ワンクリックで
routing-cybernetic-workflows
Use when a formed task needs a decision between ordinary direct work and a durable commitment-controlled run.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
メニュー
Use when a formed task needs a decision between ordinary direct work and a durable commitment-controlled run.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Use when a formed task needs durable human-approved meaning, completion obligations, evidence claims, non-goals, or live/destructive authority boundaries.
Use when maintaining or resuming an existing v1 requirements.control.json run; new runs use forming-cybernetic-commitments.
Use when an existing v1 run must compile its reviewed control chain into runtime.control.json.
Use when optional local workflow guidance or legacy v1 workflow compatibility needs diagnosis.
Use when an existing v1 control chain requires design.control.json; v2 strategies remain agent-owned.
Use when cybernetic routing is requested but user input is pre-task intent or role-ambiguous context: confusion, dissatisfaction, risk sense, observed symptoms, failed attempts, method preference, process distrust, source material, declared current state, or unclear requested transformation.
| name | routing-cybernetic-workflows |
| description | Use when a formed task needs a decision between ordinary direct work and a durable commitment-controlled run. |
Choose the smallest control entry that preserves the formed task. This skill routes only; it does not create files or execute target work.
Use $framing-cybernetic-intent first for pre-task input that is still dissatisfaction,
risk sense, symptoms, method preference, or process distrust rather than a
formed task.
For that branch, emit the literal response-only handoff:
$framing-cybernetic-intent <pre-task input>
ordinary_direct_work
commitment_controlled_run
ordinary_direct_work: normal Codex work is enough to preserve the request.commitment_controlled_run: execution needs a durable human-approved
commitment covering meaning, blocking obligations, completion evidence,
non-goals, or live/destructive authority.Do not choose a commitment-controlled run merely because solution design, implementation strategy, file selection, commands, debugging, parallelism, or subagent scheduling are uncertain. Those are agent-owned execution choices.
A material fidelity/cost tradeoff also does not choose the control entry by itself. Framing may state the user value and truthful approximation boundary. Before either route implements a materially visible tradeoff, perform a fact-bound outcome-fidelity check: compare a highest-fidelity reference with truthful lower-cost paths, reject misleading claims, and ask the user only if non-dominated paths materially differ in visible semantics. In ordinary direct work this is an agent-owned current-turn check; in a controlled run it happens during commitment formation before approval.
The v1 bounded_runtime and controlled_run entries are legacy compatibility
paths for existing run directories only. Never start a new v1 run.
Use commitment_controlled_run when at least one of these must remain stable
across a long or risky execution:
Otherwise use ordinary_direct_work.
Re-route an ordinary task before completion or a consequential action when new facts reveal durable obligations, explicit non-goals, a same-subject evidence requirement, or authority semantics. Discovery is agent-owned; do not wait for the user merely because the route must become more controlled.
For ordinary direct work with a material Value / Fidelity Frame, do not skip the outcome-fidelity check merely because no durable commitment is needed. Keep the comparison ephemeral, choose the best truthful path from current facts, and execute directly. Do not turn candidate paths, cost estimates, or a plan into a new approval object.
Every commitment-controlled run uses:
Schema validation is structural. Counterexample review is semantic.
Return:
Control entry decision.Why.Commitment scope: the meanings, obligations, evidence, non-goals, or
authority that require durable control.Recommended next step.Rejected control: process details deliberately left agent-owned.For an ordinary-direct material fidelity tradeoff, Recommended next step must
say that the agent will first perform the current-turn outcome-fidelity check,
then implement and verify the selected truthful path. It still emits no handoff
prompt.
For a commitment-controlled run, the handoff must be:
$forming-cybernetic-commitments <formed task>. 允许使用 subagent 执行 counterexample review。
Do not create the commitment in the routing turn.