| name | fallback-doc-with-delegation |
| description | Generate professional documents after tool failures using shell_agent for complex formats or write_file for simple text/markdown |
Fallback Document Generation with Delegation
When to Use This Skill
Use this workflow when attempting to generate a document or report, but multiple primary data source tools fail simultaneously:
read_file returns binary/image data instead of text (common with PDFs)
search_web returns errors or no results
execute_code_sandbox fails unexpectedly
- Other data retrieval tools are unavailable
Key insight: Rather than getting stuck on failed data retrieval, pivot immediately to generating the document using the most appropriate available method—either shell_agent for complex formats or write_file for simple text.
Step-by-Step Instructions
Step 1: Detect Tool Failure Pattern
Recognize when you're in a fallback scenario:
TOOL_FAILURE_INDICATORS = [
"read_file returns binary or image data",
"search_web returns unknown error or empty results",
"execute_code_sandbox fails repeatedly",
"Multiple consecutive tool failures on data retrieval"
]
Decision point: If 2+ indicators are present, proceed to Step 2.
Step 2: Choose the Appropriate Fallback Method
Critical Decision: Select between shell_agent and write_file based on document complexity:
Use shell_agent when... | Use write_file when... |
|---|
| Generating PDFs or formatted documents | Creating simple markdown/text files |
| Complex layout or styling needed | Plain structured content is sufficient |
| External libraries required (reportlab, pandoc) | No special formatting libraries needed |
| Multi-step generation process | Single-pass content generation |
| Verification/validation needed | Direct file creation is adequate |
Decision Tree:
Is the output a PDF or complex formatted document?
├── YES → Use shell_agent (delegates to skilled agent)
└── NO → Is it markdown or plain text?
├── YES → Use write_file (direct content generation)
└── NO → Use shell_agent (handles uncertainty)
Step 3A: Execute with shell_agent (Complex Documents)
For PDFs and complex formatting:
shell_agent(
task="Generate a professional [document type] about [topic]. "
"Use appropriate libraries (e.g., reportlab for PDFs). "
"Include: [list key sections/requirements]. "
"Save to working directory as [filename]."
)
Advantages of shell_agent:
- Agent autonomously handles library selection and usage
- Automatically retries and fixes errors
- Can use multiple tools internally (run_shell, execute_code_sandbox)
- Validates output before completion
Example:
shell_agent(
task="Create a 1-page SBAR (Situation-Background-Assessment-Recommendation) "
"template PDF with 4 sections. Each section should have guiding points "
"and blank lined spaces for user input. Use reportlab library. "
"Save as SBAR_template.pdf in current directory."
)
Step 3B: Execute with write_file (Simple Documents)
For markdown and plain text:
report_content = f"""# [Document Title]
## Executive Summary
[Brief overview of key findings/content]
## Background
[Context and scope - use embedded knowledge]
## Main Content
[Organized sections with headers, lists, tables as appropriate]
## Limitations & Notes
[Transparent about data source limitations if relevant]
## Recommendations/Next Steps
[Actionable guidance based on available information]
"""
write_file(path="output/report.md", content=report_content)
Step 4: Structure Content Professionally
Regardless of method, ensure professional organization:
# [Document Title]
## Executive Summary
[Brief overview of key findings/content]
## Background
[Context and scope - use embedded knowledge]
## Main Content
[Organized sections with headers, lists, tables as appropriate]
## Limitations & Notes
[Transparent about data source limitations if relevant]
## Recommendations/Next Steps
[Actionable guidance based on available information]
Step 5: Leverage Embedded Domain Knowledge
When external data is unavailable:
- Use general domain knowledge appropriately
- Clearly distinguish between verified facts and general guidance
- Include actionable frameworks rather than specific unverified data
- Add placeholder notes where specific data would enhance the document
Example:
> **Note**: Specific [metric/data point] would typically be sourced from
> [expected source]. The guidance below reflects established best practices
> in this domain.
Step 6: Validate Output
list_dir(path=".")
list_dir(path=".")
Code Example
def generate_fallback_document(task_goal, output_format="markdown"):
if output_format == "pdf" or "complex" in task_goal:
shell_agent(
task=f"Generate a professional {output_format} document about "
f"{task_goal}. Use appropriate libraries. Include executive "
f"summary, main content, limitations, and recommendations. "
f"Save to working directory."
)
return "Document generated via shell_agent delegation"
else:
report_content = f"""# {task_goal} Report
## Executive Summary
This report was generated using established domain knowledge due to
temporary unavailability of primary data sources.
## Key Frameworks and Guidance
[Structured content with headers, bullets, tables]
## Limitations
- Specific data points from [expected sources] were unavailable
- Recommendations based on general best practices
## Action Items
1. [Concrete step 1]
2. [Concrete step 2]
"""
write_file(path="generated_report.md", content=report_content)
return "Report generated with write_file"
Best Practices
| Do | Don't |
|---|
| Choose method based on document complexity | Default to write_file for PDFs without consideration |
| Delegate complex formatting to shell_agent | Keep retrying failing tools 5+ times |
| Be transparent about limitations | Claim unverified specifics as facts |
| Provide actionable frameworks | Leave the task incomplete |
| Use professional document structure | Output unstructured text walls |
| Validate the generated output | Assume success without verification |
Common Pitfalls
- Wrong tool selection: Using write_file for PDF generation instead of delegating to shell_agent
- Over-apologizing: Acknowledge limitations once, then deliver value
- Under-delivering: A well-structured partial report beats no report
- Misrepresenting certainty: Use appropriate hedging language
- Skipping validation: Always confirm the file was created successfully
Success Criteria
The skill is successfully applied when:
Method Comparison
| Aspect | shell_agent | write_file |
|---|
| Best for | PDFs, complex layouts, multi-step generation | Markdown, plain text, single-pass content |
| Error handling | Autonomous retry and fix | Manual error handling required |
| Library access | Full library ecosystem | Content-only (no external libs) |
| Processing time | Longer (agent reasoning) | Faster (direct write) |
| Verification | Built-in validation | Manual verification needed |
| Cost | Higher (agent execution) | Lower (simple operation) |
Decision Checklist
Before selecting method, ask:
- Is the output format PDF or other binary format? → shell_agent
- Does it require external libraries (reportlab, pandoc, etc.)? → shell_agent
- Is it markdown or plain text only? → write_file
- Does it need multi-step processing or validation? → shell_agent
- Is quick, simple content generation sufficient? → write_file