Triage maintenance problems by severity, document findings with context, route to appropriate specialist agent or human, and create actionable issue reports. Use when a maintenance task encounters problems beyond automated cleanup: code that is unsafe to delete, configuration changes requiring domain expertise, breaking changes detected during cleanup, complex refactoring needed, or security-sensitive findings such as hardcoded secrets or vulnerabilities.
Scanned 9/3/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add pjt222/agent-almanac --skill escalate-issues --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Escalate Issues?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/pjt222-escalate-issues-ec4b7b87)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: escalate-issues
locale: caveman-ultra
source_locale: en
source_commit: 82c77053
translator: "Julius Brussee homage — caveman"
translation_date: "2026-04-24"
description: >
Triage maintenance problems by severity, document findings with context,
route to appropriate specialist agent or human, and create actionable issue
reports. Use when a maintenance task encounters problems beyond automated
cleanup: code that is unsafe to delete, configuration changes requiring domain
expertise, breaking changes detected during cleanup, complex refactoring needed,
or security-sensitive findings such as hardcoded secrets or vulnerabilities.
license: MIT
allowed-tools: Read Write Edit Grep Glob
metadata:
author: Philipp Thoss
version: "1.0"
domain: maintenance
complexity: basic
language: multi
tags: maintenance, triage, escalation, routing, issue-reporting
---
# escalate-issues
## Use When
Maintenance task hits problems beyond automated cleanup:
- Uncertain if code safe to delete
- Config changes need domain expertise (security, perf, arch)
- Breaking changes detected during cleanup
- Complex refactor needed (not cleanup)
- Security-sensitive (secrets, vulns)
**Do NOT use** for simple clear fixes. Escalate only when risky/insufficient.
## In
| Param | Type | Req | Desc |
|---|---|---|---|
| `issue_description` | string | Yes | Clear description |
| `severity` | enum | Yes | `critical`, `high`, `medium`, `low` |
| `context_files` | array | No | Paths to files |
| `specialist` | string | No | Target agent (auto-route if none) |
| `blocking` | boolean | No | Blocks cleanup (default: false) |
## Do
### Step 1: Severity
Classify via standard levels.
**CRITICAL** — Blocks prod:
- Broken imports in active code
- Security vulns (secrets, SQL injection)
- Data loss risk
- Prod outages
**HIGH** — Impacts maintainability/dev:
- Significant dead code (>1000 lines)
- Broken CI/CD
- Major config drift
- Unref modules maybe dynamically loaded
**MEDIUM** — Minor hygiene:
- Unused helpers (<100 lines)
- Stale docs
- Deprecated configs
- Lint warn non-critical
**LOW** — Style:
- Mixed indent
- Trailing whitespace
- Inconsistent naming
- Minor formatting
**Decision Tree**:
```text
Does it break production? → CRITICAL
Does it block development? → HIGH
Does it impact code quality? → MEDIUM
Is it purely cosmetic? → LOW
```
→ Classified w/ clear label.
If err: uncertain → default HIGH, escalate human re-triage.
### Step 2: Document
Capture context for specialist.
**Report Template**:
````markdown
# Issue: [Brief Title]
**Severity**: CRITICAL | HIGH | MEDIUM | LOW
**Discovered During**: [Skill name, e.g., clean-codebase]
**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
**Blocking**: Yes | No
## Description
Clear description of the problem in 2-3 sentences.
## Context
- **File(s)**: [List of affected files with line numbers]
- **Related**: [Related issues, commits, or previous attempts to fix]
- **Impact**: [What breaks if this isn't fixed, or what's wasted if not cleaned]
## Evidence
```language
# Code snippet or log excerpt showing the problem
```
## Attempted Fixes
- Tried X but failed because Y
- Considered Z but uncertain due to W
## Recommendation
- **Option 1**: [Safe conservative approach]
- **Option 2**: [More aggressive fix with risks]
- **Preferred**: [Which option to pursue and why]
## Specialist Routing
**Suggested Agent**: [agent-name]
**Reason**: [Why this specialist is appropriate]
## References
- [Link to related documentation]
- [Link to similar past issues]
````
→ Documented w/ full context → `ESCALATION_REPORTS/issue_YYYYMMDD_HHMM.md`.
If err: (N/A — always document, even incomplete)
### Step 3: Route
Match issue → specialist/human.
**Routing Table**:
| Issue Type | Specialist | Reason |
|------------|-----------|---------|
| Security vuln | security-analyst | Security expertise |
| GxP compliance | gxp-validator | Regulatory |
| Architecture | senior-software-developer | Design patterns |
| Config mgmt | devops-engineer | Infra |
| Dep conflicts | devops-engineer | Pkg mgmt |
| Perf bottleneck | senior-data-scientist | Optimization |
| Style dispute | code-reviewer | Style authority |
| Dead code uncertain | r-developer (lang-specific) | Lang knowledge |
| Broken test unclear | code-reviewer | Test design |
| Doc accuracy | senior-researcher | Domain |
| License compat | auditor | Legal/compliance |
**Auto Routing**:
```python
def route_issue(severity, issue_type):
if severity == "CRITICAL":
# Always escalate to human for critical issues
return "human"
if "security" in issue_type or "secret" in issue_type:
return "security-analyst"
if "gxp" in issue_type or "compliance" in issue_type:
return "gxp-validator"
if "architecture" in issue_type or "design" in issue_type:
return "senior-software-developer"
if "config" in issue_type or "deployment" in issue_type:
return "devops-engineer"
# Default: code-reviewer for general code issues
return "code-reviewer"
```
→ Routed w/ justification.
If err: no clear specialist → human for manual route.
### Step 4: Actionable Report
Formatted for target audience.
**Specialist Agents** (structured for MCP):
Emit one document: the routing header delimited by `---` fences, then the report
body beneath it. The receiving tool parses the header keys, so those and the
agent ids stay in English.
```yaml
type: escalation
severity: high
from_agent: janitor
to_agent: security-analyst
blocking: false
```
```text
# Security Concern: Hardcoded API Key in Config
**File**: config/production.yml:45
**Pattern**: API_KEY="sk_live_abc123..."
**Request**: Please review if this is a valid secret or a placeholder.
If valid, recommend secure credential management strategy.
**Context**: Discovered during config cleanup sweep.
```
**Human** (detailed md):
```markdown
# Escalation Report: Uncertain Dead Code Removal
**From**: Janitor Agent
**Date**: 2026-02-16
**Severity**: HIGH
## Problem
File `src/legacy_payments.js` (450 lines) appears unused but contains
complex payment processing logic. Static analysis shows zero references,
but name suggests business-critical functionality.
## Why Escalated
- Uncertain if payment code is dynamically loaded at runtime
- Potential data loss risk if deleted incorrectly
- Requires domain knowledge to assess business impact
## Evidence
- No direct imports found
- Last modified 8 months ago
- Git history shows it was part of payment refactor
## Recommendation
Request human review before deletion. If confirmed dead:
1. Archive to archive/legacy/ directory
2. Document in ARCHIVE_LOG.md
3. Create ticket to verify payment flows still work
## Next Steps
Awaiting human confirmation before proceeding with cleanup.
```
→ Formatted for audience.
If err: (N/A — generic md if uncertain)
### Step 5: Track
Log escalations → prevent duplicates.
```markdown
# Escalation Log
| ID | Date | Severity | Issue | Specialist | Status |
|----|------|----------|-------|-----------|--------|
| ESC-001 | 2026-02-16 | CRITICAL | Broken prod import | human | Resolved |
| ESC-002 | 2026-02-16 | HIGH | Dead payment code | human | Pending |
| ESC-003 | 2026-02-16 | MEDIUM | Config drift | devops-engineer | In Progress |
```
→ `ESCALATION_LOG.md` updated w/ new entry.
If err: log DNE → create.
### Step 6: Notify + Block (If Required)
Blocking → notify + pause cleanup.
**Blocking Logic**:
- CRITICAL always blocks
- HIGH blocks if critical path
- MEDIUM/LOW no block
**Notification**:
```markdown
⚠️ MAINTENANCE BLOCKED ⚠️
Issue ESC-002 (HIGH severity) requires human review before proceeding.
**Affected Operation**: clean-codebase (Step 5: Remove Dead Code)
**Reason**: Uncertain if src/legacy_payments.js is truly dead
**Action Required**: Review ESCALATION_REPORTS/ESC-002_2026-02-16.md
Once resolved, re-run maintenance from Step 5.
```
→ Maintenance paused, notification clear.
If err: notification unavailable → document in report.
## Check
After escalation:
- [ ] Severity correct
- [ ] Full context (files, evidence, attempts)
- [ ] Specialist identified
- [ ] Report in ESCALATION_REPORTS/
- [ ] LOG updated
- [ ] Blocking communicated if applicable
- [ ] No secrets exposed
## Traps
1. **Over-Escalate**: Simple issues waste specialist. Only when uncertain/risky.
2. **Under-Escalate**: Delete code "to see if tests pass" no escalate → prod outage.
3. **Insufficient Context**: No evidence → specialists re-investigate. Include paths, lines, errs.
4. **Vague**: "Something wrong w/ config" not actionable. Specific: "Config drift: dev v1, prod v2".
5. **No Track**: Re-escalating already-reviewed. Check LOG first.
6. **Expose Secrets**: Real keys/passwords in reports. Redact sensitive.
## →
- [clean-codebase](../clean-codebase/SKILL.md) — Often triggers escalations uncertain
- [tidy-project-structure](../tidy-project-structure/SKILL.md) — May discover complex org issues
- [repair-broken-references](../repair-broken-references/SKILL.md) — Escalate unclear fix/remove
- [compliance/security-scan](../../compliance/security-scan/SKILL.md) — Escalate security findings
- [general/issue-triage](../../general/issue-triage/SKILL.md) — General classification patterns
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!