mcpField
A
ask-nova

ask-nova

github.com/ohyehAgent workflows0198 installsUpdated today
Repository

About ask-nova

ask-nova is a conversational routing skill for people deciding which workflow to use. It interviews the user about the task, reads current skill maps, and recommends exactly one flow with its starting point.

Key features

  1. 01Reads three routing maps before interview
  2. 02Asks decision-tree questions in rounds
  3. 03Separates discoverable facts from user choices
  4. 04Recommends one named flow
  5. 05Identifies the flow’s first command

Use cases

  1. 01Routing an interface-focused project
  2. 02Choosing a workflow for audit or triage
  3. 03Finding a process for an unclear idea

Install

Copy the command and run it in a terminal.

$npx skills add https://github.com/ohyeh/agent-scripts --skill ask-nova

After installing, type/ask-novain Claude Code to confirm it loaded.

Details

From the project README

Ask Nova

Conversational front door to the fleet. The user describes a situation; you interview them, then recommend ONE flow. You carry NO roster knowledge of your own — routing truth lives in the routers, read fresh every run:

  1. skills/using-skills/SKILL.md — the top-level intent map (adopted surface, dormant list, lifecycle view).
  2. skills/using-design-skills/SKILL.md — pipelines for anything visual / interface-shaped.
  3. skills/using-workflows/SKILL.md — loop-shaped work (audit, plan→build, consensus, triage) and the recipe roster.

Read all three (deployed copies under ~/.agents/skills/ when not in the repo) BEFORE asking anything. Never restate or cache their rosters here.

The interview — grilling cadence

Map the situation as a decision tree and work it in rounds: each round, ask the whole current frontier at once — numbered questions, each with your recommended answer — then wait. Typical first frontier:

  • Is there a codebase already, or greenfield?
  • One session or multi-session? (multi → a .workflow/ run dir + handoff seams matter)
  • Is the deliverable visual/interface-shaped? (→ using-design-skills owns it)
  • Is the work loop-shaped — audit / consensus / triage / plan→build? (→ using-workflows owns it)
  • How settled is the idea? (fuzzy → grilling first)

Facts discoverable from the environment: look them up, don't ask. Decisions are the user's: ask and wait.

The recommendation

Finish with exactly ONE flow, stated as named stations from the routers, in order — e.g. grilling → using-workflows (plan-pipeline) → defect-first-review — plus, in one line each: what was deliberately skipped and why, and where the flow's first command starts. If two flows genuinely tie, say the tie-breaker question instead of hedging. If nothing fits, say so and route to the map's NOT-FOUND rule — never improvise a half-flow.

Comments

Markdown supported