---
name: grace-execute
description: "Execute the full GRACE development plan step by step with controller-managed context packets, verification-plan excerpts, scoped reviews, level-based verification, and commits after validated sequential steps."
---
Execute the development plan step by step, generating code for each pending module with validation and commits.
## Prerequisites
- `docs/development-plan.xml` must exist with an ImplementationOrder section
- `docs/knowledge-graph.xml` must exist
- `docs/verification-plan.xml` should exist and define module-level checks for the modules you plan to execute
- if `docs/operational-packets.xml` exists, use it as the canonical packet and delta reference
- If the plan or graph is missing, stop immediately and tell the user to run `$grace-plan` themselves before large execution runs
- If the verification plan is missing or still skeletal, stop immediately and tell the user to run `$grace-verification` themselves before large execution runs
- Prefer this skill when dependency risk is higher than the gain from parallel waves, or when only a few modules remain
## Core Principle
Keep execution **sequential**, but keep context handling and verification disciplined.
- The controller parses shared artifacts once and carries the current plan state forward step by step
- Each step gets a compact execution packet so generation and review stay focused
- Reviews should default to the smallest safe scope
- Verification should be split across step, phase, and final-run levels instead of repeating whole-repo work after every clean step
- Packets must be strong enough that the worker does not need mid-run task reinterpretation
- Every step should leave behind a visible checkpoint report so failures can be reviewed without hidden reasoning
- Use a small retry budget per step; when the packet or contract is wrong, stop and replan instead of drifting
## Process
### Step 1: Load and Parse the Plan Once
Read `docs/development-plan.xml`, `docs/knowledge-graph.xml`, and `docs/verification-plan.xml`, then build the execution queue.
When the optional `grace` CLI is available, `grace module show M-XXX --path <project-root> --with verification` is a fast way to seed the shared/public portion of a step packet, and `grace file show <path> --path <project-root> --contracts --blocks` is a fast way to inspect local/private details for the current write scope.
1. Collect all `Phase-N` elements where `status="pending"`
2. Within each phase, collect `step-N` elements in order
3. Build a controller-owned execution packet for each step containing:
- module ID and purpose
- target file paths and exact write scope
- preferred stack or tooling excerpt from `docs/technology.xml` when the project defines one
- module contract excerpt from `docs/development-plan.xml`
- module graph entry excerpt from `docs/knowledge-graph.xml`
- dependency contract summaries for every module in `DEPENDS`
- verification excerpt from `docs/verification-plan.xml`, including module-local commands, critical scenarios, required log markers, and test-file targets
- assumptions or unresolved edges that are still acceptable inside the step scope
- stop conditions or replan triggers that should halt the step immediately
- retry budget for fix or review loops
- expected graph delta fields: imports, public exports, public annotations, and CrossLinks
- expected verification delta fields: test files, commands, required markers, and gate follow-up notes
Use the canonical `ExecutionPacket`, `GraphDelta`, and `VerificationDelta` shapes from `docs/operational-packets.xml` when that file exists.
4. Present the execution queue to the user as a numbered list:
```text
Execution Queue:
Phase N: phase name
Step order: module ID - step description
Step order: module ID - step description
Phase N+1: ...
```
5. Wait for user approval before proceeding. The user may exclude specific steps or reorder.
### Step 2: Execute Each Step Sequentially
For each approved step, process exactly one module at a time.
#### 2a. Implement the Module from the Step Packet
Follow this protocol for the assigned module:
- use the step packet as the primary source of truth
- generate or update code with MODULE_CONTRACT, MODULE_MAP, CHANGE_SUMMARY, function contracts, and semantic blocks
- place START_CONTRACT/END_CONTRACT above both: function signature and docstrings/comments
- generate or update module-local tests inside the approved write scope
- preserve or add stable log markers for the required critical branches
- keep changes inside the approved write scope
- run module-local verification commands from the packet only
- produce graph sync output or a graph delta proposal for the controller to apply, limited to public module interface changes
- produce a verification delta proposal for test files, commands, markers, and phase follow-up notes
- produce a short checkpoint note: assumptions kept, commands run, evidence captured, and whether the step consumed any retry budget
- **commit the implementation immediately after verification passes** with format:
```
grace(MODULE_ID): short description of what was generated
Phase N, Step order
Module: module name (module path)
Contract: one-line purpose from development-plan.xml
```
#### 2b. Run Scoped Review
After generating, review the step using the smallest safe scope:
- does the generated code match the module contract from the step packet?
- are all GRACE markup conventions followed?
- do imports match `DEPENDS`?
- does the graph delta proposal match actual imports and public module interface changes?
- do the changed tests and verification evidence satisfy the packet's required scenarios and markers?
- does the verification delta proposal match the real test files and commands?
- are there any obvious security issues or correctness defects?
If critical issues are found:
1. fix them before proceeding
2. rerun only the affected scoped checks
3. escalate to a fuller `$grace-reviewer` audit only if local evidence suggests wider drift
#### 2c. Reflect, Replan, or Stop
If implementation or review fails, do not loop indefinitely.
- use the step packet retry budget; default to at most 2 fix loops when no budget is specified
- after each failed loop, update the checkpoint note with the first divergent test, marker, function, or block
- if the failure points to a wrong contract, missing dependency, unclear third-party surface, or weak verification plan, stop and ask the user to replan instead of improvising architecture mid-run
- if the user gives new requirements during a running step, apply them at the next checkpoint rather than mutating the in-flight goal silently
If only minor issues are found, note them and proceed.
#### 2d. Apply Shared-Artifact Updates Centrally
After the implementation commit from Step 2a:
1. update `docs/knowledge-graph.xml` from the accepted graph sync output or graph delta proposal
2. update `docs/verification-plan.xml` from the accepted verification delta proposal
3. update step status in `docs/development-plan.xml` if the step format supports explicit completion state
4. commit shared artifacts if they changed:
```
grace(meta): sync after MODULE_ID
```
#### 2e. Progress Report
After each step, print:
```text
--- Step order/total complete ---
Module: MODULE_ID (path)
Status: DONE
Review: scoped pass / scoped pass with N minor notes / escalated audit pass
Verification: step-level passed / follow-up required at phase level
Checkpoint: assumptions confirmed / retry budget used N / stop trigger none
Implementation commit: hash
Meta commit: hash (if any)
Remaining: count steps
```
### Step 3: Complete Each Phase with Broader Checks
After all steps in a phase are done:
1. update `docs/development-plan.xml`: set the `Phase-N` element's `status` attribute to `done`
2. run the phase-level verification commands or gates referenced in `docs/verification-plan.xml`
3. run `$grace-refresh` to verify graph and verification-reference integrity; prefer targeted refresh if the touched scope is well bounded, escalate to full refresh if drift is suspected
4. run a broader `$grace-reviewer` audit if the phase introduced non-trivial shared-artifact changes or drift risk
5. run `grace lint --profile autonomous --path <project-root>` when the phase materially changed verification, packets, or execution policy
6. commit the phase update if it was not already included in the final step commit:
```text
grace(plan): mark Phase N "phase name" as done
```
7. print a phase summary
### Step 4: Final Summary
After all phases are executed:
```text
=== EXECUTION COMPLETE ===
Phases executed: count
Modules generated: count
Total commits: count
Knowledge graph: synced
Verification: phase checks passed / follow-up required
```
## Error Handling
- If a step fails, stop execution, report the error, and ask the user how to proceed
- If step-level verification fails, attempt to fix it; if unfixable, stop and report
- If targeted refresh or scoped review reveals broader drift, escalate before continuing
- Never skip a failing step; the dependency chain matters
- If the verification plan proves too weak for the module, stop and tell the user to run `$grace-verification` themselves before continuing
## Important
- Steps within a phase are executed sequentially
- Always verify the previous step's outputs exist before starting the next step
- Parse shared XML artifacts once, then update the controller view as each step completes
- `docs/development-plan.xml` and `docs/verification-plan.xml` are shared sources of truth; never deviate from the contract or from required evidence silently
- Prefer step-level checks during generation and broader integrity checks at phase boundaries
- **Commit implementation immediately after verification passes - do not batch commits until phase end**