Omh Decision Recall

Decision Recall

This is an OMH decision-recall workflow skill, projected for Agent Skills hosts (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, opencode, OpenClaw, pi).

Why This Exists

decision-recall exists so Hermes users can ask for this workflow in chat and receive a structured, evidence-bounded OMH operating surface instead of ad hoc narration.

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: Show rejected decisions for this project before we choose an alternative.
• Expected behavior: Produce show_rejected_decision_recall 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: Claim the recalled rejected decision is an approved memory write or proof the replacement ran.
• 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

• The query, scope, tags, stale policy, and match limit are explicit.
• Only reviewed rejected candidates are returned; expired candidates stay excluded.
• Recall output is not presented as approved memory, source freshness, or execution evidence.

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.

Use When

Use for scoped reviewed rejected-decision context; it is not approved memory or execution evidence.

Copy code
Strong routing signals: `decision-recall`, `rejected decision recall`, `rejected decisions`, `why was this rejected`, `previously rejected alternative`, `거절된 결정`, `기각된 대안`

Catalog Metadata

Category: memory Phase: decision-recall Quality tier: workflow-surface-gated Reasoning demand: light

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.

Required inputs:

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

Expected outputs:

• rejected_decision_recall/v1
• scoped rejected-decision matches
• claim boundary

Artifact expectations:

• rejected_decision_recall/v1 metadata-only recall result

Safety rules:

• Rejected-decision context is reviewed OMH-local context, not approved memory, Hermes memory, or execution evidence.
• Do not claim connector, gateway, runtime, file generation, memory mutation, or host automation evidence from prepared guidance.

Runtime Evidence

Use the current host's own tools and subagent/task mechanism when available; otherwise run the same lanes sequentially or name the unavailable capability. A prepared plan, handoff, checklist, or skill installation is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence. Report actual tool results or not_observed / not_available; never invent dispatch or host accounting. Treat supplied context as advisory, not proof of hidden memory reads or writes. State scope, constraints, verification, and the stop condition before work. Supporting paths are relative to this skill directory; sibling skill paths are relative to its parent. Resolve them from the host-provided skill base directory ({baseDir} on hosts that provide it), never a hardcoded install location. A named workflow not installed here is unavailable, not permission to emulate its host-specific capabilities. Verify through the real surface before done.