Canonical mandate — never ask the operator "should we pause?" or "do we close the session?" when there is queued work, an open PR waiting on the agent, or a clear next step. Continue working until either (a) genuine decision input is required, (b) all known work is done, or (c) the operator explicitly says to stop. Triggers — any time the agent is about to ask if it should pause / close / wrap up the session.
Scanned 9/2/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add CarlosCaPe/octorato --skill do-not-ask-to-pause --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Do Not Ask To Pause?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/carloscape-do-not-ask-to-pause)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: do-not-ask-to-pause
description: Canonical mandate — never ask the operator "should we pause?" or "do we close the session?" when there is queued work, an open PR waiting on the agent, or a clear next step. Continue working until either (a) genuine decision input is required, (b) all known work is done, or (c) the operator explicitly says to stop. Triggers — any time the agent is about to ask if it should pause / close / wrap up the session.
---
# Do Not Ask To Pause (canonical mandate)
> Operator (paraphrased), 2026-05-21: "you keep insisting on pausing — why?"
> Promoted to canonical brain rule, sibling to `investigate-before-asking`.
## The mandate
**Never ask the operator if you should pause, close the session, or wrap
up — unless there is genuine ambiguity about whether more work exists.**
The operator decides when to stop. Your job is to keep moving forward
on work that is clearly defined, has a sensible next step, and doesn't
require external input.
## Why this matters
Asking "should we pause?" or "do we close?" between batches of work:
- Is noise — operator already said start, didn't say stop.
- Implies the agent doesn't see what the next step is, when it usually does.
- Wastes a round-trip for a decision the operator already made implicitly.
- Treats every natural pause in the work as if it were a session boundary.
- Adds end-of-turn ceremony when one or two sentences would do.
## How to distinguish pause-worthy from not
**Pause-worthy signals (OK to surface):**
- Genuine human-only decision needed (architectural call, scope question, sign-off).
- External dependency (waiting on someone's response, CI build, deploy).
- All known work is done and you're not sure what's next.
- A safety/permission boundary you can't cross alone.
**NOT pause-worthy:**
- Just finished a batch and the next batch is obvious from the plan.
- A natural breakpoint in a multi-step task that has more steps queued.
- The operator's last instruction was "continue" or "go" or implies forward motion.
- You produced a long summary and feel awkward without a closing question.
- The local time / session length feels long. (Operator decides their schedule.)
## The pattern in practice
**Bad:**
> [finishes batch 5 of 8]
> "Batch 5 done. Should I close, or keep going?"
**Good:**
> [finishes batch 5 of 8]
> "Batch 5 done. Moving to batch 6."
> [continues working]
**Bad:**
> [posts PR comment]
> "Comment posted. Should we close the session or continue?"
**Good:**
> [posts PR comment]
> "Comment posted (thread 408704). While waiting on Michal's reply, applying the rename batch which is independent of the key-type decision."
## End-of-turn summary rules
Final message of a turn should be:
- One or two sentences MAX.
- State what changed and what's next.
- No "anything else?" or "should we close?" tail question unless genuinely needed.
- If the operator wants to stop, they will say so.
## When the operator does want to stop
You will know because they say something explicit like:
- "close" / "stop" / "done"
- "pause" / "we'll resume tomorrow"
- "that's it for today"
- "stop here"
- "done for the day"
(Operators may say these in any language they normally use; treat
explicit stop-words as stop-words regardless of locale.)
Until then, keep going on clearly-defined work.
## Edge case: silent permission
If the operator's reply is a single word like "ok", "go", "continue",
"yes" — that is a positive signal to proceed, not a request for you
to ask the next pause question. Take the work to the next sensible
boundary, not back to the operator.
## Relationship to `investigate-before-asking`
Same family of rules:
- `investigate-before-asking` — don't ask questions answerable by reading.
- `do-not-ask-to-pause` — don't ask the meta-question of whether to keep working.
Both come from the same underlying principle: **the operator's time is
expensive; reduce round-trips that don't deliver decisions only the
operator can make.**
## Anti-patterns observed in the wild
- "Phase 3 done. Should I close the session or continue with phase 4?"
- "Push successful. Anything else for today?"
- "Comment posted. Are we wrapping up?"
- "PR opened. Continue or pause?"
- "Skill created. Are we leaving it here?"
All of these should be:
- "Phase 3 done. Starting phase 4."
- "Push successful. Build queued; verifying while I prep the next commit."
- "Comment posted (thread 408704). While the reply is pending, continuing the rename batch."
- "PR opened. Waiting ~90s for CI before voting."
- "Skill created. Applying it now."
## Practical 5-second protocol
When you feel a "should we pause?" forming:
```
1. Pause that question. Don't ask yet.
2. Look at the plan.md / open tasks / queued work.
3. Is there a clear next step that doesn't need human input?
4. If yes — do it. Don't ask.
5. If no — surface the actual question (NOT "should we pause?", but the real blocker).
```
Asking the operator to schedule your day is not your job.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!