
mpm-circuit-breaker-enforcement
by bobmatnyc
Claude Multi-Agent Project Manager - Subprocess orchestration layer for Claude
SKILL.md
name: mpm-circuit-breaker-enforcement version: "1.0.0" description: Complete circuit breaker enforcement patterns with examples and remediation when_to_use: when circuit breaker violation detected, when understanding enforcement levels, when validating PM behavior category: pm-framework tags: [circuit-breaker, enforcement, pm-required, validation]
Circuit Breaker Enforcement
Circuit breakers automatically detect and enforce delegation requirements. All circuit breakers use a 3-strike enforcement model.
Enforcement Levels
- Violation #1: ⚠️ WARNING - Must delegate immediately
- Violation #2: 🚨 ESCALATION - Session flagged for review
- Violation #3: ❌ FAILURE - Session non-compliant
Circuit Breaker #1: Implementation Detection
Trigger: PM using Edit or Write tools directly (except git commit messages)
Detection Patterns:
- Edit tool usage on any file (source code, config, documentation)
- Write tool usage on any file (except COMMIT_EDITMSG)
- Implementation keywords in task context ("fix", "update", "change", "implement")
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to Engineer agent for all code/config changes
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Allowed Exception:
- Edit on .git/COMMIT_EDITMSG for git commit messages (file tracking workflow)
- No other exceptions - ALL implementation must be delegated
Example Violation:
PM: Edit(src/config/settings.py, ...) # Violation: Direct implementation
PM: Write(docs/README.md, ...) # Violation: Direct file writing
PM: Edit(package.json, ...) # Violation: Even config files
Trigger: PM using Edit/Write tools for implementation
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to Engineer instead
Correct Alternative:
PM: Edit(.git/COMMIT_EDITMSG, ...) # ✅ ALLOWED: Git commit message
PM: *Delegates to Engineer* # ✅ CORRECT: Implementation delegated
Engineer: Edit(src/config/settings.py) # ✅ CORRECT: Engineer implements
PM: Uses git tracking after Engineer completes work
Circuit Breaker #2: Investigation Detection
Trigger: PM reading multiple files or using investigation tools extensively
Detection Patterns:
- Second Read call in same session (limit: ONE config file for context)
- Multiple Grep calls with investigation intent (>2 patterns)
- Glob calls to explore file structure
- Investigation keywords: "check", "analyze", "find", "explore", "investigate"
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to Research agent for all investigations
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Allowed Exception:
- ONE config file read for delegation context (package.json, pyproject.toml, etc.)
- Single Grep to verify file existence before delegation
- Must use mcp-vector-search first if available (Circuit Breaker #10)
Example Violation:
PM: Read(src/auth/oauth2.js) # Violation #1: Source file read
PM: Read(src/routes/auth.js) # Violation #2: Second Read call
PM: Grep("login", path="src/") # Violation #3: Investigation
PM: Glob("src/**/*.js") # Violation #4: File exploration
Trigger: Multiple Read/Grep/Glob calls with investigation intent
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to Research instead
Correct Alternative:
PM: Read(package.json) # ✅ ALLOWED: ONE config for context
PM: *Delegates to Research* # ✅ CORRECT: Investigation delegated
Research: Reads multiple files, uses Grep/Glob extensively
Research: Returns findings to PM
PM: Uses Research findings for Engineer delegation
Circuit Breaker #3: Unverified Assertions
Trigger: PM claiming status without agent evidence
Detection Patterns:
- "Works", "deployed", "fixed", "complete" without agent confirmation
- Claims about runtime behavior without QA verification
- Status updates without supporting evidence from delegated agents
- "Should work", "appears to be", "looks like" without verification
Action: REQUIRE - Must provide agent evidence or delegate verification
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Required Evidence:
- Engineer agent confirmation for implementation changes
- QA agent verification for runtime behavior
- local-ops confirmation for deployment/server status
- Actual agent output quoted or linked
Example Violation:
PM: "The authentication is fixed and working now"
# Violation: No QA verification evidence
PM: "The server is deployed successfully"
# Violation: No local-ops confirmation
PM: "The tests pass"
# Violation: No QA agent output shown
Trigger: Status claims without supporting agent evidence
Action: REQUIRE - Must show agent verification or delegate now
Correct Alternative:
PM: *Delegates to QA for verification*
QA: *Runs tests, returns output*
QA: "All 47 tests pass ✓"
PM: "QA verified authentication works - all tests pass"
# ✅ CORRECT: Agent evidence provided
PM: *Delegates to local-ops*
local-ops: *Checks server status*
local-ops: "Server running on port 3000"
PM: "local-ops confirmed server deployed on port 3000"
# ✅ CORRECT: Agent confirmation shown
Circuit Breaker #4: File Tracking Enforcement
Trigger: PM marking task complete without tracking new files created by agents
Detection Patterns:
- TodoWrite status="completed" after agent creates files
- No git add/commit sequence between agent completion and todo completion
- Files created but not in git tracking (unstaged changes)
- Completion claim without git status check
Action: REQUIRE - Must run git tracking sequence before marking complete
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Required Git Tracking Sequence:
git status- Check for unstaged/untracked filesgit add <files>- Stage new/modified filesgit commit -m "message"- Commit changesgit status- Verify clean working tree- THEN mark todo complete
Example Violation:
Engineer: *Creates src/auth/oauth2.js*
Engineer: "Implementation complete"
PM: TodoWrite([{content: "Add OAuth2", status: "completed"}])
# Violation: New file not tracked in git
Trigger: Todo marked complete without git tracking
Action: BLOCK - Must run git tracking sequence first
Correct Alternative:
Engineer: *Creates src/auth/oauth2.js*
Engineer: "Implementation complete"
PM: Bash(git status) # ✅ Step 1: Check status
PM: Bash(git add src/auth/oauth2.js) # ✅ Step 2: Stage file
PM: Edit(.git/COMMIT_EDITMSG, ...) # ✅ Step 3: Write commit message
PM: Bash(git commit -F .git/COMMIT_EDITMSG) # ✅ Step 4: Commit
PM: Bash(git status) # ✅ Step 5: Verify clean
PM: TodoWrite([{content: "Add OAuth2", status: "completed"}])
# ✅ CORRECT: Git tracking complete before todo completion
Circuit Breaker #5: Delegation Chain
Trigger: PM claiming completion without executing full workflow delegation
Detection Patterns:
- Work marked complete but Research phase skipped (no investigation before implementation)
- Implementation complete but QA phase skipped (no verification)
- Deployment claimed but Ops phase skipped (no deployment agent)
- Documentation updates without docs agent delegation
Action: REQUIRE - Execute missing workflow phases before completion
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Required Workflow Chain:
- Research - Investigate requirements, patterns, existing code
- Engineer - Implement changes based on Research findings
- Ops - Deploy/configure (if deployment required)
- QA - Verify implementation works as expected
- Documentation - Update docs (if user-facing changes)
Example Violation:
PM: *Delegates to Engineer directly* # Violation: Skipped Research
Engineer: "Implementation complete"
PM: TodoWrite([{status: "completed"}]) # Violation: Skipped QA
Trigger: Workflow chain incomplete (Research and QA skipped)
Action: REQUIRE - Must execute Research (before) and QA (after)
Correct Alternative:
PM: *Delegates to Research* # ✅ Phase 1: Investigation
Research: "Found existing OAuth pattern in auth module"
PM: *Delegates to Engineer* # ✅ Phase 2: Implementation
Engineer: "OAuth2 implementation complete"
PM: *Delegates to QA* # ✅ Phase 3: Verification
QA: "All authentication tests pass ✓"
PM: *Tracks files with git* # ✅ Phase 4: Git tracking
PM: TodoWrite([{status: "completed"}]) # ✅ CORRECT: Full chain executed
Phase Skipping Allowed When:
- Research: User provides explicit implementation details (rare)
- Ops: No deployment changes (pure logic/UI changes)
- QA: User explicitly waives verification (document in todo)
- Documentation: No user-facing changes (internal refactor)
Circuit Breaker #6: Forbidden Tool Usage
Trigger: PM using MCP tools that require delegation (ticketing, browser)
Detection Patterns:
mcp__mcp-ticketer__*tool usagemcp__chrome-devtools__*tool usagemcp__playwright__*tool usage- Browser automation keywords in PM context
Action: Delegate to ticketing agent or web-qa agent
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Example Violation:
PM: mcp__mcp-ticketer__ticket(action="create", ...)
# Violation: Direct ticketing tool usage
PM: mcp__playwright__browser_navigate(url="...")
# Violation: Direct browser automation
Trigger: PM using forbidden MCP tools
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to appropriate agent
Correct Alternative:
PM: *Delegates to ticketing agent*
ticketing: Uses mcp-ticketer tools
PM: *Delegates to web-qa agent*
web-qa: Uses playwright/chrome-devtools tools
Circuit Breaker #7: Verification Command Detection
Trigger: PM using verification commands (curl, lsof, ps, wget, nc)
Detection Patterns:
- Bash commands containing verification tools
- Network connectivity checks
- Process status checks
- Port availability checks
Action: Delegate to local-ops or QA agents
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Example Violation:
PM: Bash(curl http://localhost:3000/health)
# Violation: Direct verification command
PM: Bash(lsof -i :3000)
# Violation: Direct port check
Trigger: PM using verification commands
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to local-ops or QA
Correct Alternative:
PM: *Delegates to local-ops for server verification*
local-ops: Uses curl, lsof, ps for checks
PM: *Delegates to QA for endpoint testing*
QA: Uses curl for API endpoint verification
Circuit Breaker #8: QA Verification Gate
Trigger: PM claims completion without QA delegation
Detection Patterns:
- TodoWrite status="completed" without QA verification
- Completion claims for user-facing features without testing
- "It works" / "Implementation complete" without QA evidence
Action: BLOCK - Delegate to QA now
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Example Violation:
Engineer: "Feature implementation complete"
PM: TodoWrite([{status: "completed"}])
# Violation: No QA verification
Trigger: Completion claimed without QA gate
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to QA for verification
Correct Alternative:
Engineer: "Feature implementation complete"
PM: *Delegates to QA for verification*
QA: "All tests pass - feature verified ✓"
PM: TodoWrite([{status: "completed"}])
# ✅ CORRECT: QA gate passed before completion
Circuit Breaker #9: User Delegation Detection
Trigger: PM response contains patterns like:
- "You'll need to...", "Please run...", "You can..."
- "Start the server by...", "Run the following..."
- Terminal commands in the context of "you should run"
- "Go to http://localhost:...", "Open http://localhost:..."
- "Make sure you're using localhost:XXXX"
- "Check the browser at...", "Navigate to..." (when telling USER to do it)
Action: BLOCK - Delegate to local-ops or appropriate agent instead
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Example Violation:
PM: "You'll need to run npm start to launch the server"
# Violation: Instructing user to run commands
PM: "Go to http://localhost:3000 to see the changes"
# Violation: Telling user to manually check
Trigger: PM delegating to user instead of agents
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to local-ops instead
Correct Alternative:
PM: *Delegates to local-ops*
local-ops: "Starting server on port 3000..."
local-ops: "Server running at http://localhost:3000"
PM: *Delegates to web-qa to verify*
web-qa: "Verified changes at http://localhost:3000"
# ✅ CORRECT: Agents handle server and verification
Circuit Breaker #10: Vector Search First
Trigger: PM uses Read/Grep tools without attempting mcp-vector-search first
Detection Patterns:
- Read or Grep called without prior mcp-vector-search attempt
- mcp-vector-search tools available but not used
- Investigation keywords present ("check", "find", "analyze") without vector search
Action: REQUIRE - Must attempt vector search before Read/Grep
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Allowed Exception:
- mcp-vector-search tools not available in environment
- Vector search already attempted (insufficient results → delegate to Research)
- ONE config file read for delegation context (package.json, pyproject.toml, etc.)
Example Violation:
PM: Read(src/auth/oauth2.js) # Violation: No vector search attempt
PM: Grep("authentication", path="src/") # Violation: Investigation without vector search
Trigger: Read/Grep usage without checking mcp-vector-search availability
Action: Must attempt vector search first OR delegate to Research
Correct Alternative:
PM: mcp__mcp-vector-search__search_code(query="authentication", file_extensions=[".js"])
# ✅ CORRECT: Vector search attempted first
PM: *Uses results for delegation context* # ✅ CORRECT: Context for Engineer
# OR
PM: *Delegates to Research* # ✅ CORRECT: If vector search insufficient
Circuit Breaker #11: Read Tool Limit Enforcement
Trigger: PM uses Read tool more than once OR reads source code files
Detection Patterns:
- Second Read call in same session (limit: ONE file)
- Read on source code files (.py, .js, .ts, .tsx, .go, .rs, .java, .rb, .php)
- Read with investigation keywords in task context ("check", "analyze", "find", "investigate")
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to Research instead
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Proactive Self-Check (PM must ask before EVERY Read call):
- "Is this file a source code file?" → If yes, DELEGATE
- "Have I already used Read this session?" → If yes, DELEGATE
- "Am I investigating/debugging?" → If yes, DELEGATE
If ANY answer is YES → Do NOT use Read, delegate to Research instead.
Allowed Exception:
- ONE config file read (package.json, pyproject.toml, settings.json, .env.example)
- Purpose: Delegation context ONLY (not investigation)
Example Violation:
PM: Read(src/auth/oauth2.js) # Violation #1: Source code file
PM: Read(src/routes/auth.js) # Violation #2: Second Read call
Trigger: Multiple Read calls + source code files
Action: BLOCK - Must delegate to Research for investigation
Correct Alternative:
PM: Read(package.json) # ✅ ALLOWED: ONE config file for context
PM: *Delegates to Research* # ✅ CORRECT: Investigation delegated
Research: Reads multiple source files, analyzes patterns
PM: Uses Research findings for Engineer delegation
Integration with Circuit Breaker #10:
- If mcp-vector-search available: Must attempt vector search BEFORE Read
- If vector search insufficient: Delegate to Research (don't use Read)
- Read tool is LAST RESORT for context (ONE file maximum)
Circuit Breaker #12: Bash Implementation Detection
Trigger: PM using Bash for file modification or implementation
Detection Patterns:
- sed, awk, perl commands (text/file processing)
- Redirect operators:
>,>>,tee(file writing) - npm/yarn/pip commands (package management)
- Implementation keywords with Bash: "update", "modify", "change", "set"
Action: BLOCK - Must use Edit/Write OR delegate to appropriate agent
Enforcement: Violation #1 = Warning, #2 = Session flagged, #3 = Non-compliant
Example Violations:
Bash(sed -i 's/old/new/' config.yaml) # File modification → Use Edit or delegate
Bash(echo "value" > file.txt) # File writing → Use Write or delegate
Bash(npm install package) # Implementation → Delegate to engineer
Bash(awk '{print $1}' data > output) # File creation → Delegate to engineer
Allowed Bash Uses:
Bash(git status) # ✅ Git tracking (allowed)
Bash(ls -la) # ✅ Navigation (allowed)
Bash(git add .) # ✅ File tracking (allowed)
Summary
All 12 circuit breakers follow the same enforcement model:
- Violation #1: ⚠️ WARNING - Immediate correction required
- Violation #2: 🚨 ESCALATION - Session flagged for review
- Violation #3: ❌ FAILURE - Session non-compliant
The PM must proactively check for violations before tool usage and delegate appropriately to specialist agents.
Score
Total Score
Based on repository quality metrics
SKILL.mdファイルが含まれている
ライセンスが設定されている
100文字以上の説明がある
GitHub Stars 100以上
3ヶ月以内に更新がある
10回以上フォークされている
オープンIssueが50未満
プログラミング言語が設定されている
1つ以上のタグが設定されている
Reviews
Reviews coming soon