/cs:workflow-build <task-description> — Design and write a deterministic Claude Code workflow (.js). Opens with intake questions, infers-and-proposes a topology when the request is vague, then scaffolds + validates the file. Use when building or running a custom Claude Code workflow.
Copy the command definition below into:
~/.claude/commands/cs-workflow-build-alirezarezvani-2.md---
name: "cs-workflow-build"
description: "/cs:workflow-build <task-description> — Design and write a deterministic Claude Code workflow (.js). Opens with intake questions, infers-and-proposes a topology when the request is vague, then scaffolds + validates the file. Use when building or running a custom Claude Code workflow."
---
# /cs:workflow-build — Workflow Architect Intake
**Command:** `/cs:workflow-build <task-description>`
Designs a deterministic multi-agent workflow for Claude Code's Workflow tool. Always opens with intake; never writes a file before the topology is confirmed.
## When to Run
- Building a new `.claude/workflows/*.js` file
- Automating a repeatable, multi-step task across fresh-context sub-agents
- Deciding whether a task even warrants a workflow (vs. a single agent or a skill)
## Step 1 — Intake (always first)
Ask the opening question set. Lead with #1.
1. What repeatable, multi-step task do you want to automate?
2. What is the one unit of work a single sub-agent does once?
3. How many units — a known list, or discovered by looping?
4. Do later steps need *all* prior results at once, or can each item flow on its own?
5. Does any step need structured data back (a verdict, a list, scores)?
6. Roughly how deep / how many tokens?
## Step 2 — If the user is vague, infer and propose (don't loop on questions)
```bash
python ../skills/workflow-builder/scripts/workflow_intake.py --task "<their request>" \
--units unknown --stages unknown --needs-all unknown --structured unknown
```
Present the result as "here's what I'd build and why": recommended topology (+ runner-up), per-stage model picks, a budget guard, and the rationale for each choice. Then ask only "what should I change?"
## Step 3 — Confirm the shape, then scaffold
```bash
python ../skills/workflow-builder/scripts/scaffold_workflow.py \
--topology <fan-out|pipeline|barrier|loop|judge-panel> --name <name> --description "..." \
> .claude/workflows/<name>.js
```
## Step 4 — Validate before running
```bash
python ../skills/workflow-builder/scripts/validate_workflow.py .claude/workflows/<name>.js
```
Fix every FAIL. WARNs need a one-line justification.
## Step 5 — Run
```bash
export CLAUDE_CODE_WORKFLOWS=1 # the feature is off by default
# Save under .claude/workflows/, then launch + monitor via /workflows.
# P = pause/resume, X = skip a sub-agent. Failed agents retry automatically.
```
## The Hard Rules (validator enforces)
1. `meta` is a pure literal and the first statement — no variables, spreads, template strings, or calls.
2. No `Date.now()`, `Math.random()`, or argless `new Date()` — they break resume.
3. No filesystem / Node APIs in the orchestrator — that work goes inside `agent()`.
4. `parallel()` takes thunks (`() => agent(...)`); default to `pipeline()` unless a stage needs the whole prior set.
5. Guard every open-ended loop with a counter or `budget.remaining()`.
6. `results.filter(Boolean)` before using parallel/pipeline output.
## Output Format
```markdown
# Workflow Build: <name>
## The Decision
[intake | recommend | scaffold | validate | run]
## Recommended Topology
[fan-out | pipeline | barrier | loop | judge-panel] — why
## Model Plan
[per-stage model + reason]
## Validator Verdict
🟢 PASS | 🟡 WARN (justified) | 🔴 FAIL (with line numbers)
## Next Steps
[3 concrete actions]
```
## Related
- Agent: [`cs-workflow-architect`](../agents/cs-workflow-architect.md)
- Skill: [`workflow-builder`](../skills/workflow-builder/SKILL.md)
- Adjacent: `/cs:write-a-skill` (authoring skills, not workflows)
---
**Version:** 1.0.0