/omh-failure-signal-audit

name: "omh-failure-signal-audit"
description: "[omh] Hidden or swallowed errors suspected: find swallowed errors, unsafe fallbacks, hidden UI/runtime failures, and missing propagation before they become false green status. Use when the user says: failure-signal-audit, failure signal audit, silent failure, silent failures, silent failure hunter, swallowed error, swallowed errors, empty catch."
metadata:
  hermes:
    tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, review]
    category: review
    phase: failure-signal-audit
    role: reviewer
    quality_tier: workflow-surface-gated

Failure Signal Audit

This is a Hermes-native `failure-signal-audit` workflow skill.

Why This Exists

`failure-signal-audit` exists so Hermes users can ask for this workflow in chat and get a structured, checkable answer instead of an improvised one.

Do Not Use When

• The request is already handled by a narrower explicit skill with stronger evidence.
• The user asks OMH to secretly run external platforms, connectors, schedulers, file exports, or runtime agents.
• The only safe answer is to ask for missing authority, credentials, target, or observed evidence first.

Examples

Good example:

• Prompt: failure-signal-audit check this frontend and agent trace for swallowed errors, false green status, and dangerous fallbacks.
• Expected behavior: Produce `prepare_failure_signal_audit` with required context, wrapper actions, and not-evidence boundaries.
• Why: The prompt names a real workflow surface that Hermes can orchestrate without hiding execution.

Bad example:

• Prompt: failure-signal-audit silently patch every catch block and claim the system is reliable now.
• Expected behavior: Report the missing observed evidence or authority instead of claiming the external step happened.
• Why: Prepared OMH guidance is not platform, runtime, connector, file, memory, or delivery evidence.

Completion Checklist

• Audit scope, source surfaces, and evidence types are named.
• Swallowed errors, dangerous fallbacks, propagation gaps, and false-green claims are reported as separate finding types.
• Each finding names location or evidence ref, severity, user/operator impact, and a smallest safe remediation route.
• No remediation, runtime repair, verification, CI, merge, or future reliability claim is made without observed follow-up evidence.

Recovery Notes

• If no code/trace/runtime evidence is supplied, prepare the audit plan and request the smallest source surface to inspect.
• If the user wants live service SLO or incident review, route to reliability-review.
• If the user wants rendered browser proof, route frontend visual evidence to visual-qa before PASS.

Workflow Lane

• Current lane: **Automation and status** (`achievements`, `workspace-audit`, `production-audit`, `live-incident-response`, `automation-blueprint`, `github-event-ops`, `github-issue-intake`, `buzz`, `+39 more`) - schedules, status, health, and ops review.
• 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 audit code, frontend/browser behavior, agent traces, or runtime reports for failures that were swallowed, downgraded, hidden by fallbacks, or reported as green without enough evidence.

Strong routing signals: `failure-signal-audit`, `failure signal audit`, `silent failure`, `silent failures`, `silent failure hunter`, `swallowed error`, `swallowed errors`, `empty catch`, `ignored exception`, `hidden failure`, `hidden failures`, `dangerous fallback`, `bad fallback`, `fallback hides errors`, `missing error propagation`, `error propagation`, `console errors ignored`, `network failures ignored`, `false green`, `false pass`, `무음 실패`, `조용한 실패`, `숨은 실패`, `삼킨 에러`, `에러 삼킴`, `위험한 fallback`, `위험한 폴백`, `폴백이 에러 숨김`, `실패 신호 감사`, `실패 신호`

Catalog Metadata

Category: `review` Phase: `failure-signal-audit` Hermes role: `reviewer` Quality tier: `workflow-surface-gated` Reasoning demand: `standard`

Quality bar:

• Name the user-facing workflow objective, required context, next action, and stop condition.
• Separate prepared guidance from observed platform, runtime, connector, file, memory, or delivery evidence.
• Expose missing tools, credentials, targets, or observations as user-visible gaps.
• Hold masked-failure and intended-fallback as competing hypotheses for each suspect site, each with observed evidence for and against, until one reading is discriminated.
• Order evidence probes cheapest-discriminating-first: read the handler and its callers, then logs and traces, before demanding expensive reruns or instrumentation.
• When a check went green without an observed fix, bisect from the last run that surfaced the failure to the first that swallowed it before naming the masking change.
• Attribute a masked failure to a specific handler or fallback only with revert-verify evidence (the signal observed reappearing without it), or mark causation unproven.
• Route remediation only against a reproduced failing signal; a remediation handoff without a reproduced failure first is a guess.

Handoff policy:

Keep this as Hermes-facing orchestration guidance first. Prepare executor, connector, gateway, or host-runtime handoff only when the user accepts that next step and observed evidence can be recorded.

Required inputs:

• user request
• target context
• delivery or status expectation
• known missing evidence

Expected outputs:

• failure_signal_audit_plan/v1
• silent_failure_finding/v1 when observed
• fallback_risk_matrix/v1
• propagation_gap_map/v1
• false_green_status_review/v1
• remediation_handoff/v1 when needed

Artifact expectations:

• failure_signal_audit_plan/v1 with source boundary, surfaces, evidence types, and stop condition
• silent_failure_finding/v1 only from observed code, trace, console, network, test, or runtime evidence
• fallback_risk_matrix/v