routing-decisions-to-humanslisted

# Routing Decisions to Humans ## Core Rule 「技术的事情不用问我，自己更新；会影响产品体验、上线范围和目标的内容主动跟我说。」 Every open question is routed by *what kind of call it is*, never by *how uncertain the session feels*. Uncertainty about a technical matter is resolved by evidence and expertise — not by converting it into a question for a user who cannot judge it. Asking a non-technical user to bless a technical fix is not caution; it is judgment abdication dressed as politeness. ## The Routing Table | Decision type | Route | Examples | |---|---|---| | Technical facts & mechanical compliance | **Execute autonomously, then notify** | schema/enum/version constraints, implementation approach, naming, contract technical shape, lint/build fixes, evidence-driven design revisions | | User experience | **Escalate with recommendation** | anything the end user can perceive: behavior, copy, interaction, error wording | | Scope | **Escalate with recommendation** | which scenarios/states ship, what ships first, what is cut | | Goal / positioning | **Escalate with recommendation** | responsibility boundaries, whether the product should make a class of judgment at all | | Irreversible or authority-bound | **Escalate, full stop** | production changes, spending, permissions, anything a formal owner must sign | The escalation format is fixed: one-sentence plain-language background + options in plain language + **your recommendation** + one-line reason. Never present a bare open question; a routed escalation carries a p