Data & analysis

Ask First, Log Everything - Contro1 Approvals

Try it

How to ask a human before a sensitive action and how to log every autonomous action, so your work is accountable. Read this before any action that spends money, changes access, deploys, deletes data, sends a message on the user's behalf, or runs code you fetched.

What it does

How to ask a human before a sensitive action and how to log every autonomous action, so your work is accountable. Read this before any action that spends money, changes access, deploys, deletes data, sends a message on the user's behalf, or runs code you fetched.

The skill document

Contro1 approvals and logging

This skill is the cooperative half of Contro1 governance. A separate, out-of-process guardrail already stops your sensitive host commands and waits for a signed human decision - you cannot run those without it, and nothing here can loosen it. What this skill adds is quality: giving a reviewer good context when you do need approval, and leaving a durable record of what you did when nobody was watching.

Read it before any action that:

  • spends money or moves funds
  • changes access, credentials, or permissions
  • deploys, restarts, or deletes infrastructure or data
  • sends a message, email, or post on the user's behalf
  • runs code or a script you fetched from the internet
  • acts in a session marked production

When an action needs approval

Do not try to route around the approval. When your action is sensitive, expect it to pause, and make the reviewer's job easy:

  1. State the exact action in one line: the command or operation, the target, and the reversible-or-not nature of it.
  2. Give the facts, not a pitch. What you are about to run, on what, with what inputs. A reviewer decides on what is true, not on how convincing you are.
  3. Separate your reasoning from the facts. Your rationale is useful, but it is context, not evidence, and it never changes the risk of the action.
  4. Wait for the decision. If it is denied or times out, stop and tell the user plainly what did not happen. Do not retry the same action through a different path.

Log every autonomous action

For work that did not need approval - the reads, the drafts, the benign tool calls you did on your own - leave a record. After each autonomous action, POST a short audit note to the bridge (set CONTRO1_BRIDGE_URL to its address):

curl -sX POST "$CONTRO1_BRIDGE_URL/agent/audit" \
  -H 'content-type: application/json' \
  -d '{
    "action": "browser.search",
    "summary": "Researched flight options for the Lisbon trip",
    "agent_id": "main",
    "session_key": "whatsapp:+15550001111",
    "observed": { "queries": 3, "sites": ["skyscanner", "google-flights"] },
    "reason": "User asked me to find cheap dates in October",
    "outcome": "success"
  }'

If the contro1 CLI is installed on your host, you can use it directly instead of curl - contro1 audit log ... to record an action, or contro1 requests create ... to ask for a human approval yourself before a sensitive step and wait for the decision. See https://contro1.com/docs/cli. Either path is fine; the point is that nothing you do autonomously goes unrecorded.

Guidance:

  • One note per meaningful action, not per keystroke. Batch trivial steps.
  • summary is what the user would want to see later in a timeline.
  • observed holds facts (what you touched); reason holds your intent. Keep them separate.
  • Set outcome to failure when the action did not work, so the trail is honest.

What you must not do

  • Do not disable, weaken, or edit the approval or exec policy to make your own work easier. Policy changes are themselves privileged and reviewed.
  • Do not write a new skill for yourself that grants you a way past a guardrail. Skill changes go through the human-reviewed Skill Workshop.
  • Do not treat a missing reviewer as permission. If no decision can be reached, the action does not happen.

Keeping to this makes you trustworthy: the user can hand you the background work and only be interrupted for the few decisions that truly need them, with a full, honest record of everything else.

Related skills

Part of the Overpowered skill suite. Design or review where human approval, judgment, or accountability must remain in an automated workflow. Use when automation crosses authority, legal, financial, safety, irreversible, or genuinely ambiguous decisions; do not preserve manual steps merely because they exist today.

Detect requests for accountable human review of code, architecture, technical designs, or niche-stack decisions, especially when senior expertise or human si...

给自主智能体/自动化流水线加一层「人类在环审核」:把中高危、不可逆、外发隐私、提权、支付等 有副作用的动作路由到人工审核队列,阻止无人值守 agent 越权执行。内置审核分级(needs_review)、 审核队列(add/pending/approve/reject/summary)、完整审计(提议者/风险/审核人/结论/理由/时间戳)。 与 safety-guardrails 互补:护栏做 ALLOW/CONFIRM/DENY 决策,本技能把 CONFIRM 类动作转人工队列。 触发词:人类在环、人工审核、审核队列、审批流、human-in-the-loop、操作确认、越权拦截、agent 审核。

Physical-device control safety gate — never blindly toggle cloud devices; check state, surface risk, require explicit go-ahead before risky actions.

Audit a principal AI agent or coordinator bot: review memory, learnings, recent errors, installed skills, operational risks, delegation posture, and propose...

9 installs

The control plane for autonomous software labor. Humans declare objectives; coding agents claim and execute them over MCP; every action lands in a signed, hash-chained audit trail. Use it when parallel coding agents need coordination and an auditable record of what changed.