Self-Sufficient Task Workflows Using Claude Code's /task Command#

Published on October 29, 2025

After extensive use of Claude Code across dozens of projects, I have developed an autonomous system for working with Claude Code that allows me to have autonomy, while still having control over critical decision points in the process. This /task command I am about to describe reflects how I prefer to approach work and represents a structure that gives better results consistently over either arbitrary prompting, or using the built-in questioning scheme presented in Claude Code 2.0.25+.

This workflow solves a fundamental question: how do you give an AI agent the necessary context, and direction, to work independently, while ensuring that it understands clearly, in detail, what you need? The answer lies in structured questioning, in two phases and with approval points made explicit.

Why This Command Works Better#

Claude Code 2.0.25+ introduced built-in questionnaires that help direct conversations with multiple choice questions. However, these multiple choice questionnaires force a rigid framework on the interaction, allowing only questions with 3-5 predetermined response sets.

The /task command takes a different approach. Free form responds levels from brief to detailed.

Built-in questionnaires force responses into predetermined ways:

 A) Approach A => rigidly, use React hooks
 B) Approach B => rigidly,
 C) Approach C => rigidly, use functional components.

My /task command allows flexible responses:

  • Brief: 1. yes 2. no 3. skip
  • Detail: 1. yes, but also check a11y aspects, and ensure that there is proper focus management.
  • Mix: 1. yes 2. fine 3. no, let us use semantic tokens instead of hard-coded color values here.

The reason for this flexibility is that technical decisions hardly ever fall into neat multiple choice questions. But also you have your right to give a free form description of what is required of the computing agent, and add pre-explanatory views or ideas that you do not like without have problems with the UX provided by Claude Code.

Furthermore, he built-in UX is clumsy if you are in a state of flow in workflow, because it breaks in with a mock-thought process forced by answers in their limited choice variants. Free-formed input will fit your flow and thought direction points better, and give results either wished or by request pre-determined, one can dictate or write eloquently in reply rather than fit questions with veri limited choices imposed.

The Two-Step Process#

The command executes a very simple process:

Step 1. Scope Alignment#

The goal here is to make sure we're aligned with Claude Code on the scope of this "task".

Claude asks 2-4 directed questions that help him clarify:

  • Precise scope end
  • Success (metrics)
  • Edge cases to be handled or ignored
  • Integration points into existing code

Output: Numbered statements of questions alone. No introduction or filler—questions only.

Your input: Answers will be determined by the best way for you to input them. Short confirmations or longer sentences. Since it's all LLM-powered, you can mistype or misspel.

And having a free form is nice - you can ask it to do some research (and thus repeat that step).

Step 2. Implementation Plan#

Now that agent knows scope, it does some amount of planning and comes back with it's implementation plan. How to make this scope happen.

Approximately the response looks like (I know I should add some screenshots or videos!)

Plan of Implementation

  • Precisely what files need to be changed (edit/create/delete)
  • What components/functions need changing
  • What styling has to be introduced (immediate tokens only)

Plan of Tests (taking account of @docs/TESTING.md - a separate doc in repo that explains specifics (if any) of how to test this codebase)

  • Unit tests specifying use of data-testid strategy (for example)
  • E2E tests (Chromium for loads, all browsers for navigations, etc)
  • Screen checks for specified considerations

Steps of Verification

  1. npm run lint:fix
  2. npm run build
  3. npm run test
  4. Manual checks for specified scenarios

So you can agree, you can ask it to redo/change/adjust it and then once all good, you confirm and agent moves forward.

Ideally at this point, if you have proper Claude Code permissions setup, it should just do it's work till very end w/o any distractions for tool permissions.

(Plug: I've built a tool to keep an eye on tool approvals and pre-allow them in user-level settings.json - pnpm claude-commands)

The Command File#

Place this in .claude/commands/task.md:

Feel free to adjust it to your likes, keeping the structure the same.

You are my engineering assistant.
### Context
We are focusing **exclusively** on the task **$ARGUMENTS**.

1. Ensure branch `feature/$ARGUMENTS` exists and is checked out. branch should follow git limitations and not be long.
2. Ask me clarifying questions until scope is unambiguous.
3. Await my approval
4. Produce a step‑by‑step implementation and test plan;
   Must follow the process in @docs/TESTING.md
   Use subagent to challenge the implementation plan and improve it.
   Then present the plan to me
5. Await my approval
6. Implement the plan. 
7. After I approve, execute the plan.
8. Once done,  call `/finish-work $ARGUMENTS` as the last step of the workflow

Entire Workflow Example#

Here is the entire autonomous loop:

  1. Start task: /task add dark mode toggle to settings page
  2. Answer scope questions: Claude asks 2-4 questions, you answer freely
  3. Check plan: Claude presents implementation + test plan of ~10-15 items
  4. Approve: Respond APPROVED to continue (or yes or ok or continue)
  5. Context change: Working through something else—Claude works autonomously
  6. Get notified: On completion, the notification appears, tapping switches you to terminal
  7. Finish work: Review results, then /finish-work dark-mode-toggle to commit and push

One comes away with an entire cycle from task initiation to PR production that is rapid and predictable. You control the scope and approach, while executing the details of execution is left to Claude.

Connection with /finish-work#

The /task command has intentionally stopped short of performing the commits. It tells you to use /finish-work {feature-name}, which does the following:

  1. Runs all tests and lints
  2. Performs any remaining tasks
  3. Commits in Conventional Commits format
  4. Pushes branch and opens PR
  5. Notifies you with terminal-notifier

This separation of concerns keeps the workflow modular. You may choose to not use /finish-work if you wish to inspect changes manually. Or use it in an automatic fashion if you have high confidence in the implementation.

Read the complete /finish-work command definition at the Claude Code Productivity Tips post.

Why This Structure Works#

After using variations of this command across dozens of projects, several patterns consistently emerge:

1. Two-phase questioning prevents misalignment Separating scope clarification from implementation planning catches misunderstandings early. It's much cheaper to iterate on questions than to rewrite code.

2. Explicit approval gates maintain control You never lose oversight. The APPROVED gate ensures Claude doesn't proceed until you've validated the approach.

3. Laconic output reduces noise Short, numbered questions and checkbox-style plans are faster to parse than verbose explanations. Constraints in the command enforce this style consistently.

4. Minimal changes philosophy reduces risk By explicitly instructing Claude to edit existing files over creating new ones, you avoid unnecessary refactors and keep PRs reviewable.

5. Hooks enable true autonomy The combination of structured commands and completion notifications lets you work asynchronously with Claude—the holy grail of AI-assisted development.

Getting Started#

  1. Create the command file: Write the above markdown into the file .claude/commands/task.md
  2. Test the workflow: Run a small task to confirm the flow
  3. Iterate: Modify the command constraints and questions to match your team's conventions

The command integrates perfectly with the existing Claude Code workflows—it requires no JIRA, special privileges, or complex dependencies—just markdown files and shell commands.

Wrap-Up#

The /task command is a distillation of hundreds of hours of working with Claude Code across real-world projects. It's structure—two-phase questioning, explicit approval gates, autonomous performing, and notification of completion—consistently yields better output than unstructured prompting.

The flexibility to give brief or detailed responses make the workflow adaptable to you rather than producing expectations in form of pre-defined queries. These along with the hooks and terminal-notifier allow you to truly context-switch while Claude works autonomously in the background.

Try it on your next feature! Refine the constraints to align with your team's conventions. The system will only improve—let me know how you find it—I'm iterating these patterns constantly based on real-world feedback.

Let's Connect

BlueskyLinkedInThreads

📚 Related Reading: For more Claude Code workflows including JIRA integration, bulk-fix patterns, and stack-specific guides, check out Boost Developer Productivity in 2025 with Claude Code.

← Back to all posts