cavecrew

SKILL.md

Cavecrew = three subagent presets that emit caveman output. Same job as Anthropic defaults (Explore, edit-style agents, reviewer); difference is the tool-result they return is compressed, so main context shrinks per delegation.

When to use cavecrew vs alternatives

Task
Use

"Where is X defined / what calls Y / list uses of Z"
cavecrew-investigator

Same but you also want suggestions/architecture commentary
Explore (vanilla)

Surgical edit, ≤2 files, scope obvious
cavecrew-builder

New feature / 3+ files / cross-cutting refactor
Main thread or feature-dev:code-architect

Review diff, branch, or file for bugs
cavecrew-reviewer

Deep code review with rationale + alternatives
Code Reviewer (vanilla)

One-line answer you already know
Main thread, no subagent

Rule of thumb: if you'd want the subagent's output in 1/3 the tokens, pick cavecrew. If you'd want prose, pick vanilla.

Why this exists (the real win)

Subagent tool results get injected into main context verbatim. A vanilla Explore that returns 2k tokens of prose costs 2k tokens of main-context budget every time. The same finding from cavecrew-investigator returns ~700 tokens. Across 20 delegations in one session that's the difference between context exhaustion and finishing the task.