How do I install the Sage Tiers skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add xoai/sage-tiers in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Sage Tiers safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Sage Tiers?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Sage Tiers free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Sage Tiers?

xoai (@xoai) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Sage Tiers by xoai — Agent Skill

Name: Sage Tiers
Author: xoai

Sage Tiers

Sizing a task before doing it. Use when the user asks which tier a task is, how big or small a change is, whether something needs a spec or a plan, whether to just do it or slow down, or when deciding how much process a piece of work deserves.

xoai Updated Sep 17, 2026

File contents

Tiers

Tier is the answer to one question: how much process does this deserve?

Too much process on a trivial change is bureaucracy, and users learn to route around it. Too little on a consequential one is how a "quick fix" becomes an outage. Tier is where that judgment is made explicit instead of being made silently, differently, every time.

The three tiers

Tier	Response	What it looks like
Tier 1	Just do it.	Single file, no design decisions, a quick answer. No manifest, no spec, no confirmation.
Tier 2	Announce and proceed.	Multiple steps, creates artifacts. Say what you are doing, then do it.
Tier 3	Card and choose.	Major effort, genuine ambiguity. Present options and let the user pick.

The bias

Bias toward Standard scope. When a task sits on a boundary, take the higher tier.

Any of these puts a task at Tier 2 minimum, regardless of how small the diff looks:

a behavior change
an API change
a decision the team would want to see

The asymmetry is deliberate. The cost of over-tiering is a few minutes of ceremony. The cost of under-tiering is a change nobody reviewed, in a place nobody expected, discovered later by someone who did not know it happened.

Tier 1 is a real escape hatch, not a trap

Tier 1 exists so the process does not tax trivial work, and it is genuinely free: no manifest is created, so the spec-gate hook has nothing to block on (the hook reads gate_state from a manifest; no manifest means no active cycle means edits are unrestricted).

That is the escape hatch working as designed. It is not a loophole — "I will call it Tier 1 so I do not have to write a spec" is a rationalization, and the list above is what it collides with.

Rationalizations that do not survive contact

The thought	Why it is wrong
"It is literally one line"	One line that changes behavior is a behavior change. The diff size is not the blast radius.
"The design is obvious"	Obvious to you, now, with your context. Write it down and find out.
"I will note it in the commit message"	A commit message is not a decision record and nobody reads it before the fact.
"The user just wants it done"	The user wants it right. They will not thank you for speed on the change that broke checkout.

---name: sage-tiersdescription: Sizing a task before doing it. Use when the user asks which tier a task is, how big or small a change is, whether something needs a spec or a plan, whether to just do it or slow down, or when deciding how much process a piece of work deserves.---# TiersTier is the answer to one question: **how much process does this deserve?**Too much process on a trivial change is bureaucracy, and users learn to routearound it. Too little on a consequential one is how a "quick fix" becomes anoutage. Tier is where that judgment is made explicit instead of being madesilently, differently, every time.## The three tiers| Tier | Response | What it looks like ||---|---|---|| **Tier 1** | Just do it. | Single file, no design decisions, a quick answer. No manifest, no spec, no confirmation. || **Tier 2** | Announce and proceed. | Multiple steps, creates artifacts. Say what you are doing, then do it. || **Tier 3** | Card and choose. | Major effort, genuine ambiguity. Present options and let the user pick. |## The bias**Bias toward Standard scope.** When a task sits on a boundary, take thehigher tier.Any of these puts a task at **Tier 2 minimum**, regardless of how small thediff looks:- a behavior change- an API change- a decision the team would want to seeThe asymmetry is deliberate. The cost of over-tiering is a few minutes ofceremony. The cost of under-tiering is a change nobody reviewed, in a placenobody expected, discovered later by someone who did not know it happened.## Tier 1 is a real escape hatch, not a trapTier 1 exists so the process does not tax trivial work, and it is genuinelyfree: no manifest is created, so the spec-gate hook has nothing to block on(the hook reads `gate_state` from a manifest; no manifest means no activecycle means edits are unrestricted).That is the escape hatch working as designed. It is not a loophole — "I willcall it Tier 1 so I do not have to write a spec" is a rationalization, and thelist above is what it collides with.## Rationalizations that do not survive contact| The thought | Why it is wrong ||---|---|| "It is literally one line" | One line that changes behavior is a behavior change. The diff size is not the blast radius. || "The design is obvious" | Obvious to you, now, with your context. Write it down and find out. || "I will note it in the commit message" | A commit message is not a decision record and nobody reads it before the fact. || "The user just wants it done" | The user wants it *right*. They will not thank you for speed on the change that broke checkout. |

Frequently asked questions