chore(conductor): Archive strategic overview and split into granular tracks
This commit is contained in:
+1
-1
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
|
||||
# Track code_path_analysis_20260507 Context
|
||||
# Track ai_interaction_call_graph_20260507 Context
|
||||
|
||||
- [Specification](./spec.md)
|
||||
- [Implementation Plan](./plan.md)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"track_id": "ai_interaction_call_graph_20260507",
|
||||
"type": "chore",
|
||||
"status": "new",
|
||||
"created_at": "2026-05-07T16:00:00Z",
|
||||
"updated_at": "2026-05-07T16:00:00Z",
|
||||
"description": "Exhaustive function-to-function call graph tracing the AI loop from request to terminal execution."
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
|
||||
# Implementation Plan: AI Interaction Call Graph (ai_interaction_call_graph_20260507)
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Trace Mapping
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Use `py_find_usages` to trace `ai_client.send` callers and callees.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Map the asynchronous hand-off from `AppController` to the AI worker threads.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Trace the recursion depth of the tool-call loop (`MAX_TOOL_ROUNDS`).
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Documentation & Synthesis
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Create a high-fidelity Mermaid sequence diagram of the entire loop.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Identify specific areas for logic consolidation or performance optimization.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Conductor - User Manual Verification 'Final Review' (Protocol in workflow.md)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
|
||||
# Specification: AI Interaction Call Graph (ai_interaction_call_graph_20260507)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
A low-level technical trace of the AI interaction loop. The goal is to map every single function call and data hand-off from the moment a user message is sent to the final terminal execution of a PowerShell script or tool result.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
- **Entry Point:** `src/gui_2.py:App._render_discussion_panel` (Send button action).
|
||||
- **Subsystems:** `ai_client.py`, `mcp_client.py`, `shell_runner.py`, `app_controller.py`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Functional Requirements
|
||||
1. **Call Graph Generation:**
|
||||
- Document the sequence of synchronous and asynchronous calls.
|
||||
- Identify thread boundaries (GUI thread vs. Background worker thread).
|
||||
2. **Data Transformation Trace:**
|
||||
- Track the transformation of a message: raw text -> GenerateRequest -> AI History -> Provider Prompt -> AI Response -> Tool Call -> PS Script.
|
||||
3. **Error & Retry Paths:**
|
||||
- Map how exceptions are caught, classified, and bubbled back to the UI.
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
- [ ] Detailed call graph in Mermaid format.
|
||||
- [ ] List of all internal private methods involved in the loop.
|
||||
- [ ] Identification of any blocking calls in the async pipeline.
|
||||
@@ -1,8 +0,0 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"track_id": "code_path_analysis_20260507",
|
||||
"type": "chore",
|
||||
"status": "new",
|
||||
"created_at": "2026-05-07T15:00:00Z",
|
||||
"updated_at": "2026-05-07T15:00:00Z",
|
||||
"description": "Comprehensive analysis of major processing routes in ./src and ./simulation. Identify data pipelines and responsibilities."
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -1,26 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# Implementation Plan: Code Path & Data Pipeline Analysis (code_path_analysis_20260507)
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Structural Exploration & Tooling Setup
|
||||
- [x] Task: Initialize `PIPELINE_ANALYSIS.md` template.
|
||||
- [x] Task: Deploy `codebase_investigator` subagents to identify top-level entry points in `gui_2.py` and `simulation/`.
|
||||
- [x] Task: Verify usage of existing tree-sitter tools to generate initial call-graph skeletons for `./src`.
|
||||
- [x] Task: Conductor - User Manual Verification 'Phase 1' (Protocol in workflow.md)
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Mapping Core Source Pipelines (`./src`)
|
||||
- [x] Task: Map the **Context Aggregation Pipeline** (`aggregate.py`, `models.py`).
|
||||
- [x] Task: Map the **AI Interaction Loop** (`ai_client.py`, `mcp_client.py`, `shell_runner.py`).
|
||||
- [x] Task: Map the **GUI Event & State Pipeline** (`gui_2.py`, `app_controller.py`).
|
||||
- [x] Task: Document data responsibilities and state boundaries for each route.
|
||||
- [x] Task: Conductor - User Manual Verification 'Phase 2' (Protocol in workflow.md)
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 3: Mapping Simulation Pipelines (`./simulation`)
|
||||
- [x] Task: Map the **Simulation Lifecycle** (`sim_base.py`, `sim_context.py`, `workflow_sim.py`).
|
||||
- [x] Task: Analyze data flow between `sim_ai_settings.py` and the execution engine.
|
||||
- [x] Task: Document the "Verification & Checkpointing" route in simulations.
|
||||
- [x] Task: Conductor - User Manual Verification 'Phase 3' (Protocol in workflow.md)
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 4: Synthesis & Reporting
|
||||
- [x] Task: Consolidate all findings into Mermaid diagrams within `PIPELINE_ANALYSIS.md`.
|
||||
- [x] Task: Identify specific "Curation Targets" (redundancies, style violations) for the next track.
|
||||
- [x] Task: Final review and hand-off to Track 2 (Codebase Curation).
|
||||
- [x] Task: Conductor - User Manual Verification 'Phase 4' (Protocol in workflow.md)
|
||||
@@ -1,27 +0,0 @@
|
||||
# Specification: Code Path & Data Pipeline Analysis (code_path_analysis_20260507)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
A deep architectural audit focused on mapping the "processing routes" and "data pipelines" of the Manual Slop codebase. This analysis will treat the program as a series of data-driven pipelines (similar to Ryan Fleury's model), identifying exactly how data flows through `./src` and `./simulation`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
- **Core Codebase:** `./src`
|
||||
- **Simulation Infrastructure:** `./simulation`
|
||||
- **Granularity:** Both high-level module interactions and detailed function-to-function execution flows.
|
||||
|
||||
## Functional Requirements
|
||||
1. **Pipeline Mapping:**
|
||||
- Identify major execution "routes" (e.g., UI Event Loop, AI Tool-Call Loop, Context Aggregation Pipeline).
|
||||
- Map these routes from entry point to terminal state.
|
||||
2. **Data Responsibility Audit:**
|
||||
- For every major path, define which data structures it owns, modifies, or depends upon.
|
||||
- Identify state boundaries and potential "data leaks" or redundant processing.
|
||||
3. **Simulation Pipeline Audit:**
|
||||
- Fully map the lifecycle of a simulation: State Setup -> Agent Injection -> Execution Loop -> Verification -> Cleanup.
|
||||
4. **Automated Extraction:**
|
||||
- Utilize MCP tools and potentially custom `tree-sitter` scripts to verify call graphs and data dependencies.
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
- [ ] Comprehensive `PIPELINE_ANALYSIS.md` report created in the root.
|
||||
- [ ] Mermaid flowcharts documenting every major processing route.
|
||||
- [ ] Data responsibility table for all mapped paths.
|
||||
- [ ] Full mapping of the `./simulation` pipeline.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
|
||||
# Track controller_state_mutation_matrix_20260507 Context
|
||||
|
||||
- [Specification](./spec.md)
|
||||
- [Implementation Plan](./plan.md)
|
||||
- [Metadata](./metadata.json)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"track_id": "controller_state_mutation_matrix_20260507",
|
||||
"type": "chore",
|
||||
"status": "new",
|
||||
"created_at": "2026-05-07T16:00:00Z",
|
||||
"updated_at": "2026-05-07T16:00:00Z",
|
||||
"description": "Comprehensive map of all methods that modify the AppController and App state."
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
|
||||
# Implementation Plan: Controller State Mutation Matrix (controller_state_mutation_matrix_20260507)
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: State Inventory
|
||||
- [ ] Task: List all public and private properties in `AppController` and `App`.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Identify all threading locks and their current usage patterns.
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Mutation Mapping
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Use grep/AST tools to find all assignments to identified state fields.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Populate the mutation matrix table.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Conductor - User Manual Verification 'Final Review' (Protocol in workflow.md)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
|
||||
# Specification: Controller State Mutation Matrix (controller_state_mutation_matrix_20260507)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
Mapping the state landscape of the Manual Slop application. We need to know exactly which methods have the authority to change global state, especially within `AppController` and `App`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
- **Classes:** `App`, `AppController`.
|
||||
- **Target Fields:** `ai_status`, `mma_status`, `_pending_gui_tasks`, `disc_entries`, `config`, etc.
|
||||
|
||||
## Functional Requirements
|
||||
1. **Mutation Matrix:**
|
||||
- Create a table: [Method Name] x [State Field Modified].
|
||||
2. **Lock Ownership Audit:**
|
||||
- Document which locks (e.g., `_pending_gui_tasks_lock`) protect which fields.
|
||||
- Identify potential race conditions or unprotected mutations.
|
||||
3. **State Lifecycle:**
|
||||
- Document how state is flushed to disk (autosave) vs. held in memory.
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
- [ ] Matrix table identifying every state mutation site.
|
||||
- [ ] Audit report of thread-safety and lock usage.
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
|
||||
# Track source_wide_redundancy_audit_20260507 Context
|
||||
|
||||
- [Specification](./spec.md)
|
||||
- [Implementation Plan](./plan.md)
|
||||
- [Metadata](./metadata.json)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,8 @@
|
||||
{
|
||||
"track_id": "source_wide_redundancy_audit_20260507",
|
||||
"type": "chore",
|
||||
"status": "new",
|
||||
"created_at": "2026-05-07T16:00:00Z",
|
||||
"updated_at": "2026-05-07T16:00:00Z",
|
||||
"description": "Deep file-by-file audit to identify unused methods, duplicate logic, and dead code."
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,10 @@
|
||||
# Implementation Plan: Source-Wide Redundancy Audit (source_wide_redundancy_audit_20260507)
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 1: Automated Scans
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Run automated "Unused Code" scripts (if any) or use `py_find_usages` on every public symbol.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Compare functionally similar files (e.g., `aggregate.py` and `summarize.py` helpers).
|
||||
|
||||
## Phase 2: Manual Review & Culling List
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Review `models.py` against all consumer imports to find unused fields.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Finalize the "Culling Candidate" report.
|
||||
- [ ] Task: Conductor - User Manual Verification 'Final Review' (Protocol in workflow.md)
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@
|
||||
# Specification: Source-Wide Redundancy Audit (source_wide_redundancy_audit_20260507)
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
The "Culling" phase of the curation. This track focuses on identifying everything in the codebase that doesn't need to be there. This includes dead functions, duplicate helper methods, and bloated data structures.
|
||||
|
||||
## Scope
|
||||
- **Directories:** `./src`, `./simulation`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Functional Requirements
|
||||
1. **Dead Code Identification:**
|
||||
- Find methods and classes that are never imported or called.
|
||||
2. **Logic Deduplication:**
|
||||
- Identify functionally identical blocks (e.g., path resolution logic in multiple files).
|
||||
3. **Data Bloat Audit:**
|
||||
- Find unused fields in `models.py` dataclasses.
|
||||
4. **Style Alignment Pre-check:**
|
||||
- Flag files that significantly deviate from the "1-space indent" or "composition over inheritance" rules.
|
||||
|
||||
## Acceptance Criteria
|
||||
- [ ] List of "Culling Candidates" with justifications.
|
||||
- [ ] Identification of logic that can be consolidated into shared utilities.
|
||||
- [ ] Verification of `models.py` purity.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user