Per user feedback 2026-06-17:
- T-shirt size is not an acceptable sizing metric. Remove it from
conductor/workflow.md (the policy file), conductor/tracks.md (the
registry), and docs/reports/NEGATIVE_FLOWS_INVESTIGATION_20260617.md.
- Regenerate manualslop_layout.ini to remove 83 stale window references
that pointed to deleted/renamed windows (Projects, Files, Screenshots,
Provider, System Prompts, Discussion History, Comms History, etc.).
Layout now matches the windows registered in src/app_controller.py
_default_windows (lines 1862-1886). Stale window count: 10 -> 3.
T-shirt size removal details:
- conductor/workflow.md: Removed the S/M/L/XL table, the replacement
pattern row, and the 'reasonable effort' guard's reference. Scope
(N files, M sites, N tasks) is the only effort dimension.
- conductor/tracks.md: Removed the T-shirt column from the table header
and removed T-shirt size mentions from the Fable track entry.
- docs/reports/NEGATIVE_FLOWS_INVESTIGATION_20260617.md: Removed the
T-shirt size mention in the follow-up track suggestion.
Layout fix:
- manualslop_layout.ini went from 17,360 bytes (102 windows, 83 stale)
to 3,361 bytes (23 windows, all matching _default_windows). The
stale window warning dropped from 10 windows to 3 (Message, Tool
Calls, Response - these are in _default_windows but reference
separate panels in the layout).
Verification: layout fix did NOT fix the underlying stack overflow crash.
After layout fix, the test still dies with rc=3221225725 (0xC00000FD).
The user noted 'Something more fundamental is wrong.' Investigation
continues; this commit only addresses the explicit ask (remove T-shirt,
fix layout).
User feedback from the first sandbox run (send_result_to_send_20260616,
2026-06-17) identified 6 conventions Tier 2 must follow. Update the agent
prompt template, slash command template, user guide, and workflow doc:
1. Test runner: ALWAYS use 'uv run python scripts/run_tests_batched.py'
(NOT 'uv run pytest'). The batched runner provides tier filtering,
parallelization (xdist), and a summary table that direct pytest lacks.
2. Default branch: this repo uses 'master', not 'main'. The Tier 2 slash
command now does 'git fetch origin master' (was 'origin main').
3. Line endings: preserve existing. This repo has a mix of CRLF and LF;
a repo-wide LF standardization is a future track.
4. Throw-away scripts: write to 'scripts/tier2/artifacts/<track>/', NOT
the base 'scripts/tier2/' directory. The base is reserved for
production code; throw-away scripts are kept for archival but
isolated per-track.
5. End-of-track report: write 'docs/reports/TRACK_COMPLETION_<track>.md'
and update 'state.toml' to 'status=completed'. The user reads this
to decide merge. Previously this was implicit; now it's explicit.
6. Run-time expectation: tracks are 1-4 hours. If context runs out, Tier
2 notes progress to disk and continues. The --resume flag picks up
from the last completed task.
Also updated the user guide with a 'Conventions' section and a
troubleshooting entry for the resume flow. The verify-the-sandbox
checklist now uses 'origin master' instead of 'origin main'.
Per user request 'use your remaining context to update agent workflow
docs and then regular docs based on what was discussed in this report',
this commit creates/updates 15 files derived from the v2.3 nagent
review (the 12 new nagent additions + the 4 memory dimensions
reframing + the cache strategy + the RAG discipline + the knowledge
harvest pattern).
Agent workflow docs (4 files):
- AGENTS.md (UPDATE): add @import line to canonical DOD + 'Code
Styleguides' section pointing to the 6 new styleguides + new
'Human-Facing Documentation' section pointing to ./docs/AGENTS.md
- conductor/workflow.md (UPDATE): new section 'Additions (2026-06-12)
- the 12 patterns from the latest nagent corpus' with TDD
protocols for knowledge harvest, cache ordering, compaction, RAG
discipline
- conductor/product-guidelines.md (UPDATE): new sections 'Memory
Dimensions (added 2026-06-12)' + 'See Also - Updated' with the
6-styleguide catalog
- docs/AGENTS.md (NEW): the agent-facing mirror of docs/Readme.md
(per the nagent CLAUDE.md pattern). 10 sections + the per-tier
reading path + the 4 memory dimensions + the caching strategy +
the knowledge harvest + the RAG discipline + the feature flags
Regular docs (11 files):
- 6 new styleguides (the convention catalog):
* data_oriented_design.md: the canonical DOD reference (Tier
0/1/2; 3 defaults to reject; 8 core defaults; 7-question
simplification pass; 10-question self-check; 4 memory
dimensions in Manual Slop context)
* agent_memory_dimensions.md: the 4 memory dims (curation /
discussion / RAG / knowledge) + when to use each + the
boundaries
* rag_integration_discipline.md: the conservative-RAG rule
(opt-in, complement, provenance, no mutation, feature-gated,
graceful failure)
* cache_friendly_context.md: stable-to-volatile context
ordering + the cache TTL GUI contract + the byte-comparison
test
* knowledge_artifacts.md: the knowledge harvest pattern
(category files, provenance, sha256 ledger, digest
regeneration, 'delete to turn off')
* feature_flags.md: file presence vs config flags vs CLI flags
- 3 new project docs (the cross-cutting guides):
* guide_agent_memory_dimensions.md: the cross-cutting guide on
the 4 dims + the decision tree
* guide_caching_strategy.md: caching across providers +
stable-to-volatile ordering + cache TTL GUI + the byte-
comparison test + the 5th provider (claude-code)
* guide_knowledge_curation.md: the knowledge memory guide (4th
dim) + the 5 category files + per-file notes + the digest +
the ledger + the harvest workflow
- 2 existing doc updates:
* guide_mma.md: new sections 'Delegation as context management'
+ 'The 4 memory dimensions (the MMA scope)'
* guide_ai_client.md: new section 'Cache strategy and the 12-
layer model' + the 5th provider (claude-code)
All files use the same style as the v2.3 review (the user's preferred
format): 7-column tables, no JSON, SSDL shape tags, forth/array
notation, file:line citations, ASCII sketches where useful. The
human Readme files (Readme.md, docs/Readme.md) are NOT modified
(per repeated user instruction).
The 5th provider (claude-code) is documented in guide_ai_client.md
+ the data_oriented_design.md references the nagent pattern as the
source of the canonical rules.
The cross-references are bidirectional: the 6 styleguides reference
the 3 project docs; the 3 project docs reference the 6 styleguides;
the 2 doc updates reference both; AGENTS.md + ./docs/AGENTS.md
provide the entry points.
The user called out the LLM training data bias: 'small files are
good, large files are bad.' This is wrong for production codebases.
Unreal has 15K+ line files; OS kernels, game engines, compilers all
routinely have 10K+ line files. File size is a non-issue. Cognitive
load is managed via naming, regions, and navigation tools (the
manual-slop MCP) — NOT via file splitting.
Updates:
1. AGENTS.md (master agent guidance):
- Added 'File Size and Naming Convention' section
- Added the hard rule: 'New namespaced src/<thing>.py files may
only be created on the user's explicit request. If you find
yourself about to create one, ASK FIRST.'
- Defaults: helpers and sub-systems go in the parent module
2. conductor/workflow.md (Guiding Principles):
- Removed 'Do NOT perform large file writes directamente' from
principle 7 (it was a delegating rule, but 'large file writes'
carried the propaganda)
- Added principle 8: 'File Naming Convention (HARD RULE)' that
references AGENTS.md
- Re-phrased principle 9 (Research-First) to clarify it's about
navigation efficiency, not file size
3. conductor/code_styleguides/python.md:
- Removed the 'extremely large files that violate the Anti-OOP
rule by necessity' framing
- Added the new rule about new src/<thing>.py files
4. .opencode/agents/tier3-worker.md and .opencode/agents/tier4-qa.md:
- Re-phrased 'Do NOT read full large files' to 'Use skeleton
tools to navigate any file regardless of size. File size is
not a concern; the right tools are.'
- Added the new rule about not creating new src/<thing>.py
files unless user explicitly requests it
5. conductor/tracks/qwen_llama_grok_followup_20260611/plan.md:
- Updated the 'Naming Convention' section to reference the new
'user explicit request' rule
This is docs-only. No code changes. The rule is now codified:
agents must ASK FIRST before creating new top-level src/ files.
Known Pitfalls (new subsection):
- HARD BAN: git checkout -- <file>, git restore, git reset
(per AGENTS.md Critical Anti-Patterns; destroyed user in-progress
edits twice on 2026-06-07; concrete 2026-06-10 incident:
mma_tier_usage_reset_fix regression)
Live_gui Test Fragility (2 new subsections):
- Anti-pattern: push_event + time.sleep(N) + assert is a race.
Fix: poll-until-state-visible with bounded retries. 5+ tests
affected in 2026-06-10 batch-green wave.
- Async setters need poll-for-state. mma_state_update and rag_*
setters dispatch to _pending_gui_tasks queue; the setter returns
before the GUI render loop processes the task. Assert immediately
= race. Fix: poll via get_value with bounded retry.
Two additions to conductor/workflow.md §"Known Pitfalls":
1. **Isolated-Pass Verification Fallacy (Added 2026-06-09)** —
the rule that a test passing in isolation but failing in
batch is FAILING. The only verification that matters for
live_gui tests is the batch run. This is the flip side of
the existing "Live_gui Test Fragility (Authoring-Side)"
rule. Cross-references that rule.
2. **Process Anti-Patterns (Added 2026-06-09)** — 8-rule
summary list, with cross-reference to AGENTS.md for the
full ruleset. The 8 patterns are: Deduction Loop,
Report-Instead-of-Fix, Scope-Creep Track-Doc,
Inherited-Cruft, Diagnostic Noise in Production, Premature
Surrender, Verbose Commit Message, Isolated-Pass
Verification Fallacy.
Markdown only. No code modified. Cross-references
AGENTS.md (the load-bearing agent doc) for the full text
of each pattern.
Per 2026-06-07 user feedback during test_suite cleanup:
"if the intent is to annotate a known failure, fine. But that
known failure must be addressed with priority."
New section between "Per-Task Decision Protocol" and
"Documentation Refresh Protocol" makes the policy explicit:
- Skip markers are DOCUMENTATION, not avoidance
- They're useful for opt-in integration tests, unimplemented
features, or feature-flag-gated code
- They're NOT useful for pre-existing failures, "I don't
understand this" issues, or racy tests the agent doesn't want
to debug
- When adding a marker, MUST document the underlying issue AND
what the fix would be
- When the fix is in-session reachable, FIX IT INSTEAD of
skipping — limited context is not an excuse
Includes a 4-question review checklist before adding a skip.
References the existing AGENTS.md "Use skip markers as excuse to
AVOID" rule so the two policies don't drift.
All additive; no breaking changes to existing content. Derived from gaps
observed during the 2026-06-06 planning session (5 tracks spec'd +
planned end-to-end).
**AGENTS.md (1 new section, 16 lines):**
- Compaction Recovery - explicit recovery path for a new agent
picking up mid-track (read the digest, check state.toml, run audits,
resume from next unchecked task). Cross-references the
workflow-level 'Compaction Recovery' section.
**conductor/workflow.md (6 new sections, 145 lines):**
- Planning Session Workflow - documents the brainstorming -> spec ->
plan flow used 5x this session; mandates spec approval before plan;
notes the plan is the only artifact the implementer reads.
- Track Dependencies and Execution Order - verify the blocked_by
chain in metadata.json before starting; topological sort gives the
recommended execution order (recorded in PLANNING_DIGEST).
- State.toml Template - canonical structure (meta / blocked_by /
blocks / phases / tasks / verification / track-specific) so future
tracks have a consistent shape.
- Per-Task Decision Protocol - small decisions (cosmetic) decide
yourself; large decisions (architectural) STOP and report; regressions
STOP and report. The boundary is 'does this require a new spec or
plan update?'.
- Documentation Refresh Protocol - after a track ships, identify
affected guides (grep for renamed/moved symbols), update them, add
new guides for new modules, add styleguides for new conventions.
The 'post-tracks documentation' pattern is repeatable; tracks that
only update code are incomplete.
- Audit Script Policy - whenever a track introduces a new convention
that can be statically checked, add an audit script in scripts/
with --help / --json / strict modes. The audit + CI gate pair is
the convention-enforcement mechanism; 3 existing audits
(audit_main_thread_imports, audit_weak_types, check_test_toml_paths)
are the precedent.
All sections reference existing project files (brainstorming skill,
writing-plans skill, audit scripts, tracks.md, the existing 5 new
tracks' spec.md files, PLANNING_DIGEST_20260606.md).
No code changes. Documentation only. ~160 lines total added.
mma_exec.py changes:
- get_role_documents: Tier 1 now gets docs/guide_architecture.md + guide_mma.md
(was: only product.md). Tier 2 gets same (was: only tech-stack + workflow).
Tier 3 gets guide_architecture.md (was: only workflow.md — workers modifying
gui_2.py had zero knowledge of threading model). Tier 4 gets guide_architecture.md
(was: nothing).
- Tier 3 system directive: Added ARCHITECTURE REFERENCE callout, CRITICAL
THREADING RULE (never write GUI state from background thread), TASK FORMAT
instruction (follow WHERE/WHAT/HOW/SAFETY from surgical tasks), and
py_get_definition to tool list.
- Tier 4 system directive: Added ARCHITECTURE REFERENCE callout and instruction
to trace errors through thread domains documented in guide_architecture.md.
conductor/workflow.md changes:
- Red Phase delegation prompt: Replaced 'with a prompt to create tests' with
surgical prompt format example showing WHERE/WHAT/HOW/SAFETY.
- Green Phase delegation prompt: Replaced 'with a highly specific prompt' with
surgical prompt format example with exact line refs and API calls.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Rewrites comprehensive_gui_ux_20260228 spec and plan using deep analysis of
the actual gui_2.py implementation (3078 lines). The previous spec asked to
implement features that already exist (Track Browser, DAG tree, epic planning,
approval dialogs, token table, performance monitor). The new spec:
- Documents 15 already-implemented features with exact line references
- Identifies 8 actual gaps (tier stream panels, DAG editing, cost tracking,
conductor lifecycle forms, track-scoped discussions, approval indicators,
track proposal editing, stream scrollability)
- Rewrites all 5 phases with surgical task descriptions referencing exact
gui_2.py line ranges, function names, and data structures
- Each task specifies the precise imgui API calls to use
- References docs/guide_architecture.md for threading constraints
- References docs/guide_mma.md for Ticket/Track data structures
Also adds architecture documentation fallback references to:
- conductor/workflow.md (new principle #9)
- conductor/product.md (new Architecture Reference section)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
ed
conductor-tier2