/omh-deploy-and-monitor

name: "omh-deploy-and-monitor"
description: "[omh] Release rollout needing health signals: release checklist, deploy decision, health signals, rollback gate, and post-deploy status. Use when the user says: deploy-and-monitor, deploy and monitor, deploy monitor, deployment monitoring, release monitor, post deploy, post-deploy, rollback."
metadata:
  hermes:
    tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, monitoring]
    category: monitoring
    phase: release-ops
    role: operator
    quality_tier: release-gated

Deploy And Monitor

This is a Hermes-native `deploy-and-monitor` workflow skill.

Why This Exists

`deploy-and-monitor` exists to keep `monitoring` work explicit, evidence-backed, and inside the Hermes/executor boundary instead of relying on ad hoc chat narration.

Do Not Use When

• An incident has already been declared and the work is commanding it -- severity, commander, running timeline, recovery verification -- rather than watching a release; use `live-incident-response`.
• The ask is deciding a release before it ships -- what goes in, its version and tag, the canary stages, or which command rolls it back; use `release-cut`, which writes the rollback trigger down before it is needed.
• The change is to declared infrastructure itself -- a Terraform plan, a Kubernetes manifest, a Helm chart -- and needs its drift, blast radius, and cost delta read before it is applied; use `iac-change`.

Examples

Good example:

• Prompt: deploy-and-monitor: prepare the release monitor, rollback signals, health checks, and post-deploy status card.
• Expected behavior: Create release monitoring guidance with deployment, metric, rollback, and observation boundaries.
• Why: The request is about deploy readiness and monitoring rather than code review alone.

Bad example:

• Prompt: deploy-and-monitor: treat casual chat or unaccepted work as if this workflow already produced verified results.
• Expected behavior: Ask a clarification question or route to a narrower workflow instead of forcing `deploy-and-monitor`.
• Why: The request lacks the required inputs or would overclaim work that Hermes did not observe.

Completion Checklist

• Confirm the workflow target, evidence boundary, and stop condition are named.
• Report which outputs are prepared, observed, blocked, or missing.
• Name the smallest next verification or handoff instead of claiming completion from narration.

Recovery Notes

• If required context is missing, ask one blocking question or route back to the narrower workflow.
• If runtime or wrapper evidence is unavailable, keep the status as not_observed and expose the next observable action.

Workflow Lane

• Current lane: **Coding handoff** (`idea-to-deploy`, `llm-app-dev`, `cto-loop`, `deploy-and-monitor`, `code-review`, `build-failure-triage`, `verification-gate`, `security-safety-review`, `+28 more`) - coding owners, handoffs, review, CI, and merge evidence.
• If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to `oh-my-hermes` or name the adjacent workflow.
• Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`.

Use When

Use when Hermes should prepare or narrate a release operation with deploy checklist, health signals, rollback criteria, and post-deploy status without pretending to run infrastructure.

Strong routing signals: `deploy-and-monitor`, `deploy and monitor`, `deploy monitor`, `deployment monitoring`, `release monitor`, `post deploy`, `post-deploy`, `rollback`, `rollback gate`, `health check`, `incident watch`, `release health`, `deploy this service`, `배포 모니터링`, `서비스 배포`, `프로덕션 배포`, `인프라에 배포`, `배포 감시`, `롤백`, `헬스 체크`, `장애 감시`, `릴리즈 모니터링`

Catalog Metadata

Category: `monitoring` Phase: `release-ops` Hermes role: `operator` Quality tier: `release-gated` Reasoning demand: `light`

Quality bar:

• Name release scope, target environment, health signals, rollback criteria, and evidence owner.
• Show pre-deploy, deploy decision, monitor, rollback, and post-deploy as distinct stages.
• Mark health and rollback status unknown until observed evidence arrives.

Handoff policy:

Keep release checklist, health criteria, rollback gates, and status narration in Hermes; record deploy, monitor, incident, or rollback evidence only when the wrapper or operator observes it.

Required inputs:

• release scope
• environment
• health signals
• rollback owner

Expected outputs:

• pre-deploy checklist
• deploy decision gate
• monitoring watchlist
• rollback criteria
• post-deploy status boundary

Artifact expectations:

• release operation status record when the wrapper captures deploy or monitor observations
• web_qa_comparison/v1 for a canary only with a trusted host_deployment_observation/v1 and a production baseline captured before it

Artifact contracts:

This label denotes the machine-enforcement level, not a skill quality score and not an observed evidence state.

• contract_id: `deploy-and-monitor`; enforcement_level: `guidance_only`; consumer_id: `none`

Safety rules:

• Do not claim deployment, health checks, rollback, or incident response happened from a prepared checklist.
• Keep release readiness, deploy decision, monitor signals, and rollback as separate evidence steps.
• Route code fixes discovered during monitoring as later executor handoffs.
• A canary web-QA comparison never authorizes rollback; a missing deployment observation is BLOCK and a field regression beyond tolerance is REVISE.

Runtime Evidence

Preferred harness for this skill: `app-delivery-loop`.

omh runtime record --skill deploy-and-monitor --harness app-delivery-loop --status started

Record observed delegation results; otherwise return `not_available` or `not_observed`. Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.

• When wrapper metadata includes `memory_review_card/v1` or `handoff_context_pack/v1`, treat it as reviewed OMH-local or wrapper-supplied context only. Use conflict-free c