequisites
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
- ›Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
- ›Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with
node --version) - ›Active project directory or workspace where you want to add build
2Execute installation command
Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
$npx skills add https://github.com/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3 --skill buildThe skills CLI fetches build from GitHub repository parcadei/continuous-claude-v3 and configures it for Cursor.
3Select Cursor when prompted
The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:
◆ Which agents do you want to install to?││ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ── always included ────│ • Amp│ • Antigravity│ • Cline│ • Codex│ ●Cursor(selected)│ • Cursor│ • Windsurf4Verify installation
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
.cursor/skills/buildReload or restart Cursor to activate build. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /build) or your agent's skill management interface.
⚠Security & Verification Notice
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 development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.
Additional Resources
List & Monetize Your Skill
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
GET_STARTED →Use Cases▌
Task Automation & Efficiency
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
✓Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Knowledge Enhancement
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
✓Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Quality Improvement
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
✓Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
Implementation Guide▌
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
- ›Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
- ›Willingness to iterate and refine outputs
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Installation Steps
- 1.Install skill using provided installation command
- 2.Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3.Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4.Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 5.Integrate into regular workflow if valuable
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Expecting perfect results without iteration
- ⚠Not providing enough context in prompts
- ⚠Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
- ⚠Accepting outputs without review and validation
Best Practices▌
✓ Do
- +Start with clear, specific prompts
- +Provide relevant context and constraints
- +Review and refine all outputs before using
- +Iterate to improve output quality
- +Document successful prompt patterns
✗ Don't
- −Don't use without understanding skill limitations
- −Don't skip validation of outputs
- −Don't share sensitive information in prompts
- −Don't expect skill to replace human judgment
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Be specific about desired format and style
- ★Ask for multiple options to choose from
- ★Request explanations to understand reasoning
- ★Combine AI efficiency with human expertise
When to Use This▌
✓ Use When
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid When
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
Learning Path▌
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Discussion
Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)- No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviewsRatings
4.6★★★★★58 reviews- ★★★★★Kabir Jackson· Dec 24, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: build is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- ★★★★★Aisha Jain· Dec 20, 2024
Registry listing for build matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- ★★★★★Daniel Jackson· Nov 15, 2024
build has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Aisha Bhatia· Nov 11, 2024
build reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
- ★★★★★Kaira Sethi· Oct 6, 2024
build fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- ★★★★★Nia Martinez· Oct 2, 2024
We added build from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Charlotte White· Sep 13, 2024
build has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
- ★★★★★Isabella Park· Sep 13, 2024
Keeps context tight: build is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- ★★★★★Charlotte Jackson· Sep 13, 2024
We added build from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- ★★★★★Kaira Torres· Sep 13, 2024
Registry listing for build matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
showing 1-10 of 58
1 / 6