Skip to content
map-workflows-guide logo

MAP Workflows Guide

map-workflows-guide

Comprehensive guide for choosing the right MAP workflow based on task type and requirements

SKILL.md

Full skill instructions

MAP Workflows Guide

This skill helps you choose the optimal MAP workflow for your development tasks. MAP Framework provides 5 specialized workflows, each optimized for different scenarios with varying token costs, learning capabilities, and quality gates.

Quick Decision Tree

Answer these 5 questions to find your workflow:

1. Is this throwaway code or a quick experiment?
   YES  → Use /​map-fast (40-50% tokens, no learning)
   NO   → Continue to question 2

2. Are you debugging/​fixing a specific bug or test failure?
   YES  → Use /​map-debug (70-80% tokens, focused analysis)
   NO   → Continue to question 3

3. Are you refactoring existing code or restructuring modules?
   YES  → Use /​map-refactor (70-80% tokens, dependency analysis)
   NO   → Continue to question 4

4. Is this critical infrastructure or security-sensitive code?
   YES  → Use /​map-feature (100% tokens, maximum validation)
   NO   → Continue to question 5

5. Is this a production feature you'll maintain long-term?
   YES  → Use /​map-efficient (60-70% tokens, batched learning) ← RECOMMENDED
   NO   → Re-evaluate based on specific constraints

Workflow Comparison Matrix

Aspect/​map-fast/​map-efficient/​map-feature/​map-debug/​map-refactor
Token Cost40-50%60-70%100% (baseline)70-80%70-80%
Learning❌ None✅ Batched✅ Per-subtask✅ Per-subtask✅ Per-subtask
Quality GatesBasicEssentialAll 8 agentsFocusedFocused
Impact Analysis❌ Skipped⚠️ Conditional✅ Always✅ Yes✅ Yes
Best ForThrowawayProductionCriticalBugsRefactoring
RecommendationNever useDEFAULTHigh-riskIssuesChanges

Detailed Workflow Descriptions

1. /​map-fast — Quick Prototypes ⚡

Use this when:

  • Creating throwaway code you'll discard after testing
  • Running experiments to validate ideas
  • Spike solutions to explore feasibility
  • Non-critical helper scripts or utilities

What you get:

  • ✅ Full implementation (Actor generates code)
  • ✅ Basic validation (Monitor checks correctness)
  • ✅ Quality check (Evaluator scores solution)
  • ❌ NO impact analysis (Predictor skipped entirely)
  • ❌ NO learning (Reflector/​Curator skipped)

Trade-offs:

  • Saves 50-60% tokens vs /​map-feature
  • mem0 never improves (no patterns stored)
  • Knowledge never accumulates
  • Minimal quality gates (only basic checks)
  • Cannot reuse learned patterns in future tasks

Example tasks:

  • "Quick prototype for authentication approach"
  • "Spike solution to test performance impact"
  • "Throwaway script to explore API design"

Command syntax:

/​map-fast [task description]

When to AVOID:

  • ❌ Never for production code
  • ❌ Never for code you'll refactor later
  • ❌ Never for security-critical logic
  • ❌ Never to save tokens on important work

See also: resources/​map-fast-deep-dive.md


2. /​map-efficient — Production Features (RECOMMENDED) 🎯

Use this when:

  • Building production features (moderate complexity)
  • Most of your development work
  • You want full learning but need token efficiency
  • Standard feature implementation with familiar patterns

What you get:

  • ✅ Full implementation (Actor)
  • ✅ Comprehensive validation (Monitor with feedback loops)
  • ✅ Quality gates (Evaluator approval)
  • ✅ Impact analysis (Predictor runs conditionally)
  • ✅ Batched learning (Reflector/​Curator run once at end)

Optimization strategy:

  • Conditional Predictor: Runs only if risk detected (security, breaking changes)
  • Batched Learning: Reflector/​Curator run ONCE after all subtasks complete
  • Result: 35-40% token savings vs /​map-feature while preserving learning
  • Same quality gates: Monitor still validates each subtask

When Predictor runs:

  • Modifies authentication/​security code
  • Introduces breaking changes
  • High complexity detected
  • Multiple files affected

Example tasks:

  • "Implement user registration with email validation"
  • "Add pagination to blog posts API"
  • "Create dashboard analytics component"
  • "Build shopping cart feature"

Command syntax:

/​map-efficient [task description]

Quality guarantee: Despite token optimization, preserves:

  • Per-subtask validation (Monitor always checks)
  • Complete implementation feedback loops
  • Full learning (batched, not skipped)
  • mem0 pattern growth from all tasks

See also: resources/​map-efficient-deep-dive.md


3. /​map-feature — Critical Features 🏗️

Use this when:

  • Implementing security-critical functionality
  • First-time complex features requiring maximum validation
  • High-risk changes affecting many systems
  • You need complete assurance before production
  • Learning is critical for future similar tasks

What you get:

  • ✅ Full implementation (Actor)
  • ✅ Comprehensive validation (Monitor with loops)
  • ✅ Per-subtask impact analysis (Predictor always runs)
  • ✅ Quality gates (Evaluator always runs)
  • ✅ Per-subtask learning (Reflector/​Curator after each subtask)

Trade-offs:

  • 100% token cost (no optimization applied)
  • Slower execution (maximum agent cycles)
  • Maximum quality assurance
  • Most comprehensive learning (frequent reflections)
  • Best for high-stakes implementations

When this is required:

  • Authentication/​authorization systems
  • Payment processing
  • Database schema changes
  • Multi-service coordination
  • Code that affects many dependencies

Example tasks:

  • "Implement secure JWT authentication system"
  • "Refactor database schema for multi-tenancy"
  • "Add payment processing via Stripe"
  • "Build real-time notification system"

Command syntax:

/​map-feature [task description]

Agent pipeline:

TaskDecomposer → Actor → Monitor → Predictor →
Evaluator → Reflector → Curator → [Next subtask]

See also: resources/​map-feature-deep-dive.md


4. /​map-debug — Bug Fixes 🐛

Use this when:

  • Fixing specific bugs or defects
  • Resolving test failures
  • Investigating runtime errors
  • Performing root cause analysis
  • Diagnosing unexpected behavior

What you get:

  • ✅ Focused implementation (Actor targets root cause)
  • ✅ Validation (Monitor verifies fix)
  • ✅ Root cause analysis
  • ✅ Impact assessment (Predictor)
  • ✅ Learning (Reflector/​Curator)

Specialized features:

  • Error log analysis
  • Stack trace interpretation
  • Test failure diagnosis
  • Regression prevention

Example tasks:

  • "Fix failing tests in auth.test.ts"
  • "Debug TypeError in user service"
  • "Resolve race condition in async code"
  • "Fix memory leak in notification handler"

Command syntax:

/​map-debug [issue description or error message]

Include in request:

  • Error message/​stack trace
  • When it occurs (specific scenario)
  • What the expected behavior is
  • Relevant log files if available

See also: resources/​map-debug-deep-dive.md


5. /​map-refactor — Code Restructuring 🔧

Use this when:

  • Refactoring existing code for readability
  • Improving code structure or design
  • Cleaning up technical debt
  • Renaming/​reorganizing modules
  • Extracting common logic

What you get:

  • ✅ Implementation (Actor)
  • ✅ Validation (Monitor)
  • ✅ Dependency impact analysis (Predictor focused on dependencies)
  • ✅ Quality gates (Evaluator)
  • ✅ Learning (Reflector/​Curator)

Specialized for:

  • Breaking change detection
  • Dependency tracking
  • Migration planning
  • Careful phased refactoring

Example tasks:

  • "Refactor auth service to separate concerns"
  • "Extract common validation logic into shared module"
  • "Rename User model to Account throughout codebase"
  • "Convert callback-based API to promise-based"

Command syntax:

/​map-refactor [refactoring description]

Impact analysis includes:

  • Which files/​modules depend on changed code
  • Potential breaking changes
  • Migration strategy
  • Scope of refactoring

See also: resources/​map-refactor-deep-dive.md


Understanding MAP Agents

MAP workflows orchestrate 8 specialized agents, each with specific responsibilities:

Execution & Validation Agents

TaskDecomposer — Breaks goal into subtasks

  • Analyzes requirements
  • Creates atomic, implementable subtasks
  • Defines acceptance criteria for each
  • Estimates complexity

Actor — Writes code and implements

  • Generates implementation
  • Makes file changes
  • Uses existing patterns from mem0
  • Queries mem0 for relevant knowledge

Monitor — Validates correctness

  • Checks implementation against criteria
  • Runs tests to verify
  • Identifies issues
  • Feedback loop: Returns to Actor if invalid

Evaluator — Quality gates

  • Scores implementation quality (0-10)
  • Checks completeness
  • Approves/​rejects solution
  • Feedback loop: Returns to Actor if score < threshold

Analysis Agents

Predictor — Impact analysis

  • Analyzes dependencies
  • Predicts side effects
  • Identifies risks and breaking changes
  • Conditional in /​map-efficient (runs if risk detected)
  • Always in /​map-feature (runs per subtask)

Learning Agents

Reflector — Pattern extraction

  • Analyzes what worked and failed
  • Extracts reusable patterns
  • Searches mem0 for existing knowledge via mcp__mem0__map_tiered_search
  • Prevents duplicate pattern storage
  • Batched in /​map-efficient (runs once at end)
  • Per-subtask in /​map-feature (extracts frequently)

Curator — Knowledge management

  • Stores patterns in mem0 via mcp__mem0__map_add_pattern
  • Deduplicates via tiered search
  • Archives outdated patterns via mcp__mem0__map_archive_pattern
  • Maintains pattern metadata
  • Batched in /​map-efficient (runs once at end)

Optional Agent

Documentation-Reviewer — Documentation validation

  • Reviews completeness
  • Checks consistency
  • Validates examples
  • Verifies external dependency docs current

Decision Flowchart

START: What type of development task?
│
├─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Throwaway prototype or experiment?  │
│ (Will discard after testing)        │
├─────────────────────────────────────┘
│ YES → /​map-fast (40-50% tokens, no learning)
│       ⚠️  WARNING: Never use for production
│
│ NO ↓
│
├─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Debugging/​fixing a specific issue?  │
│ (Bug, test failure, error)          │
├─────────────────────────────────────┘
│ YES → /​map-debug (70-80% tokens, focused analysis)
│
│ NO ↓
│
├─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Refactoring existing code?          │
│ (Improving structure, renaming)     │
├─────────────────────────────────────┘
│ YES → /​map-refactor (70-80% tokens, dependency tracking)
│
│ NO ↓
│
├─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Critical/​high-risk feature?         │
│ (Auth, payments, security, database)│
├─────────────────────────────────────┘
│ YES → /​map-feature (100% tokens, full validation)
│
│ NO ↓
│
└─────────────────────────────────────┐
  Standard production feature?        │
  (/​map-efficient recommended) ←──────┘
  YES → /​map-efficient (60-70% tokens, RECOMMENDED)

Common Questions

Q: Which workflow should I use by default?

A: /​map-efficient for 80% of tasks.

  • Best balance of quality and token efficiency
  • Full learning preserved (just batched)
  • Suitable for all production code
  • Default recommendation for feature development

Q: When is /​map-fast actually acceptable?

A: Only for code you'll throw away:

  • Experiments to test feasibility
  • Quick prototypes for discussion
  • One-off scripts for temporary use

Never use for:

  • Production code (will cause problems later)
  • Features that will be maintained
  • Security or critical infrastructure

Q: What's the practical difference between /​map-feature and /​map-efficient?

A: Token cost vs learning frequency:

/​map-feature: Maximum assurance

  • Predictor runs after EVERY subtask (100% analysis)
  • Reflector/​Curator run after EVERY subtask
  • Cost: 100% tokens, slowest execution
  • Best for: First implementations, critical systems

/​map-efficient: Smart optimization

  • Predictor runs ONLY when risk detected (conditional)
  • Reflector/​Curator run ONCE at end (batched)
  • Cost: 60-70% tokens, faster execution
  • Same learning: Patterns still captured at end
  • Best for: Standard features, most development

Q: Can I switch workflows mid-task?

A: No, each workflow is a complete pipeline. If you started with wrong workflow:

  1. Complete current workflow
  2. Start new workflow with correct one
  3. Re-implement if needed

Q: How do I know if Predictor actually ran in /​map-efficient?

A: Check agent output for indicators:

✅ Predictor: [Risk detected - Full analysis]
⏭️  Predictor: [Skipped - Low risk item]

Predictor runs if:

  • Subtask touches authentication/​security code
  • Breaking changes detected
  • High complexity estimated
  • Multiple files affected

Q: How does the mem0 tiered memory system work?

A: mem0 MCP provides tiered pattern storage:

L1 (Branch-scoped)

  • Patterns specific to current feature branch
  • Experimental patterns for current work
  • Fastest access

L2 (Project-scoped)

  • Shared project knowledge
  • Validated patterns used across branches
  • Standard access

L3 (Org-scoped)

  • Cross-project patterns
  • Organizational best practices
  • Broadest scope

Search flows: L1 → L2 → L3 (most specific first)


Resources & Deep Dives

For detailed information on each workflow:

Agent & system details:


Real-World Examples

Example 1: Choosing between /​map-efficient and /​map-feature

Task: "Add OAuth2 authentication"

Analysis:

  • Affects security ✓ (high-risk indicator)
  • Affects multiple modules ✓ (breaking changes possible)
  • First implementation of OAuth2 ✓ (high complexity)

Decision: /​map-feature (worth 100% token cost for critical feature)

Example 2: Choosing /​map-debug

Task: "Tests failing in checkout flow"

Analysis:

  • Specific issue (test failures) ✓
  • Not new feature (debugging)
  • Needs root cause analysis ✓

Decision: /​map-debug (focused on diagnosing failures)

Example 3: Choosing /​map-efficient

Task: "Add user profile page"

Analysis:

  • Standard production feature ✓
  • Moderate complexity (not first-time) ✓
  • No security implications
  • No breaking changes

Decision: /​map-efficient (recommended default)


Integration with Auto-Activation

This skill integrates with MAP's auto-activation system to suggest workflows:

Natural language request:

User: "Implement user registration"
MAP: 🎯 Suggests /​map-efficient

Questions from MAP:

MAP: "Is this for production?"
User: "Yes, but critical feature"
MAP: 🎯 Suggests /​map-feature instead

Direct command:

User: "/​map-efficient add pagination to blog API"
MAP: 📚 Loads this skill for context

Tips for Effective Workflow Selection

  1. Default to /​map-efficient — It's the recommended choice for 80% of tasks
  2. Use /​map-fast sparingly — Only for truly throwaway code, never production
  3. Reserve /​map-feature for critical paths — Don't overuse, save for auth/​payments/​security
  4. Monitor pattern growth — Use mem0 search to see learning improving
  5. Trust the optimization — /​map-efficient preserves quality while cutting token usage
  6. Review deep dives — When in doubt, check the appropriate deep-dive resource
  7. Leverage mem0 patterns — Stored patterns from previous tasks via tiered search

Next Steps

  1. First time using MAP? Start with /​map-efficient
  2. Have a critical feature? See map-feature-deep-dive.md
  3. Debugging an issue? See map-debug-deep-dive.md
  4. Understanding agents? See Agent Architecture
  5. Learning about mem0? See mem0 Integration

Skill Version: 1.0 Last Updated: 2025-11-03 Recommended Reading Time: 5-10 minutes Deep Dive Reading Time: 15-20 minutes per resource