agency-ladder
Plan the v1→v2→v3 agency progression for AI features. Walk through mapping how autonomy increases over time, define promotion criteria, and generate artifacts for stakeholder alignment. Based on CC/CD framework.
What this skill does
# Agency Ladder - AI Autonomy Progression Planning
## Core Philosophy
**AI products earn autonomy. They don't start with it.**
Every increase in AI agency means surrendering human control. This tradeoff must be intentional, not accidental.
```
Low Agency ←──────────────────→ High Agency
(Human decides) (AI decides)
High Control ←──────────────→ Low Control
(Predictable) (Unpredictable)
```
**Key insight:** You're not ready to give high agency until you've thoroughly tested how the AI behaves at lower autonomy levels.
---
## Entry Point
When this skill is invoked, start with:
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
AGENCY LADDER
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Every AI feature should earn autonomy, not start with it.
What are you working on?
1. Planning a new AI feature
→ Build the ladder from scratch
2. Reviewing an existing AI feature
→ Map current state, plan next level
3. Deciding whether to increase agency
→ Promotion criteria check
4. Workshop/conversation tool
→ Export ladder for stakeholder discussion
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**Parse intent from context:**
- If user mentions "new feature" or "planning" → Flow 1
- If user mentions "existing" or "current" → Flow 2
- If user mentions "promote" or "increase" or "ready" → Flow 3
- If user mentions "stakeholder" or "present" or "export" → Flow 4
**Command-line shortcuts:**
- `/agency-ladder` → Show entry menu
- `/agency-ladder --review` → Flow 2 (existing feature)
- `/agency-ladder --promote` → Flow 3 (promotion check)
- `/agency-ladder --export` → Flow 4 (stakeholder artifact)
---
## Flow 1: Planning a New AI Feature
### Step 1: Understand the Feature
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
STEP 1: UNDERSTAND THE FEATURE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Before mapping agency, let's understand what the AI is doing.
• What task is the AI performing?
• Who is the user?
• What's the consequence of AI being wrong?
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**Questions to ask:**
- "What's the AI's job in one sentence?"
- "What's the worst thing that happens if the AI is wrong?"
- "How would a user currently do this without AI?"
### Step 2: Define V1 (Low Agency)
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
STEP 2: DEFINE V1 (LOW AGENCY)
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
V1 is where you start: AI suggests, human decides.
• What's the minimum capability that tests your hypothesis?
• How will users override when the AI is wrong?
• What data will you collect to inform V2?
V1 Pattern: High Control, Low Agency
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**V1 questions:**
- "What's the simplest version where AI helps but human decides?"
- "What override mechanism exists?"
- "What are you testing with V1?"
- "How long will you run V1 before considering V2?"
### Step 3: Map V2 (Medium Agency)
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
STEP 3: MAP V2 (MEDIUM AGENCY)
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
V2 happens when V1 proves reliability.
• What categories could AI handle autonomously?
• What still needs human judgment?
• What's the escalation path?
V2 Pattern: Medium Control, Medium Agency
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**V2 questions:**
- "What did you learn from V1 that enables V2?"
- "What confidence threshold triggers auto-action?"
- "What scenarios still need human review?"
### Step 4: Envision V3 (High Agency)
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
STEP 4: ENVISION V3 (HIGH AGENCY)
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
V3 is the end state: AI acts autonomously.
• What does full autonomy look like?
• What's the human's role at V3?
• Is V3 even desirable for this feature?
V3 Pattern: Low Control, High Agency
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**V3 questions:**
- "What would it take to trust the AI completely?"
- "What's the human doing at V3? (spot-check, escalation only?)"
- "Should this feature ever reach V3?"
**Note:** Some features should never reach V3. That's a valid outcome.
### Step 5: Define Promotion Criteria
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
STEP 5: PROMOTION CRITERIA
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
What must be true to move from V(n) to V(n+1)?
□ Quality metrics stable for how long?
□ What user correction rate is acceptable?
□ What error patterns must be resolved?
□ What monitoring must be in place?
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**Promotion criteria categories:**
- **Quality:** Accuracy, success rate, user satisfaction
- **Safety:** Error patterns documented, failure modes understood
- **Operations:** Monitoring in place, rollback plan ready
- **Trust:** User corrections decreasing, feedback positive
### Output: Flywheel Table
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
AGENCY LADDER COMPLETE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
# [Feature Name] - Agency Ladder
## Progression Overview
| Version | Capability | Control | Agency | What You're Testing |
|---------|------------|---------|--------|---------------------|
| V1 | [describe] | High | Low | [hypothesis] |
| V2 | [describe] | Medium | Medium | [hypothesis] |
| V3 | [describe] | Low | High | [hypothesis] |
## Flywheel
| Version | What You're Testing | What You Learn | What Feeds Next Loop |
|---------|---------------------|----------------|----------------------|
| V1 | [hypothesis] | [insights] | [data for V2] |
| V2 | [hypothesis] | [insights] | [data for V3] |
| V3 | [hypothesis] | [insights] | [calibration] |
## Control Handoffs
**Override mechanism:** [how users correct]
**Escalation path:** [when AI defers]
**Feedback capture:** [how corrections improve system]
## Promotion Criteria (V1→V2)
- [ ] [Metric 1] stable for [duration]
- [ ] [Metric 2] above [threshold]
- [ ] [Condition 3] resolved
- [ ] [Monitoring] in place
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
What next?
1. Export to spec (/spec --ai)
2. Set up post-launch calibration (/calibrate)
3. Share with stakeholders
4. Start building V1
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
---
## Flow 2: Reviewing an Existing AI Feature
### Step 1: Map Current State
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
MAPPING CURRENT STATE
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Let's understand where this feature is today.
• What's the AI currently doing?
• How much human oversight exists?
• What's working? What's failing?
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
**Questions to determine current level:**
- "Does the AI act without human approval?" (If no → V1)
- "Does the AI handle some cases autonomously?" (If yes → V2)
- "Does the AI act autonomously most of the time?" (If yes → V3)
### Step 2: Identify Gaps
```
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
GAPS ANALYSIS
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Based on the current state, here are potential gaps:
□ Override mechanism exists?
□ Quality metrics being tracked?
□ Error patterns documented?
□ Promotion criteria defined?
□ Next level planned?
━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━
```
### Output: Current State Assessment
Generate assessment showing:
- Current agency level (V1/V2/V3)
- What's working
- What's missing for CC/CD compliance
- Recommended next steps
---
## Flow 3: Promotion ChRelated in Cloud & DevOps
appbuilder-action-scaffolder
IncludedCreate, implement, deploy, and debug Adobe Runtime actions with consistent layout, validation, and error handling. Use this skill whenever the user needs to add actions to an App Builder project, understand action structure (params, response format, web/raw actions), configure actions in the manifest, use App Builder SDKs (State, Files, Events, database), deploy and invoke actions via CLI, debug action issues, or implement patterns such as webhook receivers, custom event providers, journaling consumers, large payload redirects, action sequence pipelines, and Asset Compute workers. Also trigger when users mention serverless functions in Adobe context, action logging, IMS authentication for actions, or cron-style scheduled actions.
orchestrating-datacloud
IncludedSalesforce Data Cloud product orchestrator for connect→prepare→harmonize→segment→act workflows. Use this skill when the user needs a multi-step Data Cloud pipeline, cross-phase troubleshooting, or data space and data kit management. TRIGGER when: user needs a multi-step Data Cloud pipeline, asks to set up or troubleshoot Data Cloud across phases, manages data spaces or data kits, or wants a cross-phase sf data360 workflow. DO NOT TRIGGER when: work is isolated to a single phase (use the matching phase-specific skill), the task is STDM/session tracing/parquet telemetry (use observing-agentforce), standard CRM SOQL (use querying-soql), or Apex implementation (use generating-apex).
github-project-automation
IncludedAutomate GitHub repository setup with CI/CD workflows, issue templates, Dependabot, and CodeQL security scanning. Includes 12 production-tested workflows and prevents 18 errors: YAML syntax, action pinning, and configuration. Use when: setting up GitHub Actions CI/CD, creating issue/PR templates, enabling Dependabot or CodeQL scanning, deploying to Cloudflare Workers, implementing matrix testing, or troubleshooting YAML indentation, action version pinning, secrets syntax, runner versions, or CodeQL configuration. Keywords: github actions, github workflow, ci/cd, issue templates, pull request templates, dependabot, codeql, security scanning, yaml syntax, github automation, repository setup, workflow templates, github actions matrix, secrets management, branch protection, codeowners, github projects, continuous integration, continuous deployment, workflow syntax error, action version pinning, runner version, github context, yaml indentation error
sf-datacloud
IncludedSalesforce Data Cloud product orchestrator for connect→prepare→harmonize→segment→act workflows. TRIGGER when: user needs a multi-step Data Cloud pipeline, asks to set up or troubleshoot Data Cloud across phases, manages data spaces or data kits, or wants a cross-phase `sf data360` workflow. DO NOT TRIGGER when: work is isolated to a single phase (use the matching sf-datacloud-* skill), the task is STDM/session tracing/parquet telemetry (use sf-ai-agentforce-observability), standard CRM SOQL (use sf-soql), or Apex implementation (use sf-apex).
fabric-cli
IncludedUse this skill for Fabric.so CLI workflows with the `fabric` terminal command: diagnose/install/login, search or browse a Fabric library, save notes/links/files, create folders, ask the Fabric AI assistant, manage tasks/workspaces, generate shell completion, check subscription usage, produce JSON output, and use Fabric as persistent agent memory. Do not use for Microsoft Fabric/Azure/Power BI `fab`, Daniel Miessler's Fabric framework, Python Fabric SSH, Fabric.js, or textile/fashion fabric.
lark
IncludedLark/Feishu CLI skills: lark-cli operations for docs, markdown, sheets, base, calendar, im, mail, task, okr, drive, wiki, slides, whiteboard, apps, approval, attendance, contact, vc, minutes, event. Use when the user needs to operate Lark/Feishu resources via lark-cli, send messages, manage documents, spreadsheets, calendars, tasks, OKRs, deploy web pages, or any Feishu/Lark workspace operations.