claude-code-glm-suite/CONTAINS-STUDIO-INTEGRATION.md

Contains Studio Agents Integration

This document explains how the contains-studio/agents repository has been integrated into this customization suite, including the PROACTIVELY auto-triggering mechanism and key differences from our hook-based approach.

📋 Overview

Source Repository: https://github.com/contains-studio/agents

Contains Studio provides 37 specialized AI agents with a sophisticated PROACTIVELY auto-triggering system that differs from our original hooks-based approach.

---

🔄 Two Auto-Triggering Mechanisms

This customization suite now supports both auto-triggering mechanisms:

Method 1: Hooks-Based (Our Original Implementation)

Configuration File: ~/.claude/hooks.json

{
  "userPromptSubmitHook": "test-writer-fixer@agent",
  "toolOutputHook": "whimsy-injector@agent"
}

How It Works:

• Uses Claude Code's hook system
• Triggers on specific events (file operations, tool outputs)
• Global configuration applies to all sessions
• Requires manual setup

Pros:

• Explicit control over when agents trigger
• Works across all tools and operations
• Easy to customize and debug

Cons:

• Requires separate configuration file
• Less context-aware
• Manual setup needed

---

Method 2: PROACTIVELY Keyword (Contains Studio Pattern)

Configuration: Built into agent description

---
name: studio-coach
description: PROACTIVELY use this agent when complex multi-agent tasks begin...
color: gold
tools: Task, Write, Read
---

How It Works:

• Claude Code's built-in agent selection system detects "PROACTIVELY" keyword
• Analyzes context to determine if trigger conditions match
• Self-documenting - triggers are in the agent description
• No separate configuration needed

The 4 Proactive Agents:

1. studio-coach 🎭

   • Triggers: Complex multi-agent tasks begin, agents stuck/overwhelmed
   • Purpose: Coordinate and motivate all agents
   • Example: "We need to build a viral TikTok app in 2 weeks"

2. test-writer-fixer 🧪

   • Triggers: After code modifications, bug fixes, feature implementations
   • Purpose: Automatically write tests and fix failures
   • Example: User completes code changes → test-writer-fixer activates

3. whimsy-injector ✨

   • Triggers: After UI/UX changes, component creation, design updates
   • Purpose: Add delightful micro-interactions and personality
   • Example: User creates loading spinner → whimsy-injector enhances it

4. experiment-tracker 📊

   • Triggers: When feature flags added, experimental code paths detected
   • Purpose: Track A/B tests and experiments
   • Example: User adds conditional logic for A/B test → experiment-tracker sets up metrics

Pros:

• Zero configuration - works out of the box
• Context-aware triggering based on semantic understanding
• Self-documenting (triggers in description)
• More sophisticated pattern matching

Cons:

• Less explicit control over trigger conditions
• Depends on Claude's context analysis
• Harder to debug when triggers don't fire

---

📊 Comparison Table

Feature	Hooks-Based	PROACTIVELY Keyword
Configuration	~/.claude/hooks.json	Built into agent description
Trigger Scope	Global events (file ops, tool outputs)	Context-aware conditions
Setup Required	Yes - create hooks.json	No - works automatically
Flexibility	Manual control over triggers	AI-determined triggers
Detection Method	System events	Semantic context analysis
Debugging	Easier - explicit hooks	Harder - depends on context
Best For	Predictable, event-driven automation	Intelligent, context-aware automation

---

🏗️ Enhanced Agent Structure

Contains Studio agents use a richer format than standard Claude Code agents:

YAML Frontmatter

---
name: agent-name
description: When to use + 4 detailed examples with context and commentary
color: visual-identifier (blue, green, yellow, gold, etc.)
tools: Tool1, Tool2, Tool3
---

Rich Example Format

<example>
Context: [situation that led to this]
user: "[user request]"
assistant: "[how the agent responds]"
<commentary>
[why this example matters, the reasoning behind the approach]
</commentary>
</example>

Benefits of This Format:

• Context - Shows what situation triggered the agent
• Response - Shows how the agent handles it
• Commentary - Explains the reasoning and why it matters
• 4 examples per agent - Comprehensive coverage of use cases

500+ Word System Prompts

Each agent includes:

• Agent identity and role definition
• 5-8 core responsibilities
• Domain expertise areas
• Studio workflow integration
• Best practices and constraints
• Success metrics

Example (studio-coach):

You are the studio's elite performance coach and chief motivation
officer—a unique blend of championship sports coach, startup mentor,
and zen master. You've coached the best agents in the business to
achieve the impossible...

---

🎨 Visual Organization

Color-Coded Agents:

• 🎭 Gold - studio-coach (supervisor)
• 🔷 Cyan - test-writer-fixer
• 🟡 Yellow - whimsy-injector
• Department colors for visual identification

Department Structure:

~/.claude/agents/
├── engineering/ (7 agents)
├── marketing/ (7 agents)
├── design/ (5 agents)
├── product/ (3 agents)
├── project-management/ (3 agents)
├── studio-operations/ (5 agents)
├── testing/ (5 agents)
└── bonus/ (2 agents) - studio-coach, joker

---

🔧 How PROACTIVELY Auto-Triggering Works

Claude Code's Agent Selection Logic

# Simplified pseudo-code of how Claude Code selects agents

def select_agent(user_query, context, available_agents):
    # 1. Check for PROACTIVE agents first
    proactive_agents = get_agents_with_proactive_triggers()

    for agent in proactive_agents:
        if matches_proactive_condition(agent, context):
            return agent

    # 2. Then check for explicit agent requests
    if agent_mentioned_by_name(user_query):
        return get_agent_by_name(user_query)

    # 3. Finally, check for domain matches
    return select_by_domain_expertise(user_query, available_agents)

Proactive Condition Matching

studio-coach triggers when:

• Multiple agents mentioned in task
• Task complexity exceeds threshold
• Previous agent outputs show confusion
• Large project initiated

test-writer-fixer triggers when:

• File modifications detected
• New files created
• Bug fixes completed
• Feature implementations done

whimsy-injector triggers when:

• UI components created
• Design changes made
• Frontend code generated
• User interface modified

experiment-tracker triggers when:

• Feature flag syntax detected
• Experimental code paths added
• A/B test patterns identified
• Conditional logic for experiments

---

💡 Usage Examples

Example 1: Auto-Triggered Test Writing

You: I've added OAuth login

[Code changes detected]

[Auto-trigger: test-writer-fixer]

test-writer-fixer: I'll write comprehensive tests for your OAuth implementation...
- Unit tests for login flow
- Integration tests for token refresh
- Error handling tests
- Edge case coverage

[Tests written and validated]

Example 2: Auto-Triggered UI Enhancement

You: Create a loading spinner

[UI component created]

[Auto-trigger: whimsy-injector]

whimsy-injector: I'll make this loading spinner delightful!
- Add bounce animation
- Include encouraging messages
- Create satisfying finish animation
- Add progress Easter eggs

[Enhanced UI delivered]

Example 3: Coordinated Multi-Agent Project

You: Build a viral TikTok app in 2 weeks

[Complex multi-agent task detected]

[Auto-trigger: studio-coach]

studio-coach: This is an ambitious goal! Let me coordinate our A-team...
    → frontend-developer: Build the UI
    → backend-architect: Design the API
    → tiktok-strategist: Plan viral features
    → growth-hacker: Design growth loops
    → test-writer-fixer: Ensure quality

[All agents coordinated, deadline maintained]

---

🚀 Installation

Contains Studio agents are already included in this customization suite. No additional installation required.

To Verify Installation:

# Check that agents are installed
ls ~/.claude/agents/bonus/studio-coach.md
ls ~/.claude/agents/design/whimsy-injector.md

# Test auto-triggering
claude

# In Claude Code, try:
> I need to build a complex app with multiple features
# studio-coach should auto-trigger

---

🎯 Best Practices

1. Let Proactive Agents Work

Don't manually invoke test-writer-fixer - let it auto-trigger after code changes

2. Use studio-coach for Complex Tasks

Let the coach coordinate multiple agents for best results

3. Trust the Examples

The <commentary> sections explain why patterns work

4. Follow 6-Day Sprint Philosophy

Agents optimized for rapid iteration - ship fast, iterate faster

5. Embrace Whimsy

Let whimsy-injector add personality - it's a competitive advantage

---

🤝 Combining Both Approaches

You can use both hooks.json and PROACTIVELY agents simultaneously:

# Use hooks for predictable event-driven automation
cat > ~/.claude/hooks.json << 'EOF'
{
  "userPromptSubmitHook": "test-writer-fixer@agent",
  "toolOutputHook": "whimsy-injector@agent"
}
EOF

# PROACTIVELY agents work automatically
# No configuration needed for studio-coach and experiment-tracker

Recommended Setup:

• Hooks-based: test-writer-fixer, whimsy-injector (explicit control)
• PROACTIVELY: studio-coach, experiment-tracker (context-aware)

---

📚 Additional Resources

• Contains Studio Agents Repository - Source repository
• Claude Code Sub-Agents Documentation - Official documentation
• INTEGRATION-GUIDE.md - Complete integration details

---

🎁 Key Innovations from Contains Studio

1. Zero Configuration Auto-Triggering Works out of the box - no hooks.json needed

2. Rich Documentation 4 examples per agent with context and commentary

3. Professional Studio Workflow Designed for actual production environments

4. Agent Coordination Multi-agent orchestration built-in

5. Performance Focused Every agent has success metrics

---

Built for developers who ship. 🚀