Skip to content

Routes and Decisions

Jump to bottom
Your GitHub Name edited this page May 20, 2026 · 5 revisions

Routes and Decisions

PromptPilot's harness chooses what should happen before a frontier coding agent runs. Every developer prompt the harness sees gets one of four route values in the SLM's execution spec.

Route types

Route (spec value) Use when Result
clarify The request is ambiguous or underspecified Ask one focused question and stop
answer The request does not need code execution Offer a direct SLM reply (opt-in via --let-slm-answer); otherwise forward to the coding agent
passthrough Transformation risk is high Send the raw prompt to the coding agent unchanged
act Coding work is needed Forward to the coding agent (Codex / Claude-style). The SLM produces a downstream_prompt that preserves constraints and sharpens the original

These map 1:1 to the route field on the SLM's ExecutionSpec JSON (used by --normalizer slm-openai-v2) or to the INTENT: header in the prose envelope emitted by slm-anthropic / slm-openai. The downstream coding agent always receives plain text either way — see SLM Harness → Output format for the side-by-side example.

Rewrite is a behavior, not a route

When the route is act, the SLM produces a rewritten downstream_prompt alongside the spec. "Rewrite" is therefore not a separate routing decision — it's the default work the SLM does inside act. Older drafts of these docs listed Rewrite as its own route; that conflated the route (where the prompt goes) with the transformation (what the prompt looks like when it gets there).

Tool-output compression is a different subsystem

Compression of noisy tool output (pytest, grep, git diff, installer logs, ...) is not a route the harness picks for the user's prompt. It runs as a separate PostToolUse hook against the coding agent's bash tool output, after the tool runs. See Tool Output Compression for the wiring and what the regex-based compression preserves.

Decision criteria

The SLM should consider:

  • Is the user asking for code changes, explanation, setup, or troubleshooting?
  • Are there explicit constraints, non-goals, files, commands, tests, or stack traces?
  • Would rewriting remove important context? (If yes — route to passthrough.)
  • Would a clarification question prevent wasted work? (If yes — clarify.)
  • Can a direct answer satisfy the request without invoking the coding agent? (If yes — answer.)
  • Otherwise — act, with a constraint-preserving rewrite.

Examples

These examples are schematic. The real wire format is the JSON ExecutionSpec; the human-readable rendering below shows the decision shape.

Clarify:

Input: "Fix auth."
Route: clarify
Question: Which auth failure should I focus on: login, token refresh, or permission checks?

Passthrough:

Input: "Fix this production migration. Do not change the public schema contract."
Route: passthrough
Reason: High-risk database/API constraints should reach the coding agent unchanged.

Act (with rewrite):

Input: "Fix the failing auth test. Keep the public API stable and do not touch migrations."
Route: act
downstream_prompt: Fix the failing auth test without changing public API behavior or migration files.
Preserve: failing auth test, public API stability, no migration edits.

See also: SLM Harness · Semantic Preservation · Tool Output Compression

Clone this wiki locally