Guide to deciding whether to escalate from a lower model (haiku/sonnet) to a higher one (sonnet/opus). Use when evaluating escalation decisions. Ensures escalation is justified by genuine reasoning requirements, not convenience or thrashing.
Scanned 2/12/2026
Install via CLI
openskills install athola/claude-night-market---
name: escalation-governance
description: Guide to deciding whether to escalate from a lower model (haiku/sonnet) to a higher one (sonnet/opus). Use when evaluating escalation decisions. Ensures escalation is justified by genuine reasoning requirements, not convenience or thrashing.
version: 1.0.0
category: agent-workflow
tags: [escalation, model-selection, governance, agents, orchestration]
dependencies: []
estimated_tokens: 800
---
# Escalation Governance
## Overview
Model escalation (haiku→sonnet→opus) trades speed/cost for reasoning capability. This trade-off must be justified.
**Core principle:** Escalation is for tasks that genuinely require deeper reasoning, not for "maybe a smarter model will figure it out."
## The Iron Law
```
NO ESCALATION WITHOUT INVESTIGATION FIRST
```
Escalation is never a shortcut. If you haven't understood why the current model is insufficient, escalation is premature.
## When to Escalate
**Legitimate escalation triggers:**
| Trigger | Description | Example |
|---------|-------------|---------|
| Genuine complexity | Task inherently requires nuanced judgment | Security policy trade-offs |
| Reasoning depth | Multiple inference steps with uncertainty | Architecture decisions |
| Novel patterns | No existing patterns apply | First-of-kind implementation |
| High stakes | Error cost justifies capability investment | Production deployment |
| Ambiguity resolution | Multiple valid interpretations need weighing | Spec clarification |
## When NOT to Escalate
**Illegitimate escalation triggers:**
| Anti-Pattern | Why It's Wrong | What to Do Instead |
|--------------|----------------|---------------------|
| "Maybe smarter model will figure it out" | This is thrashing | Investigate root cause |
| Multiple failed attempts | Suggests wrong approach, not insufficient capability | Question your assumptions |
| Time pressure | Urgency doesn't change task complexity | Systematic investigation is faster |
| Uncertainty without investigation | You haven't tried to understand yet | Gather evidence first |
| "Just to be safe" | False safety - wastes resources | Assess actual complexity |
## Decision Framework
Before escalating, answer these questions:
### 1. Have I understood the problem?
- [ ] Can I articulate why the current model is insufficient?
- [ ] Have I identified what specific reasoning capability is missing?
- [ ] Is this a capability gap or a knowledge gap?
**If knowledge gap:** Gather more information, don't escalate.
### 2. Have I investigated systematically?
- [ ] Did I read error messages/outputs carefully?
- [ ] Did I check for similar solved problems?
- [ ] Did I form and test a hypothesis?
**If not investigated:** Complete investigation first.
### 3. Is escalation the right solution?
- [ ] Would a different approach work at current model level?
- [ ] Is the task inherently complex, or am I making it complex?
- [ ] Would breaking the task into smaller pieces help?
**If decomposable:** Break down, don't escalate.
### 4. Can I justify the trade-off?
- [ ] What's the cost (latency, tokens, money) of escalation?
- [ ] What's the benefit (accuracy, safety, completeness)?
- [ ] Is the benefit proportional to the cost?
**If not proportional:** Don't escalate.
## Escalation Protocol
When escalation IS justified:
1. **Document the reason** - State why current model is insufficient
2. **Specify the scope** - What specific subtask needs higher capability?
3. **Define success** - How will you know the escalated task succeeded?
4. **Return promptly** - Drop back to efficient model after reasoning task
## Common Rationalizations
| Excuse | Reality |
|--------|---------|
| "This is complex" | Complex for whom? Have you tried? |
| "Better safe than sorry" | Safety theater wastes resources |
| "I tried and failed" | How many times? Did you investigate why? |
| "The user expects quality" | Quality comes from process, not model size |
| "Just this once" | Exceptions become habits |
| "Time is money" | Systematic approach is faster than thrashing |
## Agent Schema
Agents can declare escalation hints in frontmatter:
```yaml
model: haiku
escalation:
to: sonnet # Suggested escalation target
hints: # Advisory triggers (orchestrator may override)
- security_sensitive # Touches auth, secrets, permissions
- ambiguous_input # Multiple valid interpretations
- novel_pattern # No existing patterns apply
- high_stakes # Error would be costly
```
**Key points:**
- Hints are advisory, not mandatory
- Orchestrator has final authority
- Orchestrator can escalate without hints (broader context)
- Orchestrator can ignore hints (task is actually simple)
## Orchestrator Authority
The orchestrator (typically Opus) makes final escalation decisions:
**Can follow hints:** When hint matches observed conditions
**Can override to escalate:** When context demands it (even without hints)
**Can override to stay:** When task is simpler than hints suggest
**Can escalate beyond hint:** Go to opus even if hint says sonnet
The orchestrator's judgment, informed by conversation context, supersedes static hints.
## Red Flags - STOP and Investigate
If you catch yourself thinking:
- "Let me try with a better model"
- "This should be simple but isn't working"
- "I've tried everything" (but haven't investigated why)
- "The smarter model will know what to do"
- "I don't understand why this isn't working"
**ALL of these mean: STOP. Investigate first.**
## Integration with Agent Workflow
```
Agent starts task at assigned model
├── Task succeeds → Complete
└── Task struggles →
├── Investigate systematically
│ ├── Root cause found → Fix at current model
│ └── Genuine capability gap → Escalate with justification
└── Don't investigate → WRONG PATH
└── "Maybe escalate?" → NO. Investigate first.
```
## Quick Reference
| Situation | Action |
|-----------|--------|
| Task inherently requires nuanced reasoning | Escalate |
| Agent uncertain but hasn't investigated | Investigate first |
| Multiple attempts failed | Question approach, not model |
| Security/high-stakes decision | Escalate |
| "Maybe smarter model knows" | Never escalate on this basis |
| Hint fires, task is actually simple | Override, stay at current model |
| No hint fires, task is actually complex | Override, escalate |
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!