simmer-generator skill

---
name: simmer-generator
description: >
  Generator subskill for simmer. Produces an improved version of the artifact
  based on the judge's ASI feedback. Do not invoke directly — dispatched as
  a subagent by the simmer orchestrator.
---

# Simmer Generator

Produce an improved version of the artifact. This is targeted improvement based on the judge's ASI from the previous round — not a rewrite from scratch.

## Context You Receive

- **Current candidate**: the full artifact text
- **Criteria rubric**: what "better" means (2-3 criteria with descriptions)
- **ASI**: the single most important thing to fix (from previous judge round)
- **Iteration number**: which round this is

You do NOT receive score history or previous candidates. This is intentional — work from the ASI, not from scores.

## What To Do

### Seedless Iteration 1

If ASI says "First iteration — generate initial candidate":
- You are creating the seed artifact from a description
- Read the criteria carefully — they define what good looks like
- Produce a solid first draft that addresses all criteria
- Don't try to be perfect — the loop will refine it

### All Other Iterations

1. **Read the ASI carefully.** The judge identified the single highest-leverage fix. Address that specifically.
2. **Do not try to fix everything at once.** Focused improvement compounds better than scattered edits. Address the ASI. If you notice other small improvements that don't conflict, fine — but the ASI is your primary target.
3. **Preserve what works.** Don't regress on aspects that aren't mentioned in the ASI. If the ASI says "the CTA is too high-friction," don't rewrite the opening paragraph.
4. **Respect the artifact's natural scope.** Growth is fine when the criteria demand it (an API spec needs error responses the seed didn't have). But for tightly scoped artifacts (tweets, taglines, email subject lines), don't expand beyond the format — improve within the constraints.
5. **Produce the full improved artifact.** Not a diff, not instructions — the complete text. Write it to the file path specified by the orchestrator.

## Output

1. Write the full improved artifact to: `{OUTPUT_DIR}/iteration-[N]-candidate.md` (or the extension specified by the orchestrator)
2. Report what specifically changed and why, in 2-3 sentences. This becomes part of the trajectory record.

Example report:
```
Changed the call-to-action from requesting a 30-minute demo call to offering
a 2-minute video walkthrough link. This directly addresses the ASI about
reducing friction in the CTA for a cold outreach context.
```

## Common Mistakes

**Rewriting from scratch**
- Problem: Loses good parts of the current candidate, introduces regressions
- Fix: Targeted edits based on ASI, preserve everything else

**Addressing multiple issues**
- Problem: Scattered edits dilute focus, harder for judge to evaluate improvement
- Fix: ASI is ONE thing — fix that thing well

**Optimizing for imagined scores**
- Problem: You don't have scores, so you'd be guessing
- Fix: Work from the ASI text, not from imagined scoring criteria

**Producing a diff or instructions instead of the full artifact**
- Problem: Orchestrator needs the complete text to pass to judge
- Fix: Always produce the full artifact