manual_slop/conductor/directives/git_hard_bans/v1.md

git_hard_bans — v1

Why this iteration: Lifted verbatim from AGENTS.md "Critical Anti-Patterns" HARD BAN lines (59-60) + conductor/workflow.md §"Known Pitfalls" (lines 417-430). This is the baseline encoding — the imperative-bullet-with-rationale style currently in production. Future variants will test alternative encodings (tabular, before/after) against this baseline.

Source: AGENTS.md:59-60 + workflow.md:417-430

---

From AGENTS.md "Critical Anti-Patterns" HARD BAN:

• HARD BAN: git restore, git checkout -- <file>, git reset are FORBIDDEN without explicit user permission in the same message. They destroyed user in-progress src/* edits twice in one session (2026-06-07). If you think you need one, ASK FIRST.
• HARD BAN: git stash* (any form: git stash, git stash pop, git stash apply, git stash drop, git stash clear) is FORBIDDEN. Stashing inverts the safety net of the working tree: a git add . then git stash then "fresh start" pattern is exactly how Tier 2 corrupted files in the 2026-06-27 cruft_elimination_20260627 track. The user explicitly stated "I hate when people fuck with my commits" — stashing throws away the user's in-progress edits silently. If you think you need a stash, you don't — use a NEW BRANCH or a WORKTREE instead. Tier 2 sandbox enforces this via conductor/tier2/opencode.json.fragment bash deny rules.

---

From conductor/workflow.md §"Known Pitfalls (2026-06-05)" §"HARD BAN": Per AGENTS.md (Critical Anti-Patterns): These three commands are FORBIDDEN without explicit user permission in the same message. They destroyed user in-progress src/* edits twice in one session (2026-06-07). If you think you need one, ASK FIRST.

The intent of "look at what the file looked like at commit X" is non-destructive inspection. The CORRECT way:

# WRONG: overwrites the working tree
git checkout HEAD~1 -- src/foo.py

# RIGHT: prints to stdout, leaves working tree alone
git show HEAD~1:src/foo.py

git checkout -- <file> and git restore are particularly dangerous because:

• They overwrite uncommitted changes silently
• They overwrite previously-committed state in the working tree if the user has already committed and then re-edited
• The user doesn't see the loss until they notice missing changes

If you genuinely need to revert (e.g., the working tree is broken from a previous agent), use git stash first to capture the in-progress state, ASK THE USER, then proceed.