Deploy And Monitor
This is a Hermes-native deploy-and-monitor workflow skill.
Why This Exists
deploy-and-monitor exists to keep monitoring work explicit, evidence-backed, and inside the Hermes/executor boundary instead of relying on ad hoc chat narration.
Do Not Use When
- The request is casual chat, a status-only acknowledgement, or another workflow has stronger routing evidence.
- The user needs implementation, review, CI, merge, or external publishing evidence that has not been delegated or observed.
Examples
Good example:
- Prompt: deploy-and-monitor: prepare the release monitor, rollback signals, health checks, and post-deploy status card.
- Expected behavior: Create release monitoring guidance with deployment, metric, rollback, and observation boundaries.
- Why: The request is about deploy readiness and monitoring rather than code review alone.
Bad example:
- Prompt: deploy-and-monitor: treat casual chat or unaccepted work as if this workflow already produced verified results.
- Expected behavior: Ask a clarification question or route to a narrower workflow instead of forcing
deploy-and-monitor.
- Why: The request lacks the required inputs or would overclaim work that Hermes did not observe.
Completion Checklist
- Confirm the workflow target, evidence boundary, and stop condition are named.
- Report which outputs are prepared, observed, blocked, or missing.
- Name the smallest next verification or handoff instead of claiming completion from narration.
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.
Workflow Lane
- Current lane: Coding handoff (
idea-to-deploy, llm-app-dev, cto-loop, deploy-and-monitor, code-review, build-failure-triage, verification-gate, security-safety-review, +13 more) - coding owners, handoffs, review, CI, and merge evidence.
- If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to
oh-my-hermes or name the adjacent workflow.
- Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules:
omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md.
Use When
Use when Hermes should prepare or narrate a release operation with deploy checklist, health signals, rollback criteria, and post-deploy status without pretending to run infrastructure.
Strong routing signals: `deploy-and-monitor`, `deploy and monitor`, `deploy monitor`, `deployment monitoring`, `release monitor`, `post deploy`, `post-deploy`, `rollback`, `rollback gate`, `health check`, `incident watch`, `release health`, `deploy this service`, `배포 모니터링`, `서비스 배포`, `프로덕션 배포`, `인프라에 배포`, `배포 감시`, `롤백`, `헬스 체크`, `장애 감시`, `릴리즈 모니터링`
Catalog Metadata
Category: monitoring
Phase: release-ops
Hermes role: operator
Quality tier: release-gated
Reasoning demand: light
Quality bar:
- Name release scope, target environment, health signals, rollback criteria, and evidence owner.
- Show pre-deploy, deploy decision, monitor, rollback, and post-deploy as distinct stages.
- Mark health and rollback status unknown until observed evidence arrives.
Handoff policy:
Keep release checklist, health criteria, rollback gates, and status narration in Hermes; record deploy, monitor, incident, or rollback evidence only when the wrapper or operator observes it.
Required inputs:
- release scope
- environment
- health signals
- rollback owner
Expected outputs:
- pre-deploy checklist
- deploy decision gate
- monitoring watchlist
- rollback criteria
- post-deploy status boundary
Artifact expectations:
- release operation status record when the wrapper captures deploy or monitor observations
- web_qa_comparison/v1 for a canary only with a trusted host_deployment_observation/v1 and a production baseline captured before it
Artifact contracts:
This label denotes the machine-enforcement level, not a skill quality score and not an observed evidence state.
- contract_id:
deploy-and-monitor; enforcement_level: guidance_only; consumer_id: none
Safety rules:
- Do not claim deployment, health checks, rollback, or incident response happened from a prepared checklist.
- Keep release readiness, deploy decision, monitor signals, and rollback as separate evidence steps.
- Route code fixes discovered during monitoring as later executor handoffs.
- A canary web-QA comparison never authorizes rollback; a missing deployment observation is BLOCK and a field regression beyond tolerance is REVISE.
Runtime Evidence
Preferred harness for this skill: app-delivery-loop.
omh runtime record --skill deploy-and-monitor --harness app-delivery-loop --status started
Record observed delegation results; otherwise return not_available or not_observed.
Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.
- When wrapper metadata includes
memory_review_card/v1 or handoff_context_pack/v1, treat it as reviewed OMH-local or wrapper-supplied context only. Use conflict-free context summaries to shape plans and handoffs, but do not claim Hermes internal memory was read or changed.
Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion.
Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.
Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory, harness, and execution rules: omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md. Load it when applicable; otherwise name an unavailable capability.
1---
2name: "omh-deploy-and-monitor"
3description: "[omh] Hermes Deploy-and-Monitor workflow: release checklist, deploy decision, health signals, rollback gate, and post-deploy status. Use when the user says: deploy-and-monitor, deploy and monitor, deploy monitor, deployment monitoring, release monitor, post deploy, post-deploy, rollback."
4metadata:
5 hermes:
6 tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, monitoring]
7 category: monitoring
8 phase: release-ops
9 role: operator
10 quality_tier: release-gated
11---
12
13# Deploy And Monitor
14
15This is a Hermes-native `deploy-and-monitor` workflow skill.
16
17## Why This Exists
18
19`deploy-and-monitor` exists to keep `monitoring` work explicit, evidence-backed, and inside the Hermes/executor boundary instead of relying on ad hoc chat narration.
20
21## Do Not Use When
22
23- The request is casual chat, a status-only acknowledgement, or another workflow has stronger routing evidence.
24- The user needs implementation, review, CI, merge, or external publishing evidence that has not been delegated or observed.
25
26## Examples
27
28Good example:
29
30- Prompt: deploy-and-monitor: prepare the release monitor, rollback signals, health checks, and post-deploy status card.
31- Expected behavior: Create release monitoring guidance with deployment, metric, rollback, and observation boundaries.
32- Why: The request is about deploy readiness and monitoring rather than code review alone.
33
34Bad example:
35
36- Prompt: deploy-and-monitor: treat casual chat or unaccepted work as if this workflow already produced verified results.
37- Expected behavior: Ask a clarification question or route to a narrower workflow instead of forcing `deploy-and-monitor`.
38- Why: The request lacks the required inputs or would overclaim work that Hermes did not observe.
39
40## Completion Checklist
41
42- Confirm the workflow target, evidence boundary, and stop condition are named.
43- Report which outputs are prepared, observed, blocked, or missing.
44- Name the smallest next verification or handoff instead of claiming completion from narration.
45
46## Recovery Notes
47
48- If required context is missing, ask one blocking question or route back to the narrower workflow.
49- If runtime or wrapper evidence is unavailable, keep the status as not_observed and expose the next observable action.
50
51## Workflow Lane
52
53- Current lane: **Coding handoff** (`idea-to-deploy`, `llm-app-dev`, `cto-loop`, `deploy-and-monitor`, `code-review`, `build-failure-triage`, `verification-gate`, `security-safety-review`, `+13 more`) - coding owners, handoffs, review, CI, and merge evidence.
54- If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to `oh-my-hermes` or name the adjacent workflow.
55- Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`.
56
57## Use When
58
59Use when Hermes should prepare or narrate a release operation with deploy checklist, health signals, rollback criteria, and post-deploy status without pretending to run infrastructure.
60
61 Strong routing signals: `deploy-and-monitor`, `deploy and monitor`, `deploy monitor`, `deployment monitoring`, `release monitor`, `post deploy`, `post-deploy`, `rollback`, `rollback gate`, `health check`, `incident watch`, `release health`, `deploy this service`, `배포 모니터링`, `서비스 배포`, `프로덕션 배포`, `인프라에 배포`, `배포 감시`, `롤백`, `헬스 체크`, `장애 감시`, `릴리즈 모니터링`
62
63## Catalog Metadata
64
65Category: `monitoring`
66Phase: `release-ops`
67Hermes role: `operator`
68Quality tier: `release-gated`
69Reasoning demand: `light`
70
71Quality bar:
72
73- Name release scope, target environment, health signals, rollback criteria, and evidence owner.
74- Show pre-deploy, deploy decision, monitor, rollback, and post-deploy as distinct stages.
75- Mark health and rollback status unknown until observed evidence arrives.
76
77Handoff policy:
78
79Keep release checklist, health criteria, rollback gates, and status narration in Hermes; record deploy, monitor, incident, or rollback evidence only when the wrapper or operator observes it.
80
81Required inputs:
82
83- release scope
84- environment
85- health signals
86- rollback owner
87
88Expected outputs:
89
90- pre-deploy checklist
91- deploy decision gate
92- monitoring watchlist
93- rollback criteria
94- post-deploy status boundary
95
96Artifact expectations:
97
98- release operation status record when the wrapper captures deploy or monitor observations
99- web_qa_comparison/v1 for a canary only with a trusted host_deployment_observation/v1 and a production baseline captured before it
100
101Artifact contracts:
102
103This label denotes the machine-enforcement level, not a skill quality score and not an observed evidence state.
104
105- contract_id: `deploy-and-monitor`; enforcement_level: `guidance_only`; consumer_id: `none`
106
107Safety rules:
108
109- Do not claim deployment, health checks, rollback, or incident response happened from a prepared checklist.
110- Keep release readiness, deploy decision, monitor signals, and rollback as separate evidence steps.
111- Route code fixes discovered during monitoring as later executor handoffs.
112- A canary web-QA comparison never authorizes rollback; a missing deployment observation is BLOCK and a field regression beyond tolerance is REVISE.
113
114## Runtime Evidence
115
116Preferred harness for this skill: `app-delivery-loop`.
117
118```sh
119omh runtime record --skill deploy-and-monitor --harness app-delivery-loop --status started
120```
121
122Record observed delegation results; otherwise return `not_available` or `not_observed`.
123Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.
124- When wrapper metadata includes `memory_review_card/v1` or `handoff_context_pack/v1`, treat it as reviewed OMH-local or wrapper-supplied context only. Use conflict-free context summaries to shape plans and handoffs, but do not claim Hermes internal memory was read or changed.
125Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion.
126
127Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.
128
129Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory, harness, and execution rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`. Load it when applicable; otherwise name an unavailable capability.