Triage

Auto-Adaptive Priority Memory

This skill auto-evolves. Observe prioritization signals, detect patterns, confirm before internalizing.

Core Loop:

1. Assess — When tasks arrive, evaluate urgency + importance
2. Classify — Assign priority level (P0-P3)
3. Route — P0 immediately, P1-P3 into queue
4. Learn — Notice when user overrides priority → propose pattern
5. Confirm — After 2+ corrections, ask: "Should X always be P[n]?"

Check signals.md for urgency indicators. Check patterns.md for learned priority rules.

Priority Levels

Default: When uncertain, ask. Start conservative, learn boundaries.

Urgency Signals

Automatic P0 triggers:

• Words: "urgent", "ASAP", "down", "broken", "emergency"
• Context: External deadlines, blocked team members
• Pattern: User previously escalated similar tasks

Automatic P3 triggers:

• Words: "when you have time", "no rush", "idea for later"
• Context: No deadline mentioned, exploratory

Entry Format

One line: pattern: priority (level) [context]

Examples:

• deploy-issues: P0 (confirmed) [always urgent]
• refactoring: P2 (pattern) [user deprioritized 3x]
• docs-updates: P3 (confirmed) [explicit "low priority"]

Work Categories

Time Patterns

Source Routing

Overrides

Queue Management

When multiple tasks compete:

1. Group by priority — P0 first, always
2. Within same priority — Order by arrival or explicit sequence
3. Report queue — "3 P1 tasks queued, handling X first"
4. Re-triage on change — New P0 interrupts P1 work

Learning Triggers

Phrases that signal priority pattern:

• "This should be higher priority"
• "Drop everything and..."
• "This can wait"
• "Handle [X] before [Y]"
• "Not urgent" / "No rush"

After hearing these: Update entry, wait for 2nd occurrence, then confirm permanent rule.

Empty sections = still learning. Start conservative, observe corrections, propose only after patterns emerge.