L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Productivité · SKILL.md

escalate-or-hold

escalate-or-hold

Decide whether an issue gets escalated now, held with a re-check time, or closed — as a typed decision with probabilities rather than a judgment call in a thread. Use when asked should I escalate this, is this a P1, do we page someone, hold or escalate, or when an on-call, support lead or PM is staring at an issue and unsure. Produces the issue state in a f…

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: escalate-or-hold description: "Decide whether an issue gets escalated now, held with a re-check time, or closed — as a typed decision with probabilities rather than a judgment call in a thread. Use when asked should I escalate this, is this a P1, do we page someone, hold or escalate, or when an on-call, support lead or PM is staring at an issue and unsure. Produces the issue state in a fixed schema, the three-way decision with probabilities and confidence, the act-or-hold verdict, and the re-check time when holding." version: 1.0.0

Escalate or Hold

Most escalation mistakes are timing mistakes: too late because nobody wanted to be the one who paged, or too early because the reporter shouted. This skill fixes the shape of the decision — six state fields, three defined options, a probability for each — so the call is made on impact and trend rather than on volume.

Where this sits

Before cs-escalation-brief (which writes the brief once you have decided to escalate) and alongside escalation-tree (which says to whom). This one says whether, and when.

What This Skill Produces

  • The issue state — six fields, filled from evidence
  • The decision — escalate / hold / close with probabilities and confidence
  • Act or hold — thresholds applied, verdict stated
  • The re-check time — when holding, a hard time (hours, not days) and what would trigger escalation before it
  • The reporter line — one sentence to send the person who raised it

Required Inputs

Ask for these if not provided:

  • issue — what happened, when first reported, current status
  • impact — customers or revenue affected, SLA state, any regulatory or safety angle
  • owner — who has it, their capacity, when they last updated
  • trend — worse, stable, or improving, with the evidence
  • prior_escalations — escalated before? what happened
  • asks — what the reporter is asking for

Framework: A Typed Decision

OptionIt applies when
escalateImpact is growing, or a commitment / SLA / safety line is crossed, and the current owner cannot fix it in time — bring in the next level now
holdImpact is bounded, the owner has a credible plan and a next update time — hold and re-check at that time
closeResolved, a duplicate, or impact was misjudged — close with a note to the reporter

Thresholds. Act when confidence ≥ 0.6 and the winning option's probability ≥ 0.7. When escalate and hold are close, hold with a hard re-check time and tell the reporter the time — a close call resolved by a clock beats a close call resolved by a mood.

Trend beats severity. A bounded sev-2 that is getting worse is closer to escalation than a static sev-1 with a tested fix landing in an hour.

Getting probabilities. Any calibrated decision model that returns a probability per defined option serves this contract; the repo ships an adapter (node integrations/jev/decide.mjs escalate-or-hold --state state.json, contract in integrations/jev/decisions/). Without one, the assistant estimates and labels the estimate.

Output Format

Escalate or hold: [issue] · first reported [time]

State

FieldValue
impact…
owner…
trend…
prior_escalations…
asks…

Decision

OptionProbability
escalate0.xx
hold0.xx
close0.xx

Confidence: 0.xx · Source: [model / estimate]

Verdict: [act: option] or [hold — re-check at HH:MM; escalate before that if: …] Reporter line: "[one sentence: what is happening and when they will hear next]"

Quality Checks

  • Trend is stated with evidence, not assumed from severity
  • All three probabilities shown; the verdict cites the thresholds
  • A hold has a re-check time in hours and a named early trigger
  • The reporter gets one sentence with a time in it
  • Safety or regulatory angles, if present, are stated explicitly and force escalate

Anti-Patterns

  • Escalating the loudest reporter rather than the largest impact
  • Holding without a clock — "let's see how it goes" is not a hold, it is a drift
  • Closing to reduce the queue when impact was never verified
  • Re-litigating the options — inventing "soft escalate" to avoid paging someone
  • Skipping the reporter line — silence is how holds turn into escalations from above

Example Trigger Phrases

  • "Should I escalate this or wait for the owner's fix?"
  • "Is this a page-someone situation?"
  • "Third ticket on this today — hold or escalate?"
Skills enregistrées