model-router

name	model-router
description	Classify sub-task complexity (cheap / medium / main) and decide whether to spawn a sub-agent at all. On MiniMax Code 0.2.4 the `task` tool does not expose per-call model selection, so the 3-tier rubric here is a thinking framework for session-level model choice and a "do I really need a sub-agent?" gate, not a per-call `model_config_id` field. USE WHEN: about to spawn a sub-agent for non-trivial work, about to spend the main model on something a cheap model could do, "do this with the cheap model" / "用便宜模型" / "不要用主模型" / "sub-task 不重" / "small task" / "小任务". TRIGGER PHRASES: "用便宜模型", "cheap model", "use the cheap model", "小任务用便宜模型", "不要用主模型", "用本地模型", "sub-task 不重", "小任务", "this is just a", "小 case 用便宜". SKIP WHEN: sub-task IS the main task, mcode 0.2.4's `task` tool does not expose a per-call model field, sub-task is genuinely synthesis / design / cross-file reasoning.
license	Apache-2.0
compatibility	Targets MiniMax Code 0.2.4. **The mcode 0.2.4 `task` tool does NOT expose a `model_config_id` parameter or any other per-call model-routing field.** Verified against the bundled `cli.js` canonical schema (only `description` / `prompt` / `agent_name` / `run_in_background`). Model selection on mcode 0.2.4 is **session-level** (chosen at session start via the host's `model` flag / interactive picker). This Skill therefore reframes the original 3-tier rubric into a session-level thinking framework and a sub-agent gate, not a per-`task()` argument.
metadata	{"author":"antianqi","version":"0.4.0","inspired-by":"https://github.com/openai/codex/blob/main/codex-rs/model-provider-info/ and codex-rs/models-manager/ (design principle only; the 3-tier classification is portable; the mcode 0.2.4 surface for model selection is session-level, not per-task)","changes-from-v0.3.3":"Removed the v0.3.3 claim that 'MiniMax Code's `task` tool accepts `model_config_id` directly' — that was wrong. The canonical mcode 0.2.4 `task` schema has no per-call model field; the only model-routing surface on 0.2.4 is session-level (the host's `model` config at session start). The 3-tier rubric is preserved as a thinking framework and as a sub-agent gate ('don't spawn a sub-agent if the work is `cheap` enough that the calling session's current model could do it in 2 tool calls'), but no `model_config_id` is passed in any `task()` call. The Example section is reframed to match the actual mcode 0.2.4 surface."}

Model Router

The main model is expensive and slow. Most sub-tasks a long agent spawns are not "main-model expensive" — they are lookups, transforms, summaries, or pattern matches. The Codex harness routes those to cheaper models and reserves the main model for synthesis and hard reasoning.

On mcode 0.2.4 specifically, the task tool does not expose a per-call model parameter. The 3-tier rubric below is therefore a thinking framework for session-level model choice and a sub-agent gate, not a per-task() argument. The Skills keep the classification because the cost-of-thought question is the same; they just do not pretend mcode 0.2.4 routes per call.

The hard fact about mcode 0.2.4

The canonical mcode 0.2.4 task schema:

task(
  description:    string,        // required
  prompt:         string,        // required
  agent_name:  "explore" | "worker" | "verifier",  // required
  run_in_background?: boolean    // optional
)

No model_config_id, no model, no reasoning_effort, no per-call tier. Model selection on mcode 0.2.4 is session-level (chosen at session start via the host's model flag / interactive picker — the same model is used for the whole session, including every task call). Trying to pass model_config_id="..." is rejected by the strict validator in cli.js:B6c (the only allowed keys are the four above).

The v0.3.3 wording "MiniMax Code's task tool accepts model_config_id directly" was wrong. The cost-of-thought question (cheap / medium / main) is still worth asking; just not as a per-task() argument.

When to use

Activate when any of these is true:

• You are about to spawn a sub-agent and the work is non-trivial.
• You are about to spend the main model on a work step that has clearly bounded complexity (a lookup, a transform, a reformat, a coverage report).
• A sub-task failed and you are about to retry; consider whether the brief was bad, not whether a stronger model would help (mcode cannot route per call).
• A batch of N similar sub-tasks is about to run; classify them once and decide whether to spawn at all (the sub-agent gate).

When NOT to use

• The sub-task is the main task (no delegation happening). You are already on the right model.
• The sub-task requires the same context the main thread has, and you cannot pass a minimal-context brief (see fork-context-decision). A sub-agent with no context will fail — do it yourself.
• The user explicitly said "use the main model for this" or "don't downgrade the model" (no-op on mcode 0.2.4 anyway, but respects the user's framing).

Process

1. Classify the sub-task into one of three tiers, before deciding whether to spawn a sub-agent at all:

   Tier	When to use	Examples
   cheap	Bounded, single-shot, the brief fully specifies success. No synthesis, no judgement.	reformat a file, list files matching a glob, count lines, parse a JSON, run a deterministic script, copy a file with substitutions
   medium	Multi-step but well-scoped, the brief is the only context needed. Some judgement, no synthesis of new ideas.	summarise a long doc, refactor a single function, write tests for a known spec, review a single PR
   main	Requires synthesis, judgement across multiple sources, or stakes that make cheap-model mistakes costly.	design an API, evaluate tradeoffs, debug a multi-file interaction, write code that needs to satisfy a spec the agent has to interpret

   If unsure, classify up — main is the safe default.

2. Decide whether to spawn at all (the sub-agent gate, on mcode 0.2.4):

   • If the work is cheap AND the calling session can do it in 2 tool calls (one read / grep / bash + one write / nothing), do not spawn. The cost of the spawn (the sub-agent's bootstrap, the brief round-trip) is higher than just doing the work.
   • If the work is medium or main, spawn with the appropriate agent_name (explore / worker / verifier).
   • The model that runs the sub-agent is the same as the calling session's model — there is no per-call tier routing on mcode 0.2.4.

3. State the tier and the spawn decision in the sub-task brief so a human reviewer can see why you spawned (or did not spawn):

   ## Sub-task brief
   ...
   
   **Tier**: cheap | medium | main
   **Spawn decision**: doing-it-myself | task(agent_name=...)
   **Reason**: <one sentence>
   

4. If the sub-task returns a "I can't do this", do not silently retry on the same call. Re-classify: either the brief is wrong (rewrite it) or the work is harder than the tier suggested (re-classify up). On mcode 0.2.4 "going up a tier" means ending the session and restarting on a stronger model, not passing a different parameter — call this out to the user.

5. Record the actual spend if the harness surfaces per-call token counts. After a fan-out, note in the aggregation how much of the total was cheap-vs- medium-vs-main. This is how you learn the right tier for each sub-task shape.

Output contract

The user sees, in this order:

• For every spawn decision: the tier and the spawn reason (one line each).
• For the fan-out aggregation: a one-line "X cheap / Y medium / Z main" summary.
• For upgrades (cheap → medium → main on a retry): a one-line reason plus the user-facing cost (on mcode 0.2.4: "this needs main; please restart the session on a stronger model").

Example

The example below is MiniMax Code 0.2.4 task tool syntax. The model_config_id argument is deliberately not shown because mcode 0.2.4 does not accept it.

[planning] 1 cheap call: list all *.rs files in <repo>/src/auth/ that
            import `tokio::sync::Mutex`.
            — tier: cheap (deterministic glob + grep, no judgement)
            — spawn decision: DO NOT SPAWN. 1 read + 1 grep is faster than
              the sub-agent bootstrap.

[execution] 1 medium call: refactor auth/callback.rs to extract the SAML
            response parser.
            — tier: medium (multi-step refactor, brief is the spec)
            — spawn decision: task(agent_name="worker")
            — model: same as calling session (mcode 0.2.4 has no per-call
              model field)

> task(
    description="Refactor SAML parser",
    agent_name="worker",
    prompt="""
      Tier:        medium
      Spawn:       task(agent_name=worker)
      Task name:   refactor-saml-parser
      Sender:      main agent
      Task:        Extract the SAML response parser from
                   <repo>/src/auth/callback.rs lines 80-140 into
                   <repo>/src/auth/saml.rs as a free function.
      Payload:     <repo>/src/auth/callback.rs (lines 80-140);
                   <repo>/src/auth/mod.rs (re-export point).
      Return:      Write the new file <repo>/src/auth/saml.rs and
                   update <repo>/src/auth/mod.rs. Run
                   `cargo test --lib auth` and confirm green.
    """
  )

[execution] 1 main call: design the OidcProvider trait given the existing
            IdP interface and the OIDC spec. Resolve the
            "extend IdP vs new sibling" question.
            — tier: main (synthesis + cross-source judgement)
            — spawn decision: this is the main task; no spawn.
            — model: session-level main model.

Common pitfalls

• Do not default to main. The default is the most expensive answer. The skill exists to move work off main, not to confirm the obvious.
• Do not route synthesis to cheap. Synthesis requires judgement, cheap models hallucinate on it, and you will pay more on the retry.
• Do not classify by token count of the sub-task input. Classify by what the sub-task is (lookup vs synthesis). A 50,000-token doc summary is medium, not cheap, even though the input is large.
• Do not pass model_config_id in a task() call on mcode 0.2.4. The strict validator in cli.js:B6c rejects it; only description / prompt / agent_name / run_in_background are allowed. Model selection is session-level on 0.2.4.
• Do not retry a failed sub-task on the same tier without re-classifying. A cheap-model failure on a synthesis-class task is a classification error; the fix is to re-classify up, not to rephrase the brief.
• Do not hide the tier from the user. The tier is part of the contract — they should be able to see "this is cheap because…" and disagree.

Verification checklist

• Did you classify the sub-task into cheap / medium / main before spawning?
• Did you decide whether to spawn at all (the sub-agent gate)?
• Did you state the tier and the spawn reason in the brief?
• Did you avoid passing model_config_id in the task() call (not supported on mcode 0.2.4)?
• If the sub-task failed, did you re-classify (not just rephrase)?
• If you ran a fan-out, did you record "X cheap / Y medium / Z main" in the aggregation?