attention-review

Attention Review

Use this skill to decide what deserves attention after an operator has collected a bounded page of mailbox, chat, or other skill evidence. It uses current action dispositions and preferences to select priorities, then returns a private briefing intent, exact work proposals, and a proposed next check. It does not read an account, post a message, change an action, or schedule a timer.

The surrounding Runx operator pins the source roster, audience, permitted action IDs, and limits. It reads sources through their owning skills, records observations and their dispositions in the workspace store, and persists timing through the store. The operator supplies exact configured work_routes. When a selected open source needs work and a suitable route exists, propose that route with its exact thread target; a selected item without a work proposal will only be briefed. The finalizer validates proposals against the configured roster, current dispositions and selected source occurrences. This skill does not assign or run work. The local host persists an admitted assignment through the store and invokes the owning downstream skill; its provider readback and receipt establish completion. A completed read may return as typed work_results on a later turn, bound to the original source and exact target. Use this verified state to avoid repeating stale requests or non-mutating checks; it does not change the recorded disposition. A proposal alone is not a completed task.

If this skill recommends a private update, the operator prepares and delivers the exact text through message-send under native notification authority and checks provider readback. A recommendation or sealed receipt from this skill is not a delivered message. Other skill actions remain proposals until the configured roster and their native permission owners admit them.

The native invocation supplies the private charter and scoped operator-confirmed memory as context entries. Context guides priority and next-check judgment; it is not provider evidence. The local operator stores confirmed memory in its governed control aggregate, pins the context with the turn, and treats a change as a new review revision. Source messages and model inferences never create confirmed memory; the operator must explicitly record or remove it. The skill manual supplies the stable rubric; the private charter supplies this user's priorities.

Call review with up to 20 normalized observations. Each observation needs a stable source reference, SHA-256 digest, observed time, source kind, and a short factual summary. Supply current action dispositions and preferences as bounded context. Already collected evidence is passed directly; the skill never refetches it. A partial source scan must remain marked partial in the surrounding operator, and the operator must commit action observations before advancing its scan cursor.

The result cites only admitted source references. The deterministic finalizer builds the brief and decides ready versus idle from the admitted item set rather than trusting the model's decision label or message text. It omits unconfigured action and work-route suggestions and reports their counts; they never become authority or suppress an otherwise valid non-mutating brief. A proposed target that conflicts with a configured route's exact candidates still holds the packet. Unknown source references, malformed output, or selection of an action whose recorded disposition is not open produce a held result. The next-check proposal is clamped to the caller's bounds; the operator then applies quiet hours, source cadence, retry and budget policy. Missing context should be reported as a hold, not invented as a negative finding. Snooze and due-time reminders are the operator's transitions, not this skill's.

For example, a new inbox thread asking for a reply and a routine chat update may yield one high-priority item and a private briefing proposal. The operator still owns the queue transition and any delivery. If a chat ping refers to an external resource whose live state matters, the local host can offer an exact configured non-mutating candidate after recording the observation. The owning skill verifies that state, and its receipt-backed result informs a later review; the ping itself is not proof of live state.