Agent Ops Review

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

Why This Exists

agent-ops-review 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: agent-ops-review show quality, blockers, and throughput for AI-agent work.
• Expected behavior: Produce prepare_agent_ops_review 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: agent-ops-review claim Codex finished and CI passed because a handoff exists.
• 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 local command, managed path, config surface, and state artifact inspected are named.
• Blocking issues, warnings, and optional surfaces are separated.
• The next repair action is explicit and does not claim a reload or runtime observation.

Recovery Notes

• If a managed path or config key is missing, route to setup/update repair instead of editing hidden state.
• If a reload or plugin load was not observed, keep the diagnostic result as local health evidence only.

When to Use

Use when Hermes should explain AI-agent work: quality gates, progress, blockers, next actions, and throughput.