Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

messaging-the-human

Guides agents through sending human decision requests and updates using registered recipients. It covers concise briefs, delivery checks, duplicate prevention, and linking replies to the correct work so that delivery receipts are kept distinct from human decisions.

OriginalShow the original description

Use when project policy calls for a human decision or update, a human delivery is pending or failed, or a reply must resume the right work.

See how to install

Good for

  • Sending a decision request with clear options
  • Reporting an outcome that needs no action
  • Investigating a failed or uncertain delivery
  • Connecting a human reply to the original work

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md8.1 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

Messaging the Human

Project World supplies when and why to contact a human. This skill supplies transport-neutral mechanics; installing it does not create an approval gate or choose a connector. If policy leaves a material decision ambiguous, identify the missing authority. Do not convert a solvable technical failure into a human gate.

Discover, check, send, inspect

Discover the registered participants and inspect the chosen human:

rig gateway human list --json
rig gateway human show <entityId> --json

Use the returned address (<entityId>@external), not a username, remembered seat, connector handle, or guessed kernel address. Where several humans exist, use the decision ownership in Project World. An absent or ambiguous registration needs a named registration correction, not a fallback address.

Check readiness: configured, enabled, active, ready, reason, and next action. indeterminate is not ready. Follow the reported next inspection; do not enable or reconfigure a connector merely to make the check pass.

Author for the person reading on a phone: a short subject in --summary, then one complete brief in --body-file. State why it matters, your recommendation and material tradeoff, the bounded action if approved, and the choice requested. For an update, state the user-visible outcome and “No action needed.” Aim for roughly 100–150 words; this is guidance, not a semantic validator. Keep technical continuation, exact candidate/revision and evidence on the owning agent row and in the durable artifact behind --evidence-ref. A local path is not a phone link and Markdown evidence files are not automatically attached.

For example, a synthetic brief could say:

The repaired status view is ready. I recommend updating this instance; live status will briefly pause. Sessions will be preserved. Approve this instance update, or hold? Supporting test detail follows in this thread.

This example grants no authority. Choose --human-intent decision for a request or --human-intent update for a quiet FYI. Omission retains legacy decision behavior; words such as “FYI” and tags do not change intent.

The sole outbound human-message primitive is:

rig queue create --destination <entityId>@external \
  --human-intent decision --summary "<short subject>" --body-file <brief-file> \
  --evidence-ref <durable-evidence> --verify --json

An optional --human-detail-file <path> supplies one coherent supplemental reply in the same thread. Announce its purpose in the brief; the product also marks that a detail reply follows. The primary must already contain the complete scope, options and action. Do not split an agent dump blindly or move the essential choice into overflow. Rendering checks every part and its accessibility fallback before posting; an oversized request is refused with a field-specific correction, never silently clipped. Shorten the brief or related detail as directed. Inspect the failed row, then deliberately cancel/replace the authored request if its content needs correction; a timeout alone is never a reason to replace it.

A follow-up update about earlier work ("the change you approved is merged") can post into that item's thread with --reply-to <earlier-qitem-id>. It is accepted only with --human-intent update. Name the item whose thread the human saw, such as the parked row, and create the update on the same host as that item. Send the update from the seat that owns that thread: the seat that parked the row, or the author of the earlier item. A human reply in a thread reaches its owning seat, so an update from any other seat posts as a new message. It also posts as a new message, rather than being refused, if the earlier thread is missing or closed, or while the earlier item still waits on the human (a pending human decision, or a row parked on the human), since a reply in that thread would answer the decision. In every such case the --verify result says threaded: false with the reason.

To answer a reply the human typed inside one of your threads, --reply-to the row their reply landed as. The update posts in that thread unless one of the cases above applies, and --verify reports it the same way. A message the human started at the top level of the channel has no thread yet, so the answer posts as a new message.

A decision with a few clear choices can carry --human-questions-file <path>: a JSON array of 1–4 questions, each {"id", "question", "options": [{"id", "label", "recommended"?}]} with 2–4 options (labels up to 75 characters, at most one recommended). Slack shows each question as a row of buttons. Each click records that answer on the item, and the decision resolves once every question has one. You then receive one reply row listing the answers. In humanAnswers, clicked answers are option-id strings. A whole typed reply is an object: {kind: "typed-reply", text: "…", placement: "first-unanswered", unansweredCount: N}. It is placed automatically under the first unanswered question; the person did not select that question. N counts the other question slots still empty in humanAnswers after that placement. Earlier button answers stay intact. Read text as the person's words, never as an option id even if the strings match. The typed reply still closes the decision with the other questions unanswered; done is not approval. If every button answer was already recorded, that final answer set stays intact and the typed reply remains in its correlated reply row. Keep the brief complete: the questions add buttons, they do not replace the explanation.

If an existing agent-owned row must wait for a decision, block it on the new live qitem ID (rig queue block <work-id> --on <human-qitem-id> ...), not on the human address. Completion of the human qitem resumes its dependants. Blocking on the human as well would issue another notification for the same decision.

The row persists before bounded delivery verification. Read its qitem ID and verification result; posted proves connector posting, not human readership. transport-failed, never-posted, or a pending/indeterminate result leaves the row intact. Inspect that same row and its next action; never create a second row or blindly resend because verification timed out.

rig queue transitions <qitem-id>

For update, confirmed complete delivery may close the delivery obligation. It creates no approval obligation and cannot be used as a decision blocker. Delivered updates remain queryable for Feed; a failure or ambiguous send stays separate. A root message alone does not prove supplemental delivery. Retries reconcile stable part identities and send only missing parts. An FYI reply is not a human decision.

For a decision, a correlated reply binds to that exact human and qitem and records the resolution that resumes the owner. Check the recorded result before claiming the decision arrived; a delivery receipt alone is not acceptance.

Existing blockers and other channels

An existing agent-owned row may be blocked on <entityId>@host. That is an internal custody label resolved through the human registry to the same external participant; it is not a second delivery address. Keep the owner and continuation on that row. Inspect its existing delivery receipt before considering another request, so a legacy blocker does not produce a duplicate message. Never derive @host from the current rig name.

rig send reaches an agent's terminal only. It is not a human transport or a durable human obligation. Agent-to-agent work uses the queue handoff path. Connector-specific configuration and handles belong to registry/readiness tools, not to project-independent message instructions.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

agent-browser

FreeSummary

Automate website interactions through a command-line browser tool. Navigate pages, fill forms, extract text, save screenshots or PDFs, reuse login sessions, and compare page states to check the effects of actions or website changes.

  • Automating form entry and submission
  • Extracting page text and saving screenshots
  • Comparing page appearance before and after changes
mvschwarz/openrig7.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Design and maintain applications where OpenRig agents help run the system. Organize instructions, shared state, and artifact checks, then trace unexpected behavior to the code, skill, or schema that needs repair.

  • Designing an application operated by OpenRig agents
  • Organizing instructions and shared application state
  • Tracing unexpected behavior to its source
mvschwarz/openrig7.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Design and run bounded procedures in environments where current conditions are uncertain. The skill separates agent judgment from precise tool actions, verifies each effect, and records checkpoints so interrupted work can resume from observed evidence.

  • Designing procedures for environments with varying conditions
  • Resuming interrupted operations from verified evidence
  • Deciding whether an agent or ordinary code should control a procedure
mvschwarz/openrig7.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

agent-starters

FreeSummary

Create reusable starting configurations that combine an agent’s role, startup context, and source history. The skill guides registry entries, checks whether their sources are current, and manages their progression from initial capture to recommendation or retirement.

  • Create reusable startup context for an agent role
  • Refresh an agent workspace from an existing starter
  • Check a starter’s source history and freshness
mvschwarz/openrig7.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Guides the design and review of agent startup context, including role files and links to authoritative records. It helps identify stale guidance, missing updates, overloaded startup files, and instructions that lose the purpose of the work.

  • Designing startup files for a new agent
  • Reviewing stale guidance used by running agents
  • Separating role information from reusable procedures
mvschwarz/openrig7.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

Configure selected OpenRig command permissions in Claude Code or Codex at the agreed project or user scope. Preserve existing restrictions, verify that settings load and behave as intended, and record additions so they can be removed later.

  • Configuring command permissions before launching an agent team
  • Reducing repeated approvals for selected rig commands
  • Adding permission rules within a chosen project scope
mvschwarz/openrig7.9KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

See all skills by mvschwarz

Report a problem with this skill