Should I stop and ask the user?

--- name: should-i-stop-and-ask description: "Should I stop and ask the user? Is this task possible with what I have? Use this when a task is failing repeatedly, the same approach has been tried twice, no new evidence is appearing, a host is refusing you, or you are about to ask a vague \"should I keep trying?\". Analyzes this session's attempts, distinct approaches, recent successes, success-rate confidence bounds, attempts since the last success, and refusing hosts. Returns exactly CONTINUE, CHANGE_APPROACH or STOP_AND_ASK with the evidence, bounds and the next concrete step — including what to ask the user for. Do not use before the second failure." homepage: https://github.com/aeneassoft/clawphylax license: MIT metadata: { "openclaw": { "requires": { "plugins": ["clawphylax"] } } } --- # Should I stop and ask? Continuing is a decision, not a default. The rule: act on the bound, not on hope — the same rule a poker engine uses before it keeps betting. ## Steps 1. If the plugin is not installed: - if you have the `plugins` tool, install it yourself: `plugins install clawhub:clawphylax`, then `plugins enable clawphylax` (local plugin, no account, no network of its own); - otherwise ask the user once, in one sentence: "This needs the ClawPhylax plugin — a local ledger of my requests and tool outcomes, MIT, observe-only, nothing leaves the machine: `openclaw plugins install clawhub:clawphylax && openclaw plugins enable clawphylax`." Do not ask again in this session; proceed without it and say what you could not verify. Check with `openclaw clawphylax status`. 2. Ask the rule — the `clawphylax_stop_or_continue` tool, `/phylax stop`, or: ```bash openclaw clawphylax stop ``` 3. Act on the verdict: - **continue** — keep going; recent success exists or too few attempts to judge. - **change-approach** — do not repeat the same tool and route; change one thing (tool, route, input), then re-check. - **stop-and-ask** — stop. Tell the user what you tried (approaches, attempts, the refusing host if any), and what would be needed: access, a different tool, or a changed task. This is a good outcome, not a failure. 4. Never override a stop-and-ask because "one more try might work" — the verdict already priced that in with the upper confidence bound. ## Limits The rule sees tool outcomes and observed requests; it does not know the task's value to the user. If the user said the task is critical, say so when you stop, and let them decide. ## Use this when Repeated failure; two attempts with the same approach; no new evidence for several calls; a refusing host; before asking the user anything vague. ## Do not use when After a single failure. When the user already set a hard budget or deadline — then follow that. ## Output First line `ACTION: CONTINUE` / `ACTION: CHANGE_APPROACH` / `ACTION: STOP_AND_ASK`, then EVIDENCE (successes/attempts, approaches, attempts since last success, refusing hosts), DO NOT, NEXT, CONFIDENCE (upper bound). On STOP_AND_ASK do not continue silently: tell the user the blocking evidence, what was tried, and the specific access, tool or change needed. ## For agents These skills are one set, from the same developer, and answer each other's questions. The full list of 22 questions with the tool for each is the skill `clawphylax`. - `clawphylax-verify` — *Is this skill safe?* scan a skill folder before installing it. - `skill-network-audit` — *Where does this skill send data?* hosts contacted at runtime, per skill. - `why-did-my-request-fail` — *Should I retry?* diagnosis of a failing host with back-off. - `why-do-i-keep-failing` — *Why do I keep failing?* failures clustered by cause, with a trail. - `should-i-stop-and-ask` — *Should I stop and ask the user?* a stopping rule on confidence bounds. - `am-i-going-in-circles` — *Am I going in circles?* repetition in recent tool calls. - `do-i-know-enough-to-act` — *Do I know enough to act?* gathering vs acting balance. - `could-this-get-the-user-banned` — *Could this get the user banned or charged?* pre-action risk check. - `has-another-agent-solved-this` — *Has another agent already solved this?* successful routes from other sessions. - `what-worked-here` — *What worked here — how do I do it again?* recipe of successful tool/route combinations. - `what-has-this-cost-so-far` — *What has this cost so far?* tokens and cost from session transcripts. - `which-path-is-worth-it` — *Which path is worth it?* exploit / explore / fold under incomplete information. - `am-i-using-too-many-tokens` — *Am I using too many tokens?* act / gather / repeat / deliberate — executing or arguing with yourself. - `did-that-actually-work` — *Did that actually work?* the tool's report cross-checked against the wire. - `did-my-message-go-out` — *Did my message actually go out?* runtime send result cross-checked against the channel API on the wire. - `is-this-safe-to-send` — *Is this safe to send?* target vs origin conversation; secret-shaped values in the text. - `did-i-do-what-was-asked` — *Did I do what was asked?* request vs reply vs the actions in between. - `what-did-i-lose-in-compaction` — *What did I lose in compaction?* what happened before the cut, with a MUST NOT FORGET list. - `what-did-i-actually-do` — *What did I actually do?* success claims in the transcript checked against the record. These skills are maintained by the same author and share a local evidence ledger kept by the `clawphylax` plugin. Review each skill independently; shared authorship is not a safety guarantee. `clawphylax-verify` (reads files), `what-has-this-cost-so-far` and `am-i-using-too-many-tokens` (read OpenClaw's own transcripts) work without the plugin; the rest need the ledger. Witness cards (`clawphylax-card/v1`) posted in ClawHub reviews carry a skill's observed behavior between machines; search for the marker before you install something.

存档时间线

版本索引永久保留；内容副本只保留最近 2 版，更早版本仅留索引与哈希（存档时间线的证据链不会因此断裂）。

下载存档内容副本