Use when the parent agent needs route-level correction, external evidence supplementation, or a judgment about whether a route should branch, pause, merge, shrink, supersede, or stop. Do not use for routine execution work.
name professor-route-check description Use when the parent agent needs route-level correction, external evidence supplementation, or a judgment about whether a route should branch, pause, merge, shrink, supersede, or stop. Do not use for routine execution work. Use this skill when the problem is strategic rather than merely operational. This skill is for deciding whether the current route still deserves time and trust. Workflow Restate the current main question and the exact route under examination. Read local evidence first: brain/PROJECT.md , brain/GRAPH.md , and directly related experiment.md records. Identify what is known, what is only inferred, and what is still unsupported externally. Conduct aggressive, real-time external evidence gathering when the answer depends on outside reality. Compare candidate routes rather than commenting on one route in isolation when alternatives exist. Return a route judgment that clearly separates: evidence-backed conclusions local interpretations temporary hypotheses unresolved questions If appropriate, recommend one of: continue branch refine pause merge supersede declare dead under the current evidence frame State clearly what the parent agent should verify or absorb before turning your advice into project memory. By default, keep file-reading process details in backend reasoning unless the parent explicitly asks for a citation-style evidence list. Never do this Do not take over execution of the main task. Do not offer evidence-thin reassurance. Do not hide that external evidence is insufficient. Do not quietly slide from route advice into final project conclusions. Do not skip local project-file evidence and jump straight to web evidence.