[omh] Hermes Feedback Triage workflow: cluster customer signals and choose the next workflow. Use when the user says: feedback-triage, customer-feedback-triage, feedback triage, customer feedback, feedback cluster, bug or feature, feature request triage, payment failure feedback.
Scanned 9/2/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add rlaope/oh-my-hermes --skill omh-feedback-triage --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Omh Feedback Triage?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/rlaope-omh-feedback-triage)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: "omh-feedback-triage"
description: "[omh] Hermes Feedback Triage workflow: cluster customer signals and choose the next workflow. Use when the user says: feedback-triage, customer-feedback-triage, feedback triage, customer feedback, feedback cluster, bug or feature, feature request triage, payment failure feedback."
metadata:
hermes:
tags: [workflow, oh-my-hermes, triage]
category: triage
phase: feedback
role: operator
quality_tier: triage-gated
---
# Feedback Triage
This is a Hermes-native `feedback-triage` workflow skill.
## Why This Exists
`feedback-triage` exists to keep customer and community signals from jumping straight into roadmap or coding; it clusters evidence, ranks signals, and chooses the next workflow.
## Do Not Use When
- The request already contains an accepted product decision and asks for implementation.
- There are no feedback items, source boundary, or product area to classify.
- The user wants current market research rather than triage of supplied signals.
## Examples
Good example:
- Prompt: Cluster these customer payment failure reports and feature requests before we plan fixes.
- Expected behavior: Cluster bug signals and feature asks, rank severity or opportunity, and recommend research, planning, or coding as a next workflow.
- Why: The input is mixed feedback that needs classification before delivery decisions.
Bad example:
- Prompt: feedback-triage implement the accepted billing fix now.
- Expected behavior: Route to planning or coding handoff instead of re-triaging.
- Why: The decision is already accepted, so triage would add delay without improving evidence.
## Completion Checklist
- The source boundary, signal clusters, severity, and follow-up lane are named.
- Bug, feature, research, strategy, and coding handoff outcomes stay separate.
- The next workflow is recommended before any implementation claim.
## Recovery Notes
- If feedback lacks source or severity, ask for the missing signal before coding handoff.
- If the item is actually a plan or research request, route to that workflow instead of triage.
## Workflow Lane
- Current lane: **Research and company ops** (`source-finder`, `web-research`, `research`, `best-practice-research`, `autoresearch-goal`, `model-optimization`, `inference-serving`, `research-brief`, `+16 more`) - research, signals, ops, and briefings.
- If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to `oh-my-hermes` or name the adjacent workflow.
- Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`.
## Use When
Use when Hermes should classify feedback, bug reports, and feature asks before deciding whether research, planning, or coding handoff is needed.
Strong routing signals: `feedback-triage`, `customer-feedback-triage`, `feedback triage`, `customer feedback`, `feedback cluster`, `bug or feature`, `feature request triage`, `payment failure feedback`, `feedback trends`, `payment failure`, `payment failure issue`, `payment failure reports`, `고객 피드백`, `피드백`, `피드백 분류`, `피드백을 모아서`, `결제 실패`, `결제 실패 이슈`, `결제 실패 피드백`, `결제 오류`, `고객 불만`, `버그 제보`, `버그 기능 요청`, `기능 요청`
## Catalog Metadata
Category: `triage`
Phase: `feedback`
Hermes role: `operator`
Quality tier: `triage-gated`
Reasoning demand: `standard`
Quality bar:
- Name the source boundary before clustering feedback.
- Classify signals into bug, feature, research, or strategy follow-up without overclaiming evidence.
- Recommend the next workflow instead of jumping straight to coding.
Handoff policy:
Keep feedback triage in Hermes; recommend the next workflow and prepare a selected executor/runtime handoff only after explicit coding intent or accepted plan evidence.
Required inputs:
- feedback items or summary
- source boundary
- product area
Expected outputs:
- clusters
- severity or opportunity ranking
- next workflow recommendation
- product_evidence_loop/v1
Artifact expectations:
- feedback triage record when a wrapper captures it
Safety rules:
- Do not turn feedback into a roadmap, implementation plan, or coding handoff by default.
- Separate bug signal, feature ask, severity, opportunity, and missing evidence.
- Route code changes only after explicit user intent or accepted planning evidence.
- product_evidence_loop/v1 is prepared-only opaque references, not observed evidence or execution.
## Runtime Evidence
Preferred harness for this skill: `customer-insight-triage`.
```sh
omh runtime record --skill feedback-triage --harness customer-insight-triage --status started
```
Record observed delegation results; otherwise return `not_available` or `not_observed`.
Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.
- Treat wrapper memory/context summaries as advisory local context, not proof of opaque Hermes memory reads or changes.
Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion.
Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.
Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory, harness, and execution rules: `omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md`. Load it when applicable; otherwise name an unavailable capability.
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!