Catch the accessibility failures that ship in almost every AI-built UI. Use after building any interactive component.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Escalate blocked runs to a human via configured channel or fallback to BLOCKED.md and exit the loop. Use when the loop hits an ambiguous spec, a missing credential, a destructive action needing approval, or 3+ consecutive verify failures on the same task.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
安装前可以查看交给 AI 代理的指令内容。
Long-running agent loops fail in a specific way when they meet a question they can't answer: they guess. The guess ships, the next session builds on it, and by the time a human looks the divergence is three commits deep. This skill is the release valve — when the agent is stuck, it stops and asks, cleanly, in a shape the human can act on.
PROMPT.md admits two implementations and the choice changes user-visible behavior./verify failures on the same task. The loop is thrashing. Stop and get a human eye before the fourth attempt.If none of the above hold, do not escalate. Guessing is bad; escalating on a solvable problem is also bad (it trains humans to ignore the channel).
Read LOOPKIT_HITL_CHANNEL. Supported values:
| Value | Shape |
|---|---|
telegram | POST to https://api.telegram.org/bot$LOOPKIT_HITL_TELEGRAM_TOKEN/sendMessage with chat_id=$LOOPKIT_HITL_TELEGRAM_CHAT, text=<question + repo + short context>. |
slack | POST JSON {"text": "..."} to $LOOPKIT_HITL_SLACK_WEBHOOK (incoming-webhook URL). |
dial | Run $LOOPKIT_HITL_DIAL_CMD with the message on stdin. Whatever the operator wired up — SMS gateway, ntfy, phone call, pager. |
none (or unset) | Skip the primary action. Go straight to fallback. |
Message body — always these five lines, in this order:
[loopkit] blocked in <repo-name> on <ISO timestamp>
Q: <one-line question>
Context: <one-line what you were doing>
Attempted: <one-line what you tried>
Choices: <A | B | C>
Non-2xx from the channel is a soft failure. Log it, then fall through to the fallback so the loop still exits cleanly.
Whether the primary succeeds or fails, always write ./BLOCKED.md at the repo root with exactly four sections:
# Blocked
## Question:
<one sentence, answerable with a short reply>
## Context:
<what feature, which file, which commit, why now — 3-6 lines>
## Attempted:
<bulleted list of what you tried and why each fell short>
## Choices:
- A) <option> — <consequence>
- B) <option> — <consequence>
- C) <option> — <consequence>
Then exit 2. The loop runner (run.sh) checks for BLOCKED.md at the head of each iteration and exits with code 2 if it exists — that stops the loop until a human clears it.
The human reads BLOCKED.md, edits PROMPT.md / drops the credential / approves the destructive step, then rm BLOCKED.md and restarts run.sh. The deleted BLOCKED.md is the unblock signal.
/verify failure on the same task, escalate. The fourth attempt is not going to succeed by the same reasoning that failed thrice.AGENTS.md, PROMPT.md, and the last three commits first. Escalation is expensive human attention — spend it on real ambiguity.BLOCKED.md because the primary channel succeeded. The file is the loop's exit contract. Without it, run.sh keeps spinning.adversarial-verify — the source of the 3-verify-failure trigger.shift-notes — after escalating, note the block in IMPLEMENTATION_PLAN.md so the next session (post-unblock) has full context.spec-first — an ambiguous PROMPT.md is a spec-first failure; the human's unblock should tighten the spec, not just answer the one-off.还没有评价。欢迎分享你的使用感受。
无需登录即可发表。欢迎分享使用感受、提问,或说明在哪些环境下无法运行。
还没有评论。来写第一条吧。
Catch the accessibility failures that ship in almost every AI-built UI. Use after building any interactive component.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Before compaction Loopkit extracts decisions into claude-decisions.json (machine-readable). Read it alongside claude-progress.txt at session start — prose is for humans, JSON is for the loop.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Review a diff against the goal spec assuming the code is BROKEN. The reviewer that lives in the maker's head always agrees with itself — this pulls review into a hostile, separate pass. Invoke after every code change before marking work done.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Verify that an endpoint checks ownership, not just authentication. Use on any handler that reads or mutates user data.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Find the exact commit that introduced a bug. Use when something worked before and broke, and you don't know which change did it.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。
Before picking new work, smoke-test the last "completed" feature. If it's broken, revert and re-open it before touching anything else. Kills the "looks shipped, isn't shipped" bug across sessions.
中文简介正在准备中。当前显示原文说明。