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