diff --git a/skills/old-coder/SKILL.md b/skills/old-coder/SKILL.md
index a2b1351..80d1b2d 100644
--- a/skills/old-coder/SKILL.md
+++ b/skills/old-coder/SKILL.md
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 name: old-coder
-description: Evidence-first development — surround the implementation with an executable spec and a gauntlet of constraints (tests, types, coverage, mutation) so line-by-line review becomes optional. Use when the user explicitly asks for high-assurance or evidence-first work ("reliable", "TDD", "prove it works", "I won't read the code"), or when the change touches high-stakes domains (money, auth, data loss, concurrency, public API). For routine changes where the user just wants normal tests, write good tests directly instead of invoking this loop.
+description: Evidence-first development — surround the implementation with an executable spec and a gauntlet of constraints (tests, types, coverage, mutation) so line-by-line review becomes optional. Use when the user explicitly asks for high-assurance or evidence-first work ("reliable", "TDD", "prove it works", "I won't read the code"). Also load it when the user did NOT ask but the change touches a high-stakes domain (money, auth, data loss, concurrency, public API) — in that case the first and only act is to OFFER the loop in one sentence and stop, so a wrong guess costs a sentence and no files; but only where a reply is possible — an autonomous run records the domain and proceeds. For routine changes where the user just wants normal tests, write good tests directly instead of invoking this loop.
 ---
 
 # Old Coder: Reliable Coding Under Constraint and Test
@@ -11,6 +11,18 @@ you write code, and (2) an **evidence report** proving the code ran the gauntlet
 Your job is to make those two artifacts trustworthy enough that line-by-line
 review becomes optional within the spec's boundaries.
 
+## First: was this loop asked for?
+
+- **Nobody asked; you loaded this on the high-stakes heuristic** (money, auth,
+  data loss, concurrency, public API): offer in one sentence — name the domain,
+  give two choices (the full loop, or a normal fix with good tests) — then stop.
+- **Create nothing before the answer**: no spec, no setup plan, no branch.
+- **A configured invocation naming this skill IS the ask** (a scheduled wake, a
+  loop prompt, another agent's task) — start at step 1, do not re-offer it.
+- **Nobody to answer?** Never stall. Record the domain and proceed under step 1's
+  autonomous rules, with spec approval `not obtained (autonomous run)`.
+- **The offer is not spec approval** — a yes authorizes the loop, not the spec.
+
 This inverts the normal review model: **trust moves from inspection to
 constraints.** Be honest about what that buys: the gauntlet turns the
 constraints the spec expresses into executable evidence — it cannot show the