Die Oberfläche ist lokalisiert; Skill-Beschreibungen und -Dokumente werden per KI automatisch in Ihre Sprache übersetzt. Code, Befehle, Pfade und Fachbegriffe bleiben im Original, maßgeblich ist das Dokument des Autors.
Skills entdecken
Entwicklung · SKILL.md

common-task-complexity-routing

common-task-complexity-routing

Scores a coding task on Spread, Novelty, and Centrality (SNC 0-6) and maps the tier to autonomy, verification depth, review mode, reviewers, model tier. Use when sizing a fix or feature before planning, choosing fast vs deep review, or deciding whether HARD STOP approval is required.

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Skill-Dokumentation

GitHub

name: common-task-complexity-routing description: Scores a coding task on Spread, Novelty, and Centrality (SNC 0-6) and maps the tier to autonomy, verification depth, review mode, reviewers, model tier. Use when sizing a fix or feature before planning, choosing fast vs deep review, or deciding whether HARD STOP approval is required. guardrail: true metadata: triggers: keywords: - task complexity - snc score - complexity tier - difficulty tier - autonomy level - review depth - model tier - how big is this change

Task Complexity Routing (SNC)

Priority: P1 (HIGH)

Same ticket label, different engineering difficulty. Score the task, not the label, then route by tier.

Score

Dimension012
Spread (how far the change reaches)one file, one moduleseveral files, one modulecross-module or cross-service
Novelty (new vs existing behavior)small edit or removal of existing behaviormodify existing logicnew behavior or rewrite
Centrality (how core the touched code is)peripheral codeshared but non-corecore domain, hot path, auth, money, trust boundary

Sum the three, never average. Output line: SNC: S=[0-2] N=[0-2] C=[0-2] total=[n] tier=[low|medium|high].

Tiers

  • tier=low: total 0-2
  • tier=medium: total 3-4
  • tier=high: total 5-6

Routing

TierAutonomyVerificationReviewApprovalmodel_tier
tier=lowautonomousbasic: focused tests + lintfast code-reviewnone requiredfast
tier=mediumguidedTDD + self-reviewdeep code-reviewplan reviewed, no HARD STOPstandard
tier=highplan-firstTDD + independent reviewers (specialist-architecture-guard, specialist-security-reviewer when relevant)deep code-reviewHARD STOP before code, human approval before mergestrong

Sensitive-Change Risk Floor

Sensitive changes touching authentication, authorization, payments/financial data, data integrity, secrets, or system trust boundaries have an explicit risk floor independent of arithmetic SNC totals:

  • Floor: Minimum tier=medium (guided execution, deep review, human plan acknowledgment) even if arithmetic total is ≤2 (e.g. S=0, N=0, C=2).
  • High Sensitivity: If spread or novelty is non-zero (S≥1 or N≥1 with C=2), enforce tier=high (plan-first HARD STOP, independent security review, human merge approval).
  • Irreversible Actions: Actions involving data destruction, schema drops, credential rotation, privilege escalation, or production cutover strictly require explicit human authorization regardless of tier.

Rules

  • Score before planning; emit snc_tier and model_tier in every Handoff Payload.
  • Label the score as inference when derived from ticket text alone; re-score after specialist-codebase-scout reports impact radius.
  • Round up on doubt. Any auth, money, trust-boundary, or hot-path touch is C=2 and subject to the sensitive-change risk floor.
  • Downward complexity reassessment is permitted ONLY with documented new evidence (e.g., scouted blast radius proves isolated scope with verified non-interference), NEVER to bypass unresolved risk, required approvals, or the sensitive-change risk floor.
  • Re-score when scope grows mid-task; the tier must rise immediately when expansion is detected.
  • Never downgrade a tier to skip a gate. Ticket type (bug vs feature) never sets the tier.

Red Flags

Stop and re-score when hearing or thinking: "it's just a bug fix", "one-line change", "skip the plan, it's small", "we'll review it later", "mark it low so we can merge tonight". Each is a rationalization, not a score.

Anti-Patterns

  • No tier by ticket type: "bug" and "feature" say nothing about S, N, or C.
  • No averaging: three 1s and one 2/0/1 both route differently only when summed.
  • No silent tier: a plan or handoff without snc_tier is incomplete.
  • No high tier without named reviewers: tier=high must list which specialists review before merge.

References

Gespeicherte Skills