Unified Notifications Ops

affaan-m/ECC/skills/unified-notifications-ops

by affaan-mef648e01899ba3e8dc6371642deaaf64b4477775No license275K starsListed Oct 9, 2026Updated Oct 9, 2026Repository updated 4 days ago

Operate notifications as one ECC-native workflow across GitHub, Linear, desktop alerts, hooks, and connected communication surfaces. Use when the real problem is alert routing, deduplication, escalation, or inbox collapse.

AI-generated overview

Designs a unified notification policy that classifies, routes, deduplicates and escalates alerts across GitHub, Linear, hooks and chat.

What it does
This skill guides an operator through consolidating fragmented notification sources into a single lane with clear severity, ownership, routing and follow-up action. It walks through inventorying current event sources and channels, deciding what deserves interruption versus digest or log-only handling, collapsing duplicate paths, and designing an ECC-native workflow. It produces a structured design covering the current surface, an event severity model, a routing plan, consolidation decisions and the next workflow to build.
When to use it
Use it when alerts from GitHub, Linear, local hooks, desktop notifications, chat or email arrive in disconnected places and create noise rather than action. It fits situations where the goal is one notification policy, fewer and better notifications, or collapsing overlapping notification branches into a single lane.
Requirements
No scripts are included; it is instructions only. It assumes the workspace may already have hooks, MCPs or connected tools, and references GitHub, Linear, desktop notification primitives and email/chat surfaces as possible sources.

Unified Notifications Ops

Use this skill when the real problem is not a missing ping. The real problem is a fragmented notification system.

The job is to turn scattered events into one operator surface with:

  • clear severity
  • clear ownership
  • clear routing
  • clear follow-up action

When to Use

  • the user wants a unified notification lane across GitHub, Linear, local hooks, desktop alerts, chat, or email
  • CI failures, review requests, issue updates, and operator events are arriving in disconnected places
  • the current setup creates noise instead of action
  • the user wants to consolidate overlapping notification branches or backlog proposals into one ECC-native lane
  • the workspace already has hooks, MCPs, or connected tools, but no coherent notification policy

Preferred Surface

Start from what already exists:

  • GitHub issues, PRs, reviews, comments, and CI
  • Linear issue/project movement
  • local hook events and session lifecycle signals
  • desktop notification primitives
  • connected email/chat surfaces when they actually exist

Prefer ECC-native orchestration over telling the user to adopt a separate notification product.

Non-Negotiable Rules

  • never expose tokens, secrets, webhook secrets, or internal identifiers
  • separate:
    • event source
    • severity
    • routing channel
    • operator action
  • default to digest-first when interruption cost is unclear
  • do not fan out every event to every channel
  • if the real fix is better issue triage, hook policy, or project flow, say so explicitly

Event Pipeline

Treat the lane as:

  1. Capture the event
  2. Classify urgency and owner
  3. Route to the correct channel
  4. Collapse duplicates and low-signal churn
  5. Attach the next operator action

The goal is fewer, better notifications.

Default Severity Model

ClassExamplesDefault handling
Criticalbroken default-branch CI, security issue, blocked release, failed deployinterrupt now
Highreview requested, failing PR, owner-blocking handoffsame-day alert
Mediumissue state changes, notable comments, backlog movementdigest or queue
Lowrepeat successes, routine churn, redundant lifecycle markerssuppress or fold

If the workspace has no severity model, build one before proposing automation.

Workflow

1. Inventory the current surface

List:

  • event sources
  • current channels
  • existing hooks/scripts that emit alerts
  • duplicate paths for the same event
  • silent failure cases where important things are not being surfaced

Call out what ECC already owns.

2. Decide what deserves interruption

For each event family, answer:

  • who needs to know?
  • how fast do they need to know?
  • should this interrupt, batch, or just log?

Use these defaults:

  • interrupt for release, CI, security, and owner-blocking events
  • digest for medium-signal updates
  • log-only for telemetry and low-signal lifecycle markers

3. Collapse duplicates before adding channels

Look for:

  • the same PR event appearing in GitHub, Linear, and local logs
  • repeated hook notifications for the same failure
  • comments or status churn that should be summarized instead of forwarded raw
  • channels that duplicate each other without adding a better action path

Prefer:

  • one canonical summary
  • one owner
  • one primary channel
  • one fallback path

4. Design the ECC-native workflow

For each real notification need, define:

  • source
  • gate
  • shape: immediate alert, digest, queue, or dashboard-only
  • channel
  • action

If ECC already has the primitive, prefer:

  • a skill for operator triage
  • a hook for automatic emission/enforcement
  • an agent for delegated classification
  • an MCP/connector only when a real bridge is missing

5. Return an action-biased design

End with:

  • what to keep
  • what to suppress
  • what to merge
  • what ECC should wrap next

Output Format

text
CURRENT SURFACE- sources- channels- duplicates- gaps
EVENT MODEL- critical- high- medium- low
ROUTING PLAN- source -> channel- why- operator owner
CONSOLIDATION- suppress- merge- canonical summaries
NEXT ECC MOVE- skill / hook / agent / MCP- exact workflow to build next

Recommendation Rules

  • prefer one strong lane over many weak ones
  • prefer digests for medium and low-signal updates
  • prefer hooks when the signal should emit automatically
  • prefer operator skills when the work is triage, routing, and review-first decision-making
  • prefer project-flow-ops when the root cause is backlog / PR coordination rather than alerts
  • prefer workspace-surface-audit when the user first needs a source inventory
  • if desktop notifications are enough, do not invent an unnecessary external bridge

Good Use Cases

  • "We have GitHub, Linear, and local hook alerts, but no single operator flow"
  • "Our CI failures are noisy and people ignore them"
  • "I want one notification policy across Claude, OpenCode, and Codex surfaces"
  • "Figure out what should interrupt versus land in a digest"
  • "Collapse overlapping notification PR ideas into one canonical ECC lane"

Related Skills

  • workspace-surface-audit
  • project-flow-ops
  • github-ops
  • knowledge-ops
  • customer-billing-ops when the notification pain is billing/customer operations rather than engineering

Source and attribution

Source:affaan-m/ECCinskills/unified-notifications-opsat commitef648e0

License: No license

Content belongs to its original authors. SourceWeft indexes it from a public repository.

Report or request removal