/omh-feedback-triage

name: "omh-feedback-triage"
description: "[omh] Unsorted customer feedback and bug reports: cluster customer signals and choose the next workflow. Use when the user says: feedback-triage, customer-feedback-triage, feedback triage, customer feedback, feedback cluster, bug or feature, feature request triage, payment failure feedback."
metadata:
  hermes:
    tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, triage]
    category: triage
    phase: feedback
    role: operator
    quality_tier: triage-gated

Feedback Triage

This is a Hermes-native `feedback-triage` workflow skill.

Why This Exists

`feedback-triage` exists to keep customer and community signals from jumping straight into roadmap or coding; it clusters evidence, ranks signals, and chooses the next workflow.

Do Not Use When

• The request already contains an accepted product decision and asks for implementation.
• There are no feedback items, source boundary, or product area to classify.
• The user wants current market research rather than triage of supplied signals.
• The triage result asks for a retention or activation intervention rather than another cluster; use `lifecycle-growth`.
• The supplied material is opportunity records and the request is portfolio health or forecast review; use `sales-pipeline-review`.

Examples

Good example:

• Prompt: Cluster these customer payment failure reports and feature requests before we plan fixes.
• Expected behavior: Cluster bug signals and feature asks, rank severity or opportunity, and recommend research, planning, or coding as a next workflow.
• Why: The input is mixed feedback that needs classification before delivery decisions.

Bad example:

• Prompt: feedback-triage implement the accepted billing fix now.
• Expected behavior: Route to planning or coding handoff instead of re-triaging.
• Why: The decision is already accepted, so triage would add delay without improving evidence.

Completion Checklist

• The source boundary, signal clusters, severity, and follow-up lane are named.
• Bug, feature, research, strategy, and coding handoff outcomes stay separate.
• The next workflow is recommended before any implementation claim.

Recovery Notes

• If feedback lacks source or severity, ask for the missing signal before coding handoff.
• If the item is actually a plan or research request, route to that workflow instead of triage.

Workflow Lane

• Current lane: **Research and company ops** (`product-docs`, `source-finder`, `web-research`, `research`, `model-optimization`, `inference-serving`, `model-finetuning`, `research-brief`, `+20 more`) - research, signals, ops, and briefings.
• 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 classify feedback, bug reports, and feature asks before deciding whether research, planning, or coding handoff is needed.

Strong routing signals: `feedback-triage`, `customer-feedback-triage`, `feedback triage`, `customer feedback`, `feedback cluster`, `bug or feature`, `feature request triage`, `payment failure feedback`, `feedback trends`, `payment failure`, `payment failure issue`, `payment failure reports`, `고객 피드백`, `피드백`, `피드백 분류`, `피드백을 모아서`, `결제 실패`, `결제 실패 이슈`, `결제 실패 피드백`, `결제 오류`, `고객 불만`, `버그 제보`, `버그 기능 요청`, `기능 요청`

Catalog Metadata

Category: `triage` Phase: `feedback` Hermes role: `operator` Quality tier: `triage-gated` Reasoning demand: `standard`

Quality bar:

• Name the source boundary before clustering feedback.
• Classify signals into bug, feature, research, or strategy follow-up without overclaiming evidence.
• Recommend the next workflow instead of jumping straight to coding.

Handoff policy:

Keep feedback triage in Hermes; recommend the next workflow and prepare a selected executor/runtime handoff only after explicit coding intent or accepted plan evidence.

Required inputs:

• feedback items or summary
• source boundary
• product area

Expected outputs:

• clusters
• severity or opportunity ranking
• next workflow recommendation
• product_evidence_loop/v1

Artifact expectations:

• feedback triage record when a wrapper captures it

Safety rules:

• Do not turn feedback into a roadmap, implementation plan, or coding handoff by default.
• Separate bug signal, feature ask, severity, opportunity, and missing evidence.
• Route code changes only after explicit user intent or accepted planning evidence.
• product_evidence_loop/v1 is prepared-only opaque references, not observed evidence or execution.

Runtime Evidence

Preferred harness for this skill: `customer-insight-triage`.

omh runtime record --skill feedback-triage --harness customer-insight-triage --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.

• Treat wrapper memory/context summaries as advisory local context, not proof of opaque Hermes memory reads or changes.

Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion. Reply in the user's own words and the host's own voice: its SOUL.md persona owns reply language, tone, speech level, and sentence endings, progress updates included (where it sets no language, use the one the user wrote in), and OMH shapes structure and content only; OMH's record terms (surface, lane, wrapper, handoff, evidence boundary, not_observed) stay in records and tool calls, never in the sentence the user reads unless they ask about one; and when a stop condition or a decision the user owns ends the turn, offer the next action as a question rather than declaring what will not be done.

Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.

Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory