setup-routing

name	setup_routing
description	Configures per-project model and effort routing so Opus + high/xhigh thinking is spent only where it changes output quality and high-volume mechanical work runs on Sonnet. Use when the user says "setup_routing", "/setup_routing", "set up model routing", "configure model routing", "route tasks by model", or "make this project use Opus/Sonnet per task". Independently analyzes the repo, classifies it into a sensitivity profile (Opus-dominant, Mixed core/scaffold, Sonnet-default, or a Balanced fallback), proposes a tag-driven routing policy, waits for explicit confirmation, then writes a sentinel-delimited routing block into the project CLAUDE.md. The pinned-model executor subagents the policy references ship with the plugin (agents/); customized per-project copies in .claude/agents/ are an opt-in override.
when_to_use	Trigger on "setup_routing", "/setup_routing", "set up / configure model routing", "route tasks by model / cost", or any request to make a project spend Opus only where it matters and Sonnet elsewhere. Operates on the CURRENT project's CLAUDE.md and .claude/agents/ — never on global user files. Re-runnable and non-destructive.
argument-hint	[short description of the project]

Model & Effort Routing Setup (setup_routing)

CodeOps Skills Version: 3.11.0

Configure per-project model and effort routing for the project the user is currently in, so that expensive reasoning (Opus, high/xhigh thinking) is spent only where it changes output quality, and high-volume mechanical work runs on Sonnet. Invoked as /codeops:setup_routing or the typeable alias /setup_routing.

The two-layer principle (preserve this throughout)

Routing has two layers, and they must stay coordinated:

1. Policy layer (soft, behavioral). A block in the project's CLAUDE.md decides which model each phase runs on — inline-first — and which pinned executor backs a dispatch when one is warranted, expressed as a rule over task tags.
2. Enforcement layer (hard, guaranteed). Each executor subagent's frontmatter pins both model: (which model runs) and effort: (which reasoning effort runs) when that executor is invoked. Claude Code enforces both, overriding the user's session/settings.json/env config — so routing works regardless of what the user has already configured. The sole exception is the CLAUDE_CODE_SUBAGENT_MODEL env var, which sits above subagent frontmatter and forces every subagent onto one model (a deliberate global cost-cap escape hatch — surface it in Phase 5).

The policy is only trustworthy because the pinned executors exist to back it. Since v3.2.0 the two executors (plan-task-executor, plan-task-executor-opus) ship with the plugin in its agents/ directory — every install has them, so the policy block is valid on its own. Never generate routing prose that references an executor that exists neither in the plugin nor in the project. Per-project copies under .claude/agents/ are an opt-in override for users who want customized executor prompts (a project agent of the same name shadows the plugin one).

The policy layer is a behavioral instruction to the orchestrator, not a hard guarantee. The exec_plan skill's "Execution mode — inline first" protocol (execution-protocol.md) defines when a phase may be dispatched at all, the phase packet, the parent/executor division of labor, and a missing-executor guard (inline fallback with notice). Watching one real phase run under the policy is still the recommended validation (Phase 5).

Project configuration

For build/test/verify commands, package manager, structure, and conventions, read the project's CLAUDE.md (or detect from manifests if none). This skill adds to that CLAUDE.md; it never rewrites the user's own sections. It reuses the non-destructive merge discipline of analyze_project, tightened with explicit sentinels for idempotency.

Hard rules

• Independent analysis, not blind trust. Classify the project from the repository, using the user's description only as a hint. State the evidence behind the classification.
• Hard confirmation gate. Never write anything until the user explicitly approves (Phase 3).
• Non-destructive & idempotent. Re-running must be safe: update the sentinel block in place, never duplicate it; write executor overrides only when the user opts in AND the file is absent; never overwrite a user's existing file.
• Operate on the current project only. Touch the project's CLAUDE.md (and .claude/agents/ only for opted-in overrides). Never edit ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md or any global user file.
• Integration-branch write (parallel agents). The routing block is a repo-wide CLAUDE.md write, so it belongs on the integration branch. Resolve it the way analyze_project does — the integrationBranch marker key, else origin/HEAD, else main/master; if git is unavailable, treat the current branch as integration. On a non-integration (feature) branch, warn and skip the write and tell the user to run setup_routing on the integration branch — don't stage or fork the block. It's a once-per-repo idempotent write that only needs to happen there, so concurrent feature worktrees never collide on the routing block.
• Concise generated output. The routing block is injected into every session; keep it tight.
• Grounded options & recommendations. When you present the profile, the proposal, or any adjustment choice, follow the always-on Grounded Options directive in the coding standards: present only viable options, second-guess each, ground claims in the real repo, and lead with a recommendation and its reason. You recommend; the user decides. For consequential recommendations also apply the recommendation-hardening protocol (_shared/recommendation-hardening.md).

---

Sensitivity profiles

Detect the project type and map it to a profile. The set is extensible — add profiles by giving each a trigger set, detection hints, and a default-tag + escalation rule.

Profile A — "Opus-dominant" (high reasoning sensitivity)

• Triggers: compiler, interpreter, programming-language implementation, type system, semantic analysis, code generation, optimizer, formal verification, or similar.
• Detection hints: lexer/parser/ast/ir/codegen directories or files; grammar files (.g4, .pest, custom); heavy use of a systems language; a description mentioning "compiler", "language", "type checker", "IR", "codegen".
• Default tag: untagged → complex (Opus). De-escalate only explicitly mechanical tasks (lexer tables, AST-node boilerplate, test fixtures, mechanical refactors) → trivial (Sonnet).
• preflight always Opus.

Profile B — "Mixed core/scaffold" (split sensitivity)

• Triggers: a DSL or query language that lowers/compiles to another target (e.g. SQL); ORMs with non-trivial query generation; any semantic translation core surrounded by mechanical scaffolding.
• Detection hints: description mentioning "DSL", "lowering", "transpile", "query builder", "compiles to SQL"; a translation/lowering layer plus a parser/CLI surface.
• Default tag: untagged → standard, but all lowering/translation tasks and anything touching target-language semantics → sensitive (Opus). Frontend plumbing, error formatting, CLI wiring, scaffolding, fixtures → trivial/standard (Sonnet).
• preflight always Opus, with explicit emphasis on semantic-correctness review — silent wrong-output is the failure mode.

Profile C — "Sonnet-default" (low reasoning sensitivity)

• Triggers: conventional web/app development — React, Vue, Node, REST/GraphQL APIs, CRUD, standard backend services.
• Detection hints: package.json with react/next/express/fastify/nest; component directories; typical web-app layout.
• Default tag: untagged → standard (Sonnet). Escalate only tasks tagged security-sensitive, concurrency-sensitive, or performance-critical → sensitive (Opus).

Fallback — "Balanced"

If detection is ambiguous, use a balanced profile: untagged → standard (Sonnet), escalate complex/sensitive → Opus. Tell the user this was a fallback and invite them to correct the classification before confirming.

Task-tag vocabulary

Routing is tag-driven, not a blanket per-project switch (Profiles A and B are internally mixed). The vocabulary is fixed: trivial, standard, complex, sensitive. Each profile sets only the default tag for untagged tasks and the escalation/de-escalation it applies. The routing rule is constant — trivial/standard → Sonnet; complex/sensitive → Opus — applied inline-first: run each phase inline on the model its tag calls for, and dispatch a phase to the matching pinned executor only when a cheaper model than the session's is warranted (see the exec_plan skill's inline-first mode).

The generated routing block also instructs make_plan/exec_plan (within this project) to tag each task with one of these levels, so routing becomes a mechanical rule rather than a per-task judgment call. This is written into the project CLAUDE.md routing block — the skill does not modify the global make_plan skill.

---

The interaction flow

Phase 1 — Analyze (read-only)

Read the repo: manifests (package.json, Cargo.toml, go.mod, pyproject.toml, Makefile, build files), directory structure, key files, grammar/IR/codegen markers, framework signals, and any existing CLAUDE.md. Combine the evidence with the user's one-line description.

Phase 2 — Classify & propose

Pick a profile and state the evidence ("I see parser/, ir/, and codegen.rs — classifying as Opus-dominant"). Then present, in full and exactly as it will be written:

• the chosen profile and its default tag + escalation rule;
• the complete routing block (from templates.md, filled in);
• the complete quality-profile block (templates.md section 4; canonical semantics in _shared/quality-profile.md) — lens add-ons, security_profile, and perf_critical inferred from the same repo evidence under the same independent-analysis rule: propose from what the code shows, never from the user's description alone;
• a note that the referenced executors ship with the plugin, plus the OPTIONAL override: offer to copy them into .claude/agents/ for per-project prompt customization.

Phase 3 — Confirmation gate (HARD STOP)

Ask the user to confirm, adjust (override the profile, individual tag mappings, or any quality-block value), or cancel. ONE gate covers both blocks — routing and quality. Do not write anything until explicit approval. Honor adjustments before writing.

Phase 4 — Write

Apply the writes from templates.md:

1. Routing block. Apply the sentinel merge to the project CLAUDE.md (replace between markers / append / refuse-on-corruption — see templates.md). The executors it references ship with the plugin; nothing else to write.
2. Quality-profile block. Apply the identical sentinel merge for the <!-- CODEOPS-QUALITY --> markers (templates.md section 4) — a separate managed region; each write touches only its own block.
3. Executor overrides (ONLY if the user opted in at Phase 3). Copy the plugin's executor files into .claude/agents/ for customization — each only if absent; on a name collision, report and skip, or offer a suffixed name — never overwrite a user's file. Never touch content outside the managed blocks or pre-existing executor files.

Phase 5 — Verify & report

Summarize exactly what was written and where. Tell the user how to confirm:

• run /agents to see the executors (plugin-shipped, plus any project overrides — a project agent of the same name shadows the plugin one);
• inspect the <!-- CODEOPS-ROUTING --> and <!-- CODEOPS-QUALITY --> blocks in CLAUDE.md;
• (recommended) run one exec_plan task and confirm the Sonnet executor is actually selected.

Quality-block consumer note: the quality loop activates on the next exec_plan run (activation rules in _shared/quality-profile.md), and a quality agent whose pinned model is unavailable on the user's account (for example, absent from an org allowlist) silently runs on the session model — mention it so surprising review quality is traceable.

Flag the real-world validation explicitly: whether their Claude Code version honors delegation-by-name reliably, and that they should watch their rework rate for a week before trusting Sonnet on borderline tasks. Also confirm the generated model:/effort: shorthand is valid for their installed Claude Code version (see templates.md). Note that the pinned model: and effort: win over any model/effort they already set in settings.json or env — except if they have set CLAUDE_CODE_SUBAGENT_MODEL, which overrides every subagent's pinned model.

---

Related skills

• exec_plan skill — consumes the routing block via its "Delegated Execution" protocol (handoff packet, parent-owns-plan-file, blocker path, missing-executor inline fallback).
• make_plan skill — the routing block asks it to tag each generated task trivial/standard/ complex/sensitive within this project.
• preflight skill — always Opus under every profile (and semantic-correctness-focused under B).
• analyze_project command — the non-destructive CLAUDE.md merge discipline this skill reuses.
• For coding, testing, and git standards, follow your project's CLAUDE.md and use /gitcm / /gitcmp for commits.