| name | oracle |
| description | Pre-task intelligence layer — classify complexity, select skill chain, search patterns, assign model tier. Run BEFORE any non-trivial task begins. Turns the system from reactive to proactive. |
| type | process |
Task Intake
Overview
ORACLE — Latin "oraculum": the prophetic voice consulted before any major decision.
When invoked: scores task complexity 1–10 across 8 dimensions, selects the optimal skill chain (BUG / FEATURE / REFACTOR / ARCHITECT), assigns the correct model tier (Haiku → Opus), and searches memory for relevant past patterns — all in 60 seconds before any code is written.
Core principle: Never start a task cold. 60 seconds of classification prevents hours of wrong-direction work.
This skill is the meta-intelligence layer of Superpowers. It classifies every task before execution, selects the optimal skill chain, searches for relevant past patterns, and assigns the correct model tier — automatically.
Announce at start: "Running ORACLE to classify and plan approach."
WHEN TO RUN:
- Before ANY task that touches code or architecture
- Before ANY bug investigation
- Before ANY new feature or design decision
- At the start of EVERY non-trivial conversation
SKIP only for: Trivial one-liner answers, pure information questions, file reads.
Fast Path (Complexity ≤ 3)
Before running all 5 phases, do a 5-second triage:
Is ALL of the following true?
✓ Single file or fewer than 3 files
✓ No investigation required — cause is known
✓ No security, architecture, or cross-system implications
✓ Similar task done before (no novelty)
✓ No domain skill triggers
→ FAST PATH: Skip Phases 2–5.
Announce: "Complexity ≤ 3 — fast path. Tier 1, no plan needed."
Proceed directly to implementation.
If ANY condition is false, run the full 5-phase intake.
Phase 1: Task Classification (30 seconds)
Step 1: Score Complexity (1–10)
Answer each question honestly:
| Question | +Points |
|---|
| Touches more than 3 files? | +1 |
| Requires investigation before implementation? | +1 |
| Touches 2+ engineering domains? | +1 |
| Has security implications? | +2 |
| Involves architecture decisions? | +2 |
| Novel problem (no precedent in codebase)? | +2 |
| Cross-system integration? | +1 |
| Strict performance or timing requirements? | +1 |
Score → Tier:
1-3: SIMPLE → Tier 0/1 model, single skill, no plan needed
4-6: STANDARD → Tier 1/2 model, 2-4 skills, plan recommended
7-9: COMPLEX → Tier 2/3 model, full skill chain, plan required
10: CRITICAL → Tier 3 model, SPARC structure, human review gate
Step 2: Identify Domain(s)
Check all that apply:
Step 3: Identify Task Type
Is this a BUG?
└─ Yes → [debug-chain]
Is this a NEW FEATURE?
└─ Yes → [feature-chain]
Is this a REFACTOR?
└─ Yes → [refactor-chain]
Is this an ARCHITECTURE DECISION?
└─ Yes → [architecture-chain]
Is this a RESEARCH / EXPLORATION?
└─ Yes → [research-chain]
Phase 2: Skill Chain Selection
Pre-built chains — use the matching one, execute skills in order:
[debug-chain]
1. chronicle → search for similar past bugs
2. hunter → root cause investigation
3. forge → failing test before fix
4. sentinel → verify fix works
5. chronicle → store pattern after success
[feature-chain]
1. chronicle → search for similar past features
2. [domain skill(s)] → apply domain expertise
3. architect → design before code (complexity ≥ 4)
4. blueprint → implementation plan (complexity ≥ 5)
5. vector → assign tier per task
6. legion → topology if 3+ independent files
7. phantom → execute plan (complexity ≥ 6)
8. sentinel → gate before completion
9. tribunal → review gate (complexity ≥ 7)
10. chronicle → store pattern after success
[refactor-chain]
1. chronicle → search past refactor patterns
2. forge → baseline tests before touching code
3. blueprint → plan the refactor (complexity ≥ 5)
4. vector → tier 1/2 for mechanical work
5. sentinel → no regression
6. chronicle → store pattern
[architecture-chain]
1. chronicle → past architecture decisions
2. architect → explore 2-3 approaches
3. blueprint (SPARC) → SPARC structure REQUIRED
4. tribunal → architecture review gate
5. chronicle → store decision + rationale
[research-chain]
1. chronicle → search existing knowledge
2. legion (Mesh) → parallel investigation
3. architect → synthesize findings
4. chronicle → store findings
Phase 3: Pattern Search
BEFORE starting ANY task (complexity ≥ 4):
SEARCH ReasoningBank:
Query: "<task-type> <domain> <key-keywords>"
Example:
- "feature ml-engineering data-drift detection"
- "debug frontend react useEffect stale closure"
- "architecture api jwt multi-tenant"
REVIEW matches:
- What worked? Apply directly.
- What failed? Avoid explicitly.
- What's different? Note context differences.
ANNOUNCE findings:
"Found [N] relevant patterns:
1. [key] — [one-sentence summary]
Applying: [how it influences this approach]"
If no matches:
"No prior patterns. Novel problem — will create pattern after solving."
Phase 4: Model Tier Assignment
Use the decision from vector skill. Quick summary:
| Complexity Score | Start Tier | Notes |
|---|
| 1–3 | Tier 0/1 (direct/Haiku) | Mechanical or single-file |
| 4–6 | Tier 2 (Sonnet) | Standard development |
| 7–9 | Tier 2→3 (Sonnet→Opus) | Escalate if stuck |
| 10 | Tier 3 (Opus) | Architecture/security critical |
Phase 5: SPARC Gate
SPARC is REQUIRED (not optional) when ANY of:
- Complexity score ≥ 8
- Task involves security-critical code
- Task involves architecture decisions (system design)
- Task is cross-system integration
- Task has been attempted before and failed
SPARC is optional when:
- Complexity score ≤ 7
- Clear requirements exist
- Similar task done before (patterns found)
Task Intake Output Template
After completing all 5 phases, announce:
TASK INTAKE COMPLETE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Complexity: [score]/10 → [SIMPLE/STANDARD/COMPLEX/CRITICAL]
Domain(s): [list]
Task type: [debug/feature/refactor/architecture/research]
Skill chain: [chain name]
Model tier: [0/1/2/3]
SPARC: [Required/Optional]
Patterns: [N found | 0 found — novel]
Proceeding with [chain name] chain.
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Multi-Domain Synthesis
When a task touches 2+ engineering domains simultaneously, conflicting guidance can arise. Resolve it before starting work.
Step 1: Identify Conflicts
After invoking domain skills, check for contradictions:
| Conflict Type | Example | Resolution |
|---|
| Language conflict | ML says Python, EE says C only | Platform constraint wins — use C with Python for offline tooling |
| Memory model conflict | ML wants dynamic allocation, EE says no malloc in ISR | ISR constraint is absolute — use static allocation + offline training |
| Latency conflict | AI wants cloud LLM, EE needs <10ms response | Latency is physical — use on-device model or precomputed responses |
| Framework conflict | Frontend wants React, Backend wants server render | Explicit user constraint wins; if none, prefer existing codebase pattern |
Rule: Physical/hardware constraints always win over software preferences.
Step 2: Build Synthesis Statement
Before starting any multi-domain task, write:
MULTI-DOMAIN SYNTHESIS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Domains: [domain 1] + [domain 2] (+ [domain 3])
Conflicts: [list any conflicting guidance]
Resolution: [which constraint wins and why]
Unified constraint: [the combined non-negotiables]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Step 3: Add Domain Reviewers
For multi-domain code review, specify ALL relevant domains:
DOMAIN: ml, embedded
The reviewer will apply both checklists.
After-Action Review (Task Close Protocol)
Run this AFTER every task completes — before moving to the next.
This closes the learning loop. Without it, patterns are stored inconsistently or not at all.
AFTER-ACTION REVIEW
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
1. Did the skill chain work as planned?
[ ] Yes — as expected
[ ] Partially — [what deviated]
[ ] No — [what went wrong]
2. Was the complexity score accurate?
Predicted: [N] | Actual feel: [lower/accurate/higher]
→ [adjust future scoring for this task type]
3. Was the model tier right?
[ ] Yes — tier [N] was appropriate
[ ] Should have been higher — [why]
[ ] Could have been lower — [why]
4. What pattern should be stored?
Key: <domain>:<type>:<keywords>
[ ] Storing now in auto-memory
[ ] Nothing novel — skipping storage
5. What would I do differently?
[one sentence or "nothing"]
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
After-action is mandatory when:
- Task complexity was ≥ 6
- Something unexpected happened
- A novel approach was used
- The first approach failed
After-action is optional when:
- Complexity < 4 and everything went as expected
- Mechanical task with no surprises
Storage: If a pattern is worth storing, invoke chronicle now.
Integration with Superpowers
Calls into:
chronicle — pattern search before task
vector — tier selection
legion — topology selection
architect — when complexity ≥ 4 + feature task
blueprint — when complexity ≥ 5
hunter — when task type is debug
Called by:
ascend — ORACLE is the FIRST process skill for non-trivial tasks
Red Flags
Never skip ORACLE when:
- You feel "this is obviously simple" (obvious ≠ simple)
- You're under time pressure (intake is 60 seconds, saves hours)
- The user says "just quickly..." (scope always grows)
- You've started before thinking (stop, run intake)
Rationalization table:
| Thought | Reality |
|---|
| "I know what to do" | Knowing ≠ best approach. Intake confirms. |
| "Too simple for intake" | Simple tasks rarely stay simple. |
| "User wants it fast" | Wrong approach is slower than 60-second intake. |
| "I'll plan as I go" | Unplanned work creates rework. |
Final Rule
60 seconds of intake → hours saved
No task starts cold
Classify → chain → search → tier → execute