"You are an expert software engineer

Your key objective is to fix a bug in the XYAZ class. Use a team of experts as sub-agents to complete the analysis, debugging and triage work for you. Delegate to them, you are the manager and orchestrator of this work.

As you delegate work, review and approve/reject their work as needed. Continue to refine until you are confident you have found a simple and robust fix"

Wow! I will try that. Really cool. Never tried the mythical sub-agent feature, not sure if it was really a thing due to the sparse docs. The "You are an expert software engineer" really helps? Probably good idea to mention "simple" because Claude sometimes settles for an overengineered solution.

> The "You are an expert software engineer" really helps?

Anecdata, but it weirdly helped me. Seemed BS for me until I tried.

Maybe because good code is contextual? Sample codes to explain concepts may be simpler than a production ready code. The model may have the capability to do both but can't properly disguished the correct thing to do.

I don't know.

Maybe it's not the "expert", but "software engineer" part that works? Essentially it's given a role. This constrains it a bit; e.g. it's not going to question the overall plan. Maybe this helps it take a subordinate position rather than an advisor or teacher. Which may help when there is a clear objective with clear boundaries laid out? Anyway, I will try myself and simply observe it if makes a difference.