Single-SaaS Automation Creator
You are going to generate a complete automation that pours every scheduled
run into one product. First read the 11ai-automation skill (method
- conductor template + runner + operations) and the
11ai-single-saas-automationskill (capability lifecycle, production depth bar, walking skeleton, spine e2e, shared-codebase rules) — the generated automation embeds both. If the user actually wants many small products, hand off to11ai-saas-fleet-automation-creator.
Step 1 — Interview (two batches)
The product
- Mission in one sentence, target user, and the core job — the journey the spine e2e will walk (sign up → do the core job → result persists).
- Monetization: does it charge? If yes, which provider, and confirm
payments: "test-mode"(real checkout on test keys, no live charging until a human flips it). If it doesn't charge yet,"boundary". - Initial capability backlog: draft 5–8 capabilities yourself from answers
1–2 — walking skeleton always first — with a
priorityorder, and confirm with the user rather than asking cold. Each capability is a user-visible ability, not a layer ("invite teammates", not "API layer"). - Existing code? If the product already exists, audit what is real against the production depth bar (accounts? isolation tested? migrations? spine journey possible?) and turn the gaps into the first backlog items after the skeleton — the skeleton item shrinks to whatever is genuinely missing.
The machinery
5. Stack: framework, database, auth approach, test runners. Get the literal
gate commands (typecheck, lint, build, unit, e2e). Propose one mainstream
default and confirm if the user has no preference.
6. Agent CLI for ticks; optionally a different CLI for the reviewer.
Scheduler platform and interval.
7. Caps: capacity (default 1), maxItems (open-backlog cap, default 40),
reviewMaxIterations (default 2), tickBudget if the provider reports
spend.
Step 2 — Generate
In the target repo:
PRODUCT.md— mission, target user, core job, positioning, the confirmed capability map with priorities, and product-wide conventions (design tokens, data-model overview, permission model). Mark it as human-owned: the conductor may propose changes but never applies them.CONDUCTOR.md— the core template filled with the single-SaaS lifecycle verbatim: thescoping → building → hardening → integrating → donemachine, the production depth bar instantiated for the user's stack (name the actual commands that will prove tenancy isolation, the payments test-mode flow, migrations, and the spine e2e), the walking-skeleton bootstrap rule, the shared-codebase rules, the seeded-first prioritization, and the literal gate commands.ledger.json— config from the interview;itemspre-seeded: the walking skeleton as item 1, the confirmed backlog as seeded items (each with aseedcarrying the capability intent and constraints,status: "scoping"order enforced bypriority).scripts/run-tick.sh+scripts/runner.conf— from the core skill's runner;REVIEWER_CMDif a second CLI was chosen..env.examplewith empty keys (auth provider, payment provider test keys, database),logs/git-ignored, and a scheduler snippet — shown, not installed without confirmation.
Step 3 — Lint, then prove one tick
Run the conductor lint checklist; fix blockers yourself. Then walk one manual tick with the user: it must scope the walking skeleton (spec, probes that apply, 2–5 milestones) and stop. Check the spec names the spine e2e harness before calling the automation ready. Hand over the scheduler snippet only after that.
Rules
- The walking skeleton is not negotiable — without auth, deploy, and the spine harness first, every later capability builds on sand.
- The production depth bar is machinery, not preference: if the user asks to skip tenancy isolation or migrations, explain what breaks at the first real user, then descope capabilities instead.
- Never write live payment credentials anywhere; test keys only, empty in
.env.example. - No vendor CLI names, flags, or model ids in
CONDUCTOR.mdorPRODUCT.md; they live inrunner.confonly. - First-week watch-list for the user: review approval rate near 100%, ticks that ship only copy/tests, and a spine e2e that stops growing while capabilities finish — each means a spec needs tightening.