Does the SKILL.md format need first-class fields for failure criteria and escalation / hand-back rules — i.e. "when should this capability stop and hand control back"?
Prompt
Allie K. Miller's "How I built my AI agent workforce" (2026-06-17) frames agent roles as job descriptions with four required fields: goals, success criteria, failure criteria, and escalation rules. Our SKILL.md files cover capability/purpose (≈ goals) and implicitly success, but do not define explicit stop/handback conditions. The routing pod decides which model; nothing defines when an agent role should escalate or abort.
Why it might matter
Maps onto the assessor-loop return path / conditional-approval shape (residual + re_attest_by): an escalation rule is the same structural object as a conditional approval — "proceed unless X, in which case hand back."
Currently these conditions are implicit per role across hyperguild / agentsquad / Crush. Implicit = unauditable.
Scope of this issue
Audit: do current skills have implicit-only escalation/abort conditions, or none?
Decide: should SKILL.md gain optional failure_criteria / escalation fields (Agent Skills standard permitting)?
If yes: define the field semantics and how a harness is expected to honour them.
Refs
brain: wiki/homelab/decisions/no-centralized-cross-harness-observer-2026-06-17.md (sibling decision from same source read)
Related: hyperguild brain-injection verification (issue #32) for the hyperguild-side check.
Not blocking anything; sharpening question raised during an architecture read.
## Question
Does the SKILL.md format need first-class fields for **failure criteria** and **escalation / hand-back rules** — i.e. "when should this capability stop and hand control back"?
## Prompt
Allie K. Miller's "How I built my AI agent workforce" (2026-06-17) frames agent roles as job descriptions with four required fields: goals, success criteria, **failure criteria**, and **escalation rules**. Our SKILL.md files cover capability/purpose (≈ goals) and implicitly success, but do **not** define explicit stop/handback conditions. The routing pod decides *which model*; nothing defines *when an agent role should escalate or abort*.
## Why it might matter
- Maps onto the assessor-loop return path / conditional-approval shape (`residual` + `re_attest_by`): an escalation rule is the same structural object as a conditional approval — "proceed unless X, in which case hand back."
- Currently these conditions are implicit per role across hyperguild / agentsquad / Crush. Implicit = unauditable.
## Scope of this issue
1. Audit: do current skills have implicit-only escalation/abort conditions, or none?
2. Decide: should SKILL.md gain optional `failure_criteria` / `escalation` fields (Agent Skills standard permitting)?
3. If yes: define the field semantics and how a harness is expected to honour them.
## Refs
- brain: `wiki/homelab/decisions/no-centralized-cross-harness-observer-2026-06-17.md` (sibling decision from same source read)
- Related: hyperguild brain-injection verification (issue #32) for the hyperguild-side check.
_Not blocking anything; sharpening question raised during an architecture read._
Blocking a user prevents them from interacting with repositories, such as opening or commenting on pull requests or issues. Learn more about blocking a user.
Question
Does the SKILL.md format need first-class fields for failure criteria and escalation / hand-back rules — i.e. "when should this capability stop and hand control back"?
Prompt
Allie K. Miller's "How I built my AI agent workforce" (2026-06-17) frames agent roles as job descriptions with four required fields: goals, success criteria, failure criteria, and escalation rules. Our SKILL.md files cover capability/purpose (≈ goals) and implicitly success, but do not define explicit stop/handback conditions. The routing pod decides which model; nothing defines when an agent role should escalate or abort.
Why it might matter
residual+re_attest_by): an escalation rule is the same structural object as a conditional approval — "proceed unless X, in which case hand back."Scope of this issue
failure_criteria/escalationfields (Agent Skills standard permitting)?Refs
wiki/homelab/decisions/no-centralized-cross-harness-observer-2026-06-17.md(sibling decision from same source read)Not blocking anything; sharpening question raised during an architecture read.