omh-cto-loop

---
name: "omh-cto-loop"
description: "[omh] Engineering leadership over roadmap and risk: roadmap, PM, technical tradeoffs, risk, delivery, release, and follow-up operating cadence. Use when the user says: cto-loop, cto loop, cto, cto pm, pm dev qa security ops, roadmap technical tradeoffs, technical tradeoff, delivery risk."
metadata:
  hermes:
    tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, leadership]
    category: leadership
    phase: operating-loop
    role: operator
    quality_tier: decision-gated
---

# Cto Loop

This is a Hermes-native `cto-loop` workflow skill.

## Why This Exists

`cto-loop` exists to keep `leadership` work explicit, evidence-backed, and inside the Hermes/executor boundary instead of relying on ad hoc chat narration.

## Do Not Use When

- The request is a settings-only change, one bounded edit that is explicitly low-risk and has a direct owner and verification path, or a direct answer/diagnosis; handle it directly or use `strategy-brief` for a decision brief instead of starting a leadership operating loop.

## Examples

Good example:

- Prompt: cto-loop: run the PM, dev, QA, security, and ops loop for this risky billing launch.
- Expected behavior: Prepare the CTO operating model with role responsibilities, gates, blockers, and status boundaries.
- Why: The request needs a leadership operating loop, not just a generic plan.

Bad example:

- Prompt: cto-loop: treat casual chat or unaccepted work as if this workflow already produced verified results.
- Expected behavior: Ask a clarification question or route to a narrower workflow instead of forcing `cto-loop`.
- Why: The request lacks the required inputs or would overclaim work that Hermes did not observe.

## Completion Checklist

- Confirm the workflow target, evidence boundary, and stop condition are named.
- Report which outputs are prepared, observed, blocked, or missing.
- Name the smallest next verification or handoff instead of claiming completion from narration.

## Recovery Notes

- If required context is missing, ask one blocking question or route back to the narrower workflow.
- If runtime or wrapper evidence is unavailable, keep the status as not_observed and expose the next observable action.

## Workflow Lane

- Current lane: **Coding handoff** (`idea-to-deploy`, `llm-app-dev`, `cto-loop`, `deploy-and-monitor`, `code-review`, `build-failure-triage`, `verification-gate`, `security-safety-review`, `+27 more`) - coding owners, handoffs, review, CI, and merge evidence.
- If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to `oh-my-hermes` or name the adjacent workflow.
- Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`.

## Use When

Use when Hermes should run a leadership-style operating loop that turns signals into roadmap decisions, technical tradeoffs, delivery risk, release readiness, and explicit follow-up handoffs.

    Strong routing signals: `cto-loop`, `cto loop`, `cto`, `cto pm`, `pm dev qa security ops`, `roadmap technical tradeoffs`, `technical tradeoff`, `delivery risk`, `release readiness`, `technical leadership loop`, `leadership operating loop`, `engineering leadership`, `CTO 구조`, `PM 구조`, `로드맵`, `아키텍처 트레이드오프`, `기술 리더십`, `출시 준비`

## Catalog Metadata

Category: `leadership`
Phase: `operating-loop`
Hermes role: `operator`
Quality tier: `decision-gated`
Reasoning demand: `heavy`

Quality bar:

- Separate product priority, architecture tradeoff, delivery risk, release risk, and follow-up owner.
- Tie recommendations to observed signals or mark assumptions.
- Record accepted decisions separately from draft recommendations.
- Prepare executor handoffs only for accepted implementation follow-ups.

Handoff policy:

Keep CTO/PM-style synthesis, tradeoffs, risk ranking, decision notes, and status in Hermes; convert accepted implementation follow-ups into executor-neutral handoffs.

Required inputs:

- operating signals
- roadmap or release scope
- known risks
- decision owner

Expected outputs:

- priority frame
- architecture tradeoffs
- delivery risks
- decision note
- follow-up handoff candidates

Artifact expectations:

- leadership loop record or status summary when a wrapper captures decisions and follow-ups

Safety rules:

- Do not treat a CTO loop recommendation as an accepted roadmap decision.
- Do not imply CTO, PM, QA, Security, or Ops runtime agents exist without observed wrapper evidence.
- Separate strategy decisions from implementation handoffs and release evidence.

## Runtime Evidence

Preferred harness for this skill: `app-delivery-loop`.

```sh
omh runtime record --skill cto-loop --harness app-delivery-loop --status started
```

Record observed delegation results; otherwise return `not_available` or `not_observed`.
Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.
- When wrapper metadata includes `memory_review_card/v1` or `handoff_context_pack/v1`, treat it as reviewed OMH-local or wrapper-supplied context only. Use conflict-free context summaries to shape plans and handoffs, but do not claim Hermes internal memory was read or changed.
Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion.
Reply in the user's own words and the host's own voice: OMH's record terms (surface, lane, wrapper, handoff, evidence boundary, not_observed) stay in records and tool calls, never in the sentence the user reads unless they ask about one; and when a stop condition or a decision the user owns ends the turn, offer the next action as a question rather than declaring what will not be done.

Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.

Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory, harness, and execution rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`. Load it when applicable; otherwise name an unavailable capability.