human-checkpoint
Skill52 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub
Escalate critical decisions to a human with options, tradeoffs, and recommendation. TRIGGER when: major safety risk, high irreversible impact, large GPU spend, destructive data ops, shared-memory publication, or hard blockers requiring human approval. DO NOT TRIGGER when: routine confirmations handled by run-governor, or low-stakes reversible actions.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- dagarre00/claude-code-templatetheir own version, first seen Oct 15, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- dagarre00/claude-code-template★ 1same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- deep-researchSkill
- experiment-executionSkill
- memory-managerSkill
- paper-writingSkill
- project-contextSkill
- research-planSkill
- research-workflowSkill
- run-governorSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
12 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈10
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 20
If the built-in tool is unavailable in the current runtime, degrade to concise plain-text questions in chat.
- Distinctive: line 22
Never silently skip a required checkpoint because the preferred channel is unavailable.
- Distinctive: line 41
Always trigger for shared-memory publication.
- Distinctive: line 45
Treat these as major risks:
- Very specific: line 65
When using request_user_input, map the same structure into 1-3 short option-based questions.
- Distinctive: line 66
When using plain-text fallback, ask one concise direct question at a time.
- Distinctive: line 77
If option 2 is chosen, record it in run policy for this run only.
- Distinctive: line 81
Keep options executable now.
- Distinctive: line 83
Put recommended option first when appropriate.
- Distinctive: line 84
Keep request short and clear.
- Very specific: line 92
If fallback is used, record fallback_reason.
- Distinctive: line 96
If no human response is available:
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Human Checkpoint
Mission
Request human decisions only at meaningful risk or decision points, using executable options.
Interaction Channel Policy
For checkpoints that require user input, choose interaction channel in this order:
- In
moderateordetailed, prefer built-in user-question tool (request_user_input) for all required user interactions. - If the built-in tool is unavailable in the current runtime, degrade to concise plain-text questions in chat.
- In
full-auto, avoid non-essential questions and trigger checkpoints only by mode policy. - Never silently skip a required checkpoint because the preferred channel is unavailable.
Mode-Aware Trigger Policy
full-auto- Trigger only for hard blockers or major safety risks.
moderate- Trigger for plan-finalization confirmations.
- Trigger before high-resource actions.
- Trigger for major safety risks.
- Trigger for required intake clarification and parameter confirmations.
- Trigger for replan confirmations when route changes materially.
detailed- Trigger when path is unclear.
- Trigger before high-resource actions.
- Trigger for major safety risks.
- Trigger for required intake clarification and parameter confirmations.
- Trigger for replan confirmations when route changes materially.
Always trigger for shared-memory publication.
Major Safety Risk Examples
Treat these as major risks:
- potential large-scale file deletion
- likely secret leakage
- destructive remote/shared resource mutation
- actions with clear financial or operational damage potential
In all modes, checkpoint is required for major risks.
Request Format
Use this structure:
Decision NeededContextOptionsRecommendationIf ApprovedIf Rejected
When using request_user_input, map the same structure into 1-3 short option-based questions.
When using plain-text fallback, ask one concise direct question at a time.
Required Option Set for Risky Actions
Provide these options unless user already gave explicit policy:
- allow once
- allow same action type for this run
- disallow and stop
- user-defined handling
If option 2 is chosen, record it in run policy for this run only.
Option Design Rules
- Keep options executable now.
- State tradeoffs in cost, risk, and learning value.
- Put recommended option first when appropriate.
- Keep request short and clear.
After Decision
- Execute only approved behavior.
- Record rationale and outcome in memory/logs.
- Re-check if another checkpoint is needed before next high-impact action.
- Record
interaction_channel=request_user_input|plain-text-fallback. - If fallback is used, record
fallback_reason.
Failure Handling
If no human response is available:
- In
full-auto, continue with safest reversible path unless major safety risk remains unresolved. - In
moderateordetailed, use plain-text fallback if built-in question tool is unavailable. - In
moderateordetailed, remain blocked until user response for required checkpoints.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

