[omh] Hermes adaptation for wiki construction blueprints and retained knowledge capture with destination-aware external knowledge connection guidance.
SkillScore64Maintained
Automatic
◆Knowledge Management pack
Last verified 8/18/2026
What it changes
Passed 13 of 21 test cases with the skill, and 8 of 21 without it.
Without skill36%
With skill64%
Checks it passed that the model alone missed
Explains that taxonomy depends on audience scale.
Includes breaking conditions in the blueprint schema.
Includes maintenance routine in the blueprint schema.
and 6 more in the full report
6 fixed8 passed either way8 still failing0 broke
Pass-rate lift
+27 pp
Tokens
+68%
Agent turns
0%
Response time
-8%
Model gemini-3.6-flashMeasured 8/18/2026v114 of 22 cases passed with skill · 21 comparable
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
See it in action
One of 5 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
1 of 5
Prompt
build a wiki: We need a shared technical documentation vault for our engineering group so both developers and automated agents can easily retrieve facts. Please help us design a maintainable layout by gathering our destination and ownership details, then proposing a structural framework, maintenance conventions, and initial seed topics.
What was checked, without and with the skill
Checked
Without skill
With skill
Gathers audience and maintenance requirements before generating full final structure.
Missed
Passed
Includes breaking conditions for the proposed structural model.
Missed
Passed
case-03 · gemini-3.6-flash · 8/18/2026 · answers are capped and redacted
What's inside
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
SKILL.md130 lines5 files
Wiki
This is a Hermes-native wiki workflow skill.
Why This Exists
wiki exists to keep knowledge work explicit, evidence-backed, and inside the Hermes/executor boundary instead of relying on ad hoc chat narration.
Do Not Use When
The request is casual chat, a status-only acknowledgement, or another workflow has stronger routing evidence.
The user needs implementation, review, CI, merge, or external publishing evidence that has not been delegated or observed.
Examples
Good example:
Prompt: wiki: six of us keep re-answering the same questions in chat; help me stand up a wiki in Notion.
Expected behavior: Ask who reads and maintains it and what knowledge repeats, then propose one model with its breaking conditions, a skeleton, and seed pages, without claiming the store was created.
Why: The request is wiki construction for a shared audience, not a single note capture or connector execution.
Bad example:
Prompt: wiki: treat casual chat or unaccepted work as if this workflow already produced verified results.
Expected behavior: Ask a clarification question or route to a narrower workflow instead of forcing wiki.
Why: The request lacks the required inputs or would overclaim work that Hermes did not observe.
Completion Checklist
Audience scale, destination, knowledge types, and maintenance owner are recorded or named as missing.
The proposed model carries its rationale, breaking conditions, and one alternative.
Skeleton, entry points, conventions, maintenance, and seed pages are concrete enough to start today.
Destination-specific guidance is prepared for the named store or the unknown destination gap is explicit.
No output claims an external write, store creation, connector run, or memory mutation without evidence.
Separate coding or connector tasks are extracted instead of buried in notes.
Recovery Notes
If the audience scale is unknown, ask for it before proposing structure; it changes the model.
If nobody owns maintenance, record 'unmaintained' and choose a model that survives it.