stall-escalation

name	stall-escalation
description	Stop and ask for direction when blocked instead of inventing assumptions or placeholder data
user-invocable	false

stall-escalation

When you detect blockers that prevent correct implementation, stop and ask for user direction using this pattern.

When to stop

Trigger this pattern if any of these occur:

• Missing critical inputs (files, logs, schemas, examples)
• No measurable progress after 2+ turns on the same issue
• Scope is too broad for a focused next step
• Would need to scan >5 unknown files to proceed
• Contract/schema is unclear and correctness requires guessing
• About to invent placeholder data or assume behavior

Response pattern

When blocked, structure your response like this:

**Blocker:** <one sentence>

**Option A - Split:**
- <smallest next step with current info>
- <alternative small step>

**Option B - Escalate:**
<what's needed: broader search, Task tool, more files>

**Question:** <direct question to user>

Guidelines

Default to Split when possible:

• Can it be done with ≤3 files? → Split
• Is it a focused investigation? → Split
• Just need one clarification? → Split

Escalate when necessary:

• Needs repo-wide search → "Use Task tool with Explore agent"
• Requires understanding 10+ components → "Needs architectural context"
• Schema unclear → "Need schema documentation or examples"
• Security implications → "Requires security review"

No filler:

• Don't apologize excessively
• Don't invent results to "push through"
• Don't add placeholder comments like "TODO: implement this"

Examples

Missing file path

**Blocker:** Template file path unknown - cannot modify CSS without knowing which template to edit.

**Option A - Split:**
- Read [PROMPT_INSTRUCTIONS.md](PROMPT_INSTRUCTIONS.md) for template references
- Ask user for specific template path

**Option B - Escalate:**
- Use Task tool with Explore agent to search all templates

**Question:** Do you know which template file needs updating, or should I search the codebase?

Scope too broad

**Blocker:** "Optimize CV generation" is too broad - unclear which metrics matter.

**Option A - Split:**
- Profile current performance with sample CV
- Identify top 3 slowest operations
- Propose specific optimizations based on data

**Option B - Escalate:**
- Full performance audit across all CV types
- Requires load testing setup

**Question:** Are you seeing specific performance issues, or should I profile first?

Missing contract

**Blocker:** API contract unclear - no request/response schema documented.

**Option A - Split:**
- Read [function_app.py](function_app.py) to extract current API
- Document actual behavior as baseline

**Option B - Escalate:**
- Trace all API calls across frontend/backend
- Create comprehensive schema

**Question:** Should I document current behavior, or do you have a spec?

When NOT to use this pattern

Don't stop if:

• You have all needed information
• Making clear progress (tests passing, code working)
• User explicitly said to proceed
• It's a simple clarification (just ask normally)

After user responds

Based on their choice:

• Split chosen: Proceed with focused next step
• Escalate chosen: Use Task tool or broader exploration
• User clarifies: Continue with new information
• User provides files: Read them and proceed

Why this matters

Prevents:

• Wasted turns on wrong assumptions
• Invented placeholder data that needs rework
• Solving the wrong problem
• Context pollution from failed approaches

Enables:

• Faster course correction
• Better use of user's time
• Clearer communication of blockers
• Focused problem-solving