# Workflow Router > Use when a request is broad, ambiguous, or multi-step and the right workflow (implementation, debugging, review, GitHub, research, workflow design, system triage, artifacts) must be chosen before execution. Also use when choosing or designing whether a repeatable workflow belongs in a skill, plugin, MCP, script, repo doc, or direct implementation path. - Skill: `moonweave-systems/workflow-router` (Agent Skill, multi-file: 4 files) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add moonweave-systems/workflow-router` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/moonweave-systems/workflow-router/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: AI & ML - Author: Moonweave-Systems (https://skillmd.com/u/moonweave-systems) - Updated: 2026-09-17 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/moonweave-systems/workflow-router --- # Workflow Router Use this as a thin control layer: classify the request, choose the smallest workflow, load only useful specialists, and finish with evidence. Keep it bounded, reversible, and tied to the user's current goal. ## Activation Contract It activates on explicit request or broad/multi-step description match; it is not a daemon or global override. Once active, use these files as the runtime contract. Trivial one-step tasks bypass ceremony; a stricter loaded policy wins. If the current tool root has `skill-routing.json`, read it as an optional local specialist overlay. Explicit skill requests win; select one primary route and no more than two overlays. If it declares `default_candidates`, use that small list as the normal candidate pool; unlisted skills remain available for explicit invocation only. ## Start Here 1. Restate the operational goal in one sentence for yourself. 2. Inspect local context before deciding if the request depends on repo, machine, GitHub, or installed skill state. 3. Classify the task using `references/router-map.md` and the optional registry. 4. Load any triggered specialized skill before acting. 5. Execute the chosen workflow end to end when the action is reversible and within scope. 6. Verify with the smallest meaningful command, UI check, artifact metric, or source citation that proves the requested behavior. For nontrivial routes, report the primary, overlays, rejected candidates, and required evidence in the closeout; do not create a route artifact for trivial work. If the user asks only for options, market research, or a strategy, stop after the decision and do not create files or run write actions. ## Routing Rules Prefer a single specialized path over several overlapping ones. If two routes seem plausible, choose the route that provides the earliest verifiable evidence; a failing CI request is a debugging route with GitHub context. - Implementation: read relevant files, make a minimal diff, run focused tests, then summarize changed files and verification. - Debugging: reproduce first, minimize the failing surface, instrument only as needed, fix, then add or run a regression check. - Review: findings first, ordered by severity, with file and line references. Summaries are secondary. - GitHub: resolve repo and branch state, inspect PR/issue/CI context, then use GitHub-specific workflows or `gh` for gaps. - Research: prefer official/current sources and cite URLs. For local repo decisions, local architecture beats generic web guidance. - Workflow design: decide whether the right artifact is a skill, plugin, MCP, script, repo doc, or direct implementation path, then validate the decision with a real prompt, command, or documented evaluation path. - System triage: sample live state before explaining causes. Do not rely on stale summaries for process, storage, config, or runtime claims. - Artifact: prove the artifact changed in the consumer-visible layer, such as rendered pixels, DOCX XML/text, slide render, or spreadsheet cells. ## Loop Discipline Use bounded repair loops: - A repair attempt is one action/check cycle: a command, patch, tool call, browser check, or external call followed by its observed result. - The first failed action counts as attempt 1. - Retry the same approach at most two additional times when the failure is clearly transient or mechanical. - If the same error appears across three attempts, change strategy instead of repeating. - Stop after five total repair attempts in one workflow. A new signal justifies a strategy switch inside the cap, never extending it. - Preserve the strongest evidence gathered before reporting a blocker. Each loop must improve at least one of: reproduction fidelity, fault localization, patch quality, or verification strength. A loop that only reruns the same command is not progress. ## Risk Gate Proceed autonomously with reversible local reads, new files, small edits, local tests, local commits when requested, and normal pushes when the user requested publishing. Pause for explicit confirmation before destructive or externally visible work: - force push, hard reset, clean, branch deletion, or history rewrite - deleting files or directories - package installs or dependency changes - database migrations - production deploys - payments, subscriptions, secret access, or external messages - public API changes when not clearly requested Secrets must never be committed. Before pushing a new or changed public repo, run a lightweight secret pattern scan or a stronger available scanner. Never fabricate data to satisfy validation. If evidence is missing, say what is missing and what was verified instead. ## Completion Gate Before claiming completion: 1. Run the smallest meaningful verification step available. 2. Confirm the output directly, not from memory. 3. Separate passing evidence from blocked or skipped checks. 4. Give the user the result, changed paths, and any remaining risk. Include browser or screenshot verification for visual work with a local target, actual command behavior for command-line work, and cited sources for research.