Nm Conserve Decisive Action

v1.0.0

Guidance on when to ask clarifying questions vs proceed with standard approaches. Reduces unnecessary interaction rounds

0· 69·1 current·1 all-time
Security Scan
VirusTotalVirusTotal
Benign
View report →
OpenClawOpenClaw
Benign
high confidence
Purpose & Capability
The name/description match the SKILL.md content: the document provides heuristics and examples for asking vs acting. It does not request unrelated credentials, binaries, or system access.
Instruction Scope
SKILL.md stays within scope: it is text guidance and examples about decision thresholds, previews, dry-runs, and safe use of git/backups. References to git stash, branches, copying files, and previews are appropriate given the goal of safe autonomous action and are phrased as recommended safety mechanisms, not as hidden steps to exfiltrate data.
Install Mechanism
No install spec and no code files are present, so nothing will be written to disk or fetched at install time.
Credentials
The skill declares no environment variables, credentials, or config paths. The SKILL.md does not ask for secrets or unrelated service keys.
Persistence & Privilege
always is false and the skill is user-invocable. It does not request permanent presence or elevated platform privileges.
Assessment
This is a low-risk, instruction-only skill that provides heuristics for asking vs acting. Before enabling it for autonomous agents, confirm the agent's execution permissions (so it cannot perform destructive git/file operations without your consent), ensure backups/repos exist for reversibility, and verify agent policies for confirmations on irreversible actions. If you want extra safety, require manual approval for actions that the skill would classify as 'irreversible' or 'security-critical.'

Like a lobster shell, security has layers — review code before you run it.

Runtime requirements

🦞 Clawdis
latestvk97484tjfk5dhr9h61ndjwssmn84m7z2
69downloads
0stars
1versions
Updated 1w ago
v1.0.0
MIT-0

Night Market Skill — ported from claude-night-market/conserve. For the full experience with agents, hooks, and commands, install the Claude Code plugin.

Table of Contents

Decisive Action

Guidance on when to ask clarifying questions versus proceeding autonomously.

When To Use

  • Reducing unnecessary clarifying questions
  • Taking autonomous action when intent is clear

When NOT To Use

  • High-stakes irreversible operations requiring explicit confirmation
  • Ambiguous requirements where clarification prevents wasted work

Core Principle

Ask questions only when ambiguity would materially impair correctness or capacity to fulfill the request precisely.

When to Ask (High Impact Ambiguity)

Always Ask For

ScenarioWhyExample
Destructive OperationsIrreversible, high cost of error"Delete which files?"
Multiple Valid ApproachesMaterially different tradeoffs"Add index vs cache vs denormalize?"
Security-CriticalWrong choice = vulnerability"Which auth method?"
Data MigrationData loss risk"Preserve or transform?"
Breaking ChangesAffects downstream users"Deprecate or remove?"

Ask Threshold Checklist

Before asking, verify:

  • >30% chance of wrong interpretation
  • Error cost > correction cost
  • No clear standard approach exists
  • User context doesn't clarify intent

When to Proceed Without Asking

Default to Action For

ScenarioWhyAssumption
Standard Approach ExistsIndustry conventionUse conventional pattern
Easily ReversibleLow cost of errorCan undo via git/backup
Clear from ContextIntent is obviousProceed with stated goal
User Can ReviewPR/dry-run availableChanges are inspectable

Proceed Threshold Checklist

Proceed without asking if:

  • Standard/obvious solution exists
  • Easily reversible (git, backup)
  • User can review before finalize
  • Context makes intent clear
  • Error cost < interruption cost

Decision Matrix

ReversibilityAmbiguityAction
ReversibleLowProceed
ReversibleHighProceed with preview
IrreversibleLowProceed with confirmation
IrreversibleHighAsk

Safety Mechanisms

Before Proceeding Autonomously

  1. Dry-run/Preview: Show proposed action before executing
  2. Backup First: Create git branch, backup directory
  3. Incremental Changes: Commit small, reviewable chunks
  4. Document Assumptions: In commit message or PR description

Undo Capability

Always ensure rollback is possible:

  • Git operations: git stash, backup branches
  • File operations: Copy before modify
  • Data operations: Transaction rollback

Examples

Example: Should Ask

User: "Delete the old files"

Analysis:

  • Destructive operation ✗
  • Multiple interpretations ✗
  • No clear standard ✗

Response:

Which files should I delete? I found:
- Files unchanged >6 months: 23 files
- Files in deprecated/: 5 files
- Files marked TODO remove: 2 files

Example: Should Proceed

User: "Add error handling to the parser"

Analysis:

  • Standard approach exists ✓
  • Easily reversible (git) ✓
  • User can review PR ✓

Action: Implement try/catch with logging, create PR.

Example: Proceed with Preview

User: "Refactor the API layer"

Analysis:

  • Multiple valid approaches
  • BUT: reversible via git
  • AND: user can review

Action:

Refactoring API layer. Proposed changes:

1. Extract authentication middleware
2. Standardize error responses
3. Add request validation

Creating branch: refactor/api-layer
Preview diff available before merge.

Anti-Patterns

Asking Too Much (Inefficient)

  • Asking for every implementation detail
  • Seeking validation for obvious choices
  • Repeating questions already answered in context

Asking Too Little (Risky)

  • Proceeding with destructive actions silently
  • Assuming intent when multiple valid interpretations exist
  • Ignoring ambiguity in security-critical operations

Integration

Combine with:

  • conserve:response-compression - Direct communication
  • sanctum:git-workspace-review - Context gathering
  • imbue:scope-guard - Scope management

Quick Reference

SituationAction
"Delete X"Ask which X
"Add feature"Proceed with standard approach
"Fix bug"Proceed with obvious fix
"Choose between A/B"Ask for preference
"Optimize query"Ask if multiple approaches
"Format code"Proceed with project style
"Deploy to prod"Ask for confirmation

Comments

Loading comments...