Grok Delegate
You are the
orchestrator. This skill lets you hand a bounded coding task to a separate
implementer — the Grok Build CLI (
) — then review what it produced and land it yourself. You
write the brief and own the judgment; Grok does the typing under an explicit autonomy profile; you
verify and commit.
Nothing here is specific to one orchestrating agent. The loop needs only the ability to run a shell
command and read a file, so it works the same whether you are Claude Code, Cursor, OpenCode with a
selected model, or any comparable agent. (It is designed for Claude Code and Cursor; treat other
orchestrators as designed-for, not yet proven.)
When NOT to use this
- The task is small enough to just do inline — delegation overhead is not worth it.
- The CLI is not installed, not authenticated, or the account lacks Grok Build beta access.
- You want to write the code yourself, or you only need a review without an implementer run.
Prerequisites (check once)
- succeeds. If not, install on any platform with
npm i -g @xai-official/grok
(or use the installer from xAI's official Grok CLI docs) and
authenticate (, or on headless hosts, or set
).
- Confirm which is on PATH. shows the active binary and
its version — the relay records the version it ran into , so a stale binary is visible
after the fact.
- You are in (or will point at) the target git repository.
The loop
Run these five steps per task. Steps 1, 4, and 5 are your judgment; 2 and 3 are mechanical.
1. Write the brief
Grok sees only the text you send — no orchestrator chat history, no shared context. Everything the
task needs goes in the brief: the goal, the current state, what to change, what to leave untouched,
the project's actual gate commands (discover them from the repo's CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md/Makefile —
do not assume), and a report contract. Tell Grok it will not commit (you will). Keep one task per
brief. Full guidance and a template: references/writing-the-brief.md.
2. Dispatch
Send the brief to Grok with the bundled helper. It wraps
, captures the run, and writes a
structured
— so your only job is "run a command, read a file." (
below is
this skill's installed directory — the folder containing this
, i.e. the directory you loaded
the skill from. Claude Code prints it as "Base directory for this skill" when the skill loads; on other
orchestrators use that same directory — if unsure where it landed, run
find ~ -name relay.mjs -path '*grok-delegate*'
and substitute the directory above it.)
bash
node "<skill-dir>/scripts/relay.mjs" --brief brief.txt --cd /path/to/repo
# read-only (review/diagnosis; best-effort — verify touchedFiles): add --read-only
# continue the previous Grok session: add --resume-last (send only the delta brief)
# hard time limit (watchdog): add --timeout 2h (default: off; implementation runs routinely need 1-2h)
# see all options: node .../relay.mjs --help
The helper defaults to a write-capable (
) autonomy profile —
plus
— and writes its artifacts to a temp dir, so the repo under review stays clean.
It
never commits — see step 5. Mechanics, flags, and the
shape:
references/dispatch-and-poll.md.
3. Wait for completion
The helper blocks until Grok finishes, so back it with whatever your orchestrator offers and resume
when it returns:
- Claude Code: run the Bash call with ; you are notified on completion.
- Plain shell / other agents: run it in the foreground for short tasks, or background it and poll
the result file — in bash/zsh (including Git Bash/WSL), or your shell's equivalent (
in PowerShell, in cmd). The run is done when exists with a . (A
pre-run usage error — bad args or an empty brief — instead exits with code 2 and a stderr message and
writes no result file, so check the exit code too. A missing binary exits 127 but does write
a with status .)
Do not trust progress trackers over reality: a run is finished when
is written and the
process has exited. Read the working tree, not a status line. The implementer's full report is
the
field in
(also printed in full on stdout between the report markers).
4. Review — do not trust the self-report
Grok's
includes its own summary and gate claims.
Re-verify, don't accept:
- Re-run the project's gates yourself (the test/lint/build commands from step 1). Never take
"gates passed" on faith.
- Read the diff against the brief: did Grok do what was asked, nothing more (scope creep) and
nothing less? in the result is your starting point.
- Run the relevant guard skills on the diff if you have them installed (clean-code-guard,
test-guard, etc. from ) — this skill produces the work; those skills judge it.
- For schema/migration changes, round-trip them; for removals, grep for dangling references.
Full checklist: references/review-and-land.md.
5. Land it
The orchestrator commits. Only after the gates pass and the diff holds:
- Commit the verified work yourself, with a clear message.
- If it needs changes, send a delta brief with (don't restate the whole task) and
review again.
Autonomy model
Grok's default permission mode is
, which
blocks on approval prompts in a headless pipe. The
relay therefore always sets autonomy explicitly:
| Relay flag | What Grok gets | Use when |
|---|
| (default) | --always-approve --sandbox workspace
| Normal implementation — writes scoped to the working tree |
| --sandbox read-only --permission-mode plan
| Review / diagnosis — best-effort, not enforced (see caveat below) |
| --always-approve --sandbox off
| Explicit opt-in when the task needs unrestricted tools |
alone would approve
all tools (writes, shell, network) — closer to unrestricted
than to a workspace-scoped write. Pairing it with
is what keeps the default
safe. Reach for
only when the human asks for it.
is best-effort, not a hard guarantee. The read-only sandbox restricts out-of-workspace
filesystem/network access, not grok's own edit tool, and headless
mode is advisory — a run
verified here still wrote the working tree when told to. Use
to
signal review intent,
but always confirm
afterward; treat the diff, not the flag, as the guarantee. The relay
automates the check: it snapshots
before a
run and sets
in
(with a summary warning) when the tree changed anyway.
It's a porcelain-level tripwire — an edit inside an already-dirty file can evade it, so on a dirty
tree the diff review stays the only real guarantee.
Authorization model
Delegation is something the human opts into. Once they have ("run this queue", "proceed"), committing
verified, gate-passing work is the agreed contract — that is the whole point. Two limits on that
mandate: surface, don't absorb (report Grok's design decisions, defensible-but-unasked turns, and
non-blocking nitpicks rather than silently keeping them) and stop for scope changes (if correct
completion needs going beyond the brief, ask — don't expand the mandate yourself). The full treatment
is in references/review-and-land.md.
References
- references/writing-the-brief.md — how to write a brief Grok can
execute blind: structure, XML blocks, the report contract, embedding the real gate commands.
- references/dispatch-and-poll.md — flags, the
contract, backgrounding per orchestrator, and recovery when a run misbehaves.
- references/review-and-land.md — the review checklist, the commit
boundary, and the rework cycle via .
- references/multi-task-queues.md — running a sequential queue:
carrying constraints forward, progress tracking, and the end-of-run coherence check.