agentleFS
patrickbdevaneypatrickbdevaney/hermes-max/skills/workflow-escalate/SKILL.md

workflow-escalate

Skill1 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

When (and when not) to escalate a hard, well-scoped subproblem to a cloud tier.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈0

    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
  1. Very specific:

    Call escalate(task, tier) (mcp-escalation).

    line 60
  2. Very specific:

    Treat the cloud result as a proposal: integrate it, then run the verify gate (workflow-task-finish) before accepting it.

    line 63

≈ “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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md
<!-- TRIGGERS WHEN: "When (and when not) to escalate a hard, well-scoped subproblem to a cloud tier." version: 1.0.0 author: Hermes Max license: MIT platforms: [linux, macos, windo -->

Escalate — rare, scoped, cost-capped

The default is $0 local grinding. Escalation to a cheap cloud frontier model is the exception, not the habit. mcp-escalation is OFF by default and has a hard daily USD cap enforced in the server.

Escalate ONLY when ALL hold

  • The subproblem is genuinely hard for the local model (subtle algorithm, dense cross-file reasoning, a tricky proof-like constraint) — not routine work.
  • It is well-scoped: you can state the problem and the success criterion in a self-contained prompt, with the relevant code/context attached.
  • You have already tried locally and have a clear record of what failed (you've effectively passed the workflow-stuck bar on reasoning, not on a missing decision).

Do NOT escalate

  • Routine edits, boilerplate, formatting, test scaffolding.
  • Anything blocked on a human decision (use workflow-stuck → ping instead).
  • Repeatedly, to brute-force a vague problem — that just burns the cap.

Repeated stuck mid-run → rises to the CONDUCTOR

The conductor planned the task; the escalation ladder rises back to it. When you are stuck or an issue repeats mid-run — a step failed twice, you hit an architectural decision PLAN.md didn't cover, or you're spinning — do not keep grinding locally and do not silently lower the bar. Rise to the conductor:

  • A reasoning gap (you can't resolve a design/algorithm question in budget, a step is complexity: HIGH, or verify failed twice) → call reasoning_escalation — the SAME conductor/frontier reasoner that wrote your plan. Act on its ## Frontier guidance.
  • A plan step is impossible as written (a referenced API doesn't exist, the approach can't work, verify failed 3+ times on one step) → call review_and_adapt; the conductor REVISES PLAN.md from that step. Do not attempt impossible implementations.

Both are run-capped (see workflow-plan). This is the rule: a repeated local failure escalates to the conductor, it does not get brute-forced or quietly dropped.

How (scoped one-off escalation)

  1. Assemble a self-contained prompt: problem statement, the minimal relevant code, constraints, and the exact success criterion.
  2. Call escalate(task, tier) (mcp-escalation). If it returns disabled or cap-reached, respect that — fall back to workflow-stuck and ping the operator. Never try to route around the cap.
  3. Treat the cloud result as a proposal: integrate it, then run the verify gate (workflow-task-finish) before accepting it.

Never

Tier-3 (Opus / Claude Code) is not wired here and must not be — it lives on the laptop's separate Claude Code to avoid auth collisions.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.