mirror of
https://github.com/NousResearch/hermes-agent.git
synced 2026-05-23 05:31:23 +00:00
190 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
190 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: kanban-orchestrator
|
|
description: Decomposition playbook + specialist-roster conventions + anti-temptation rules for an orchestrator profile routing work through Kanban. The "don't do the work yourself" rule and the basic lifecycle are auto-injected into every kanban worker's system prompt; this skill is the deeper playbook when you're specifically playing the orchestrator role.
|
|
version: 2.0.0
|
|
platforms: [linux, macos, windows]
|
|
metadata:
|
|
hermes:
|
|
tags: [kanban, multi-agent, orchestration, routing]
|
|
related_skills: [kanban-worker]
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Kanban Orchestrator — Decomposition Playbook
|
|
|
|
> The **core worker lifecycle** (including the `kanban_create` fan-out pattern and the "decompose, don't execute" rule) is auto-injected into every kanban process via the `KANBAN_GUIDANCE` system-prompt block. This skill is the deeper playbook when you're an orchestrator profile whose whole job is routing.
|
|
|
|
## When to use the board (vs. just doing the work)
|
|
|
|
Create Kanban tasks when any of these are true:
|
|
|
|
1. **Multiple specialists are needed.** Research + analysis + writing is three profiles.
|
|
2. **The work should survive a crash or restart.** Long-running, recurring, or important.
|
|
3. **The user might want to interject.** Human-in-the-loop at any step.
|
|
4. **Multiple subtasks can run in parallel.** Fan-out for speed.
|
|
5. **Review / iteration is expected.** A reviewer profile loops on drafter output.
|
|
6. **The audit trail matters.** Board rows persist in SQLite forever.
|
|
|
|
If *none* of those apply — it's a small one-shot reasoning task — use `delegate_task` instead or answer the user directly.
|
|
|
|
## The anti-temptation rules
|
|
|
|
Your job description says "route, don't execute." The rules that enforce that:
|
|
|
|
- **Do not execute the work yourself.** Your restricted toolset usually doesn't even include terminal/file/code/web for implementation. If you find yourself "just fixing this quickly" — stop and create a task for the right specialist.
|
|
- **For any concrete task, create a Kanban task and assign it.** Every single time.
|
|
- **Split multi-lane requests before creating cards.** A user prompt can contain several independent workstreams. Extract those lanes first, then create one card per lane instead of bundling unrelated work into a single implementer card.
|
|
- **Run independent lanes in parallel.** If two cards do not need each other's output, leave them unlinked so the dispatcher can fan them out. Link only true data dependencies.
|
|
- **If no specialist fits, ask the user which profile to create.** Do not default to doing it yourself under "close enough."
|
|
- **Decompose, route, and summarize — that's the whole job.**
|
|
|
|
## The standard specialist roster (convention)
|
|
|
|
Unless the user's setup has customized profiles, assume these exist. Adjust to whatever the user actually has — ask if you're unsure.
|
|
|
|
| Profile | Does | Typical workspace |
|
|
|---|---|---|
|
|
| `researcher` | Reads sources, gathers facts, writes findings | `scratch` |
|
|
| `analyst` | Synthesizes, ranks, de-dupes. Consumes multiple `researcher` outputs | `scratch` |
|
|
| `writer` | Drafts prose in the user's voice | `scratch` or `dir:` into their Obsidian vault |
|
|
| `reviewer` | Reads output, leaves findings, gates approval | `scratch` |
|
|
| `backend-eng` | Writes server-side code | `worktree` |
|
|
| `frontend-eng` | Writes client-side code | `worktree` |
|
|
| `ops` | Runs scripts, manages services, handles deployments | `dir:` into ops scripts repo |
|
|
| `pm` | Writes specs, acceptance criteria | `scratch` |
|
|
|
|
## Decomposition playbook
|
|
|
|
### Step 1 — Understand the goal
|
|
|
|
Ask clarifying questions if the goal is ambiguous. Cheap to ask; expensive to spawn the wrong fleet.
|
|
|
|
### Step 2 — Sketch the task graph
|
|
|
|
Before creating anything, draft the graph out loud (in your response to the user). Treat every concrete workstream as a candidate card:
|
|
|
|
1. Extract the lanes from the request.
|
|
2. Assign each lane to the best specialist.
|
|
3. Decide whether each lane is independent or gated by another lane.
|
|
4. Create independent lanes as parallel cards with no parent links.
|
|
5. Create synthesis/review/integration cards with parent links to the lanes they depend on.
|
|
|
|
Examples of prompts that should fan out:
|
|
|
|
- "Build an app" -> `designer` for product/UI direction and `frontend-eng` or `backend-eng` for implementation, with a later integration/review card if needed.
|
|
- "Fix blockers and check model variants" -> one implementation card for the blocker fixes plus one discovery/research card for config/source verification. A final reviewer card can depend on both.
|
|
- "Research docs and implement" -> a docs-research card can run in parallel with a codebase-discovery card; implementation waits only if it truly needs those findings.
|
|
- "Analyze this screenshot and find the related code" -> `observer` handles visual analysis while an explorer-style profile searches the codebase.
|
|
|
|
Words like "also," "finally," or "and" do not automatically imply a dependency. They often mean "make sure this is covered before reporting back." Only link tasks when one card cannot start until another card's output exists.
|
|
|
|
Example for "Analyze whether we should migrate to Postgres":
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
T1 researcher research: Postgres cost vs current
|
|
T2 researcher research: Postgres performance vs current
|
|
T3 analyst synthesize migration recommendation parents: T1, T2
|
|
T4 writer draft decision memo parents: T3
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Show this to the user. Let them correct it before you create anything.
|
|
|
|
### Step 3 — Create tasks and link
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
t1 = kanban_create(
|
|
title="research: Postgres cost vs current",
|
|
assignee="researcher",
|
|
body="Compare estimated infrastructure costs, migration costs, and ongoing ops costs over a 3-year window. Sources: AWS/GCP pricing, team time estimates, current Postgres bills from peers.",
|
|
tenant=os.environ.get("HERMES_TENANT"),
|
|
)["task_id"]
|
|
|
|
t2 = kanban_create(
|
|
title="research: Postgres performance vs current",
|
|
assignee="researcher",
|
|
body="Compare query latency, throughput, and scaling characteristics at our expected data volume (~500GB, 10k QPS peak). Sources: benchmark papers, public case studies, pgbench results if easy.",
|
|
)["task_id"]
|
|
|
|
t3 = kanban_create(
|
|
title="synthesize migration recommendation",
|
|
assignee="analyst",
|
|
body="Read the findings from T1 (cost) and T2 (performance). Produce a 1-page recommendation with explicit trade-offs and a go/no-go call.",
|
|
parents=[t1, t2],
|
|
)["task_id"]
|
|
|
|
t4 = kanban_create(
|
|
title="draft decision memo",
|
|
assignee="writer",
|
|
body="Turn the analyst's recommendation into a 2-page memo for the CTO. Match the tone of previous decision memos in the team's knowledge base.",
|
|
parents=[t3],
|
|
)["task_id"]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
`parents=[...]` gates promotion — children stay in `todo` until every parent reaches `done`, then auto-promote to `ready`. No manual coordination needed; the dispatcher and dependency engine handle it.
|
|
|
|
### Step 4 — Complete your own task
|
|
|
|
If you were spawned as a task yourself (e.g. `planner` profile was assigned `T0: "investigate Postgres migration"`), mark it done with a summary of what you created:
|
|
|
|
```python
|
|
kanban_complete(
|
|
summary="decomposed into T1-T4: 2 researchers parallel, 1 analyst on their outputs, 1 writer on the recommendation",
|
|
metadata={
|
|
"task_graph": {
|
|
"T1": {"assignee": "researcher", "parents": []},
|
|
"T2": {"assignee": "researcher", "parents": []},
|
|
"T3": {"assignee": "analyst", "parents": ["T1", "T2"]},
|
|
"T4": {"assignee": "writer", "parents": ["T3"]},
|
|
},
|
|
},
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Step 5 — Report back to the user
|
|
|
|
Tell them what you created in plain prose:
|
|
|
|
> I've queued 4 tasks:
|
|
> - **T1** (researcher): cost comparison
|
|
> - **T2** (researcher): performance comparison, in parallel with T1
|
|
> - **T3** (analyst): synthesizes T1 + T2 into a recommendation
|
|
> - **T4** (writer): turns T3 into a CTO memo
|
|
>
|
|
> The dispatcher will pick up T1 and T2 now. T3 starts when both finish. You'll get a gateway ping when T4 completes. Use the dashboard or `hermes kanban tail <id>` to follow along.
|
|
|
|
## Common patterns
|
|
|
|
**Fan-out + fan-in (research → synthesize):** N `researcher` tasks with no parents, one `analyst` task with all of them as parents.
|
|
|
|
**Parallel implementation + validation:** one implementer card makes the change while one explorer/researcher card verifies config, docs, or source mapping. A reviewer card can depend on both. Do not make the implementer own unrelated verification just because the user mentioned both in one sentence.
|
|
|
|
**Pipeline with gates:** `pm → backend-eng → reviewer`. Each stage's `parents=[previous_task]`. Reviewer blocks or completes; if reviewer blocks, the operator unblocks with feedback and respawns.
|
|
|
|
**Same-profile queue:** 50 tasks, all assigned to `translator`, no dependencies between them. Dispatcher serializes — translator processes them in priority order, accumulating experience in their own memory.
|
|
|
|
**Human-in-the-loop:** Any task can `kanban_block()` to wait for input. Dispatcher respawns after `/unblock`. The comment thread carries the full context.
|
|
|
|
## Pitfalls
|
|
|
|
**Bundling independent lanes into one card.** If the user asks for two independent outcomes, create two cards. Example: "fix blockers and check model variants" is not one fixer task; create a fixer/engineer card for the fixes and an explorer/researcher card for the variant check, then optionally gate review on both.
|
|
|
|
**Over-linking because of wording.** "Finally check X" may still be parallel with implementation if X is static config, docs, or source discovery. Link it after implementation only when the check depends on the implementation result.
|
|
|
|
**Forgetting dependency links.** If the task graph says `research -> implement -> review`, do not create all tasks as independent ready cards. Use parent links so implement/review cannot run before their inputs exist.
|
|
|
|
**Reassignment vs. new task.** If a reviewer blocks with "needs changes," create a NEW task linked from the reviewer's task — don't re-run the same task with a stern look. The new task is assigned to the original implementer profile.
|
|
|
|
**Argument order for links.** `kanban_link(parent_id=..., child_id=...)` — parent first. Mixing them up demotes the wrong task to `todo`.
|
|
|
|
**Don't pre-create the whole graph if the shape depends on intermediate findings.** If T3's structure depends on what T1 and T2 find, let T3 exist as a "synthesize findings" task whose own first step is to read parent handoffs and plan the rest. Orchestrators can spawn orchestrators.
|
|
|
|
**Tenant inheritance.** If `HERMES_TENANT` is set in your env, pass `tenant=os.environ.get("HERMES_TENANT")` on every `kanban_create` call so child tasks stay in the same namespace.
|
|
|
|
## Recovering stuck workers
|
|
|
|
When a worker profile keeps crashing, hallucinating, or getting blocked by its own mistakes (usually: wrong model, missing skill, broken credential), the kanban dashboard flags the task with a ⚠ badge and opens a **Recovery** section in the drawer. Three primary actions:
|
|
|
|
1. **Reclaim** (or `hermes kanban reclaim <task_id>`) — abort the running worker immediately and reset the task to `ready`. The existing claim TTL is ~15 min; this is the fast path out.
|
|
2. **Reassign** (or `hermes kanban reassign <task_id> <new-profile> --reclaim`) — switch the task to a different profile and let the dispatcher pick it up with a fresh worker.
|
|
3. **Change profile model** — the dashboard prints a copy-paste hint for `hermes -p <profile> model` since profile config lives on disk; edit it in a terminal, then Reclaim to retry with the new model.
|
|
|
|
Hallucination warnings appear on tasks where a worker's `kanban_complete(created_cards=[...])` claim included card ids that don't exist or weren't created by the worker's profile (the gate blocks the completion), or where the free-form summary references `t_<hex>` ids that don't resolve (advisory prose scan, non-blocking). Both produce audit events that persist even after recovery actions — the trail stays for debugging.
|