manual_slop/conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/spec_v3.md

Track Specification v3: nagent_review_20260608 — Major Update (nagent + Case Studies)

Status: Draft (pending user review) Initialized: 2026-06-19 Owner: Tier 1 Orchestrator (sole author) Priority: Medium (architectural; informs future Application + Meta-Tooling decisions) Spec pair: spec_v3.md (this file) + plan_v3.md (the implementation plan, produced by the writing-plans skill after this spec is approved) Lineage: Sits alongside the existing v2.3 spec (spec.md at eb6be32a baseline) and v1/v2/v2.1/v2.2 historical reviews in the same track directory. v2.3 is preserved as historical; v3 is the canonical going forward.

Reading note. This spec supersedes only the deliverables, not the v2.3 reasoning. The 14-pattern analysis in nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md remains the "what we knew on 2026-06-12" reference. v3 covers (a) the 24 new nagent commits on main between eb6be32a (2026-06-12) and a1f0680 (2026-06-18), and (b) the two case-study repos that didn't exist at v2.3 baseline.

---

1. Overview

This is a major version update (v3) to the existing nagent_review_20260608 track. It is not a delta-followup. It is a full rewrite that replaces the v2.3 canonical review with a v3 review covering:

1. The 24 new nagent commits on macton/nagent@main between eb6be32a (2026-06-12) and a1f0680 (2026-06-18) — a 6-day, 3×-volume update over the v1→v2 baseline that triggered the original review.
2. The two case-study repos that Acton built using nagent between v2.3 and now: macton/pep-copt (PEP image compression, 2.04× speedup, byte-identical output) and macton/differentiable-collisions-optc (Convex Primitive Collision Detection, 102× speedup). Neither existed at v2.3 baseline.

v3 covers three entirely new first-class subsystems (campaigns, conversation safety net, hooks), one new provider (Together), one delegation bug fix, eight expanded pattern areas, and two end-to-end case studies that demonstrate nagent's per-turn proof harness in production. The case studies are inseparable from the hooks feature they showcase — the hooks commit (a4fb141) is the substrate the case studies depend on.

1.1 What v3 produces (artifact table)

Artifact	Action	Purpose
nagent_review_v3_20260619.md	NEW	The v3 canonical review. ~5,500-6,500 LOC. 11 cluster sections + supporting structure (TL;DR, reading guide, lineage note, references).
comparison_table.md	REPLACE	Refreshed for v3. v2.3 content recoverable via git log -p.
decisions.md	REPLACE	Refreshed for v3. ~25-30 candidates (v2.3's 16 + v3's ~10-14 new). Top of file includes a v2.3 → v3 status mapping (PROMOTED / SUPERSEDED / STILL-OPEN / WITHDRAWN).
nagent_takeaways_v3_20260619.md	NEW	Bridge doc: v2.3 takeaways → v3 deltas + v3's new takeaways + sibling-review cross-refs (fable_review, intent_dsl_survey, superpowers_review).
nagent_takeaways_20260608.md	KEEP	Unchanged historical reference (the v2.3-era bridge doc).
spec_v3.md (this file)	NEW	The v3 spec.
plan_v3.md	NEW	The v3 plan (produced by writing-plans after this spec is approved).
metadata.json	REFRESH	v3 fields: nagent_commits_reviewed, scope, verification_criteria, deferred_to_followup_tracks. v2.3 fields preserved in git history.
state.toml	REFRESH	Update current_phase, phases, tasks, verification as v3 phases complete.
report.md + all nagent_review_v2*.md	KEEP	All v1/v2.x historical reviews preserved as-is.
conductor/tracks.md	NO CHANGE	Per the "B. Same track, v3 update" decision, v3 lives under the existing nagent_review_20260608 track.

1.2 Non-Goals

• Not rewriting Manual Slop to use nagent. The architectures serve different domains (per spec.md §2: Application vs Meta-Tooling).
• Not replacing any existing track. v3 is a refresh of the nagent review track; it informs future tracks but doesn't compete with them.
• Not a complete rewrite of v2.3's reasoning. v2.3's 14-pattern analysis stands. v3 adds, updates, and supersedes — it doesn't delete the historical analysis.
• Not a Tier 3-dispatched review. v3 is Tier 1 sole-authored (mirrors v2.3 and fable_review_20260617). No parallel cluster dispatches.
• Not a deep-dive of the Fable system prompt or the superpowers plugin. Those are sibling reviews (fable_review_20260617, superpowers_review_20260619); v3 cross-references them, doesn't replicate them.
• Not a marketing comparison. v3 is for engineers, not framework-vs-framework discourse.

---

2. Current State Audit

As of 2026-06-19. Baseline commits reviewed:

• nagent at a1f0680 (2026-06-18 23:51:28 UTC) — the latest commit on macton/nagent@main as of v3 init.
• pep-copt at main (5 commits) — the case-study repo for image compression optimization.
• differentiable-collisions-optc at main (5 commits) — the case-study repo for collision detection.

2.1 What v2.3 already covered (DO NOT re-litigate)

v2.3 (nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md, 4,969 lines) reviews nagent at eb6be32a (2026-06-12 00:25:50 UTC) and is the authoritative "what we knew on 2026-06-12" reference. It covers:

• The 14 patterns of nagent (build → rename → own → exploit → name → apply → compare), one section per pattern.
• The 8 new commits since v1 (2026-06-08 → 2026-06-12) introducing the knowledge harvest, tag parser, claude-code provider, project context, prompt caching, conversation direction, and compaction patterns.
• The harvest pipeline (§4), cache strategy (§5), compaction pattern (§6), architecture (§7), protocol (§8), file-ops (§9), candidates (§10), artifacts (§11), next-steps (§12), and references (§13).
• 16 future-track candidates in decisions.md (candidates 1-16).

v2.3 remains valid for all material at the eb6be32a baseline. v3 does NOT redo this work.

2.2 What v3 adds (gaps to fill)

24 new commits on nagent, organized into 8 internal change clusters + the 2 case-study repos + 1 cross-cutting methodology cluster:

nagent-internal changes (23 commits)

Cluster	Commits	What it adds
Campaign system (6)	24cf16d, 199a36b, f3ec090, c1d2cad, 6443d70, 7a7e242	Plans as operable artifacts + distill passes (merge / graduate) + ordered-issue filing. New .nagent/campaigns/ layout (TBD pending source-read). Renames nagent-gc to nagent-distill.
Conversation safety net (2)	38d3d4f, 6426a67	Checkpoints + rebuild + instant save (extracted summaries). New failure-recovery semantics for long-running conversations.
Hooks (1)	a4fb141	--hook-per-run + --hook-per-file-edit. The mechanism the case studies depend on for per-turn proof injection.
Project-local roots (4)	54c8741, 557dd39, 0b9d1a2, 023e23a	Default root moved into project. nagent-gc renamed to nagent-distill. Scratch files git-ignored.
Provider expansion (3)	bdfa2a6, 5075f6e, 2edc7ee	Together provider + per-model token-cap rebuilds + --list-providers. claude-code billing fix + spinner names.
Delegation rewrite (3)	d56f0f0, 65787a6, 315fe9e	"Decomposition, not offloading" + context-isolation rationale + recursion-bug fix.
Robustness (4)	065168c, 6b762da, 12c35b7, 49e07f3	Tolerate non-protocol output + collapse duplicate tags + shell-before-next ordering + per-conversation scratch dir for <nagent-write>.
Operating rules (1)	a1f0680	Sampling can justify replacing the machine (simplification-pass Q9). context/data-oriented-design.md expanded.
README regeneration (1)	afc7ab8	Full arc with campaigns + safety net. Documentation-only commit; folded into the cluster sections that introduce the new features.

Case-study repos (10 commits across 2 repos, both on main)

Repo	Commits	Subject	Key result
macton/pep-copt	5	PEP image compression: reference vs LLM-optimized	2.04× speedup aggregate (1.5–2.6× per image, 24-image benchmark). Byte-identical .pep output (size ratio 1.00× on all images).
macton/differentiable-collisions-optc	5	Convex Primitive Collision Detection: reference vs LLM-optimized (Tracy/Howell/Manchester arXiv:2207.00669)	102× speedup on the committed 1000-pair benchmark (~98–102× generally). Distance-tolerance match contract (1mm + 0.1%·

Both repos share the same 4-prompt methodology and the same proof-harness pattern. Both use the new nagent --hook-per-run ./prove-optimized-harness.sh mechanism.

Cross-cutting: the case-study methodology

A pattern emerges from comparing both repos: the 4-prompt methodology + proof harness + optimization log + committed-input sha256 freeze + "GPT-5.5" model-as-test-subject. This is itself a cluster candidate — call it Case-study methodology — that surfaces the reusable abstraction Acton is iterating on.

2.3 Gaps in v2.3 that v3 fills

Gap	Why v2.3 missed it	What v3 adds
Three first-class subsystems (campaigns, safety net, hooks)	Did not exist at eb6be32a.	New cluster sections (§1, §2, §3) in v3.
Per-model token-cap rebuilds + Together provider	v2.3 had 5 providers; nagent now has 6 (with Together) + per-model context windows.	Updated providers cluster (§5) in v3.
The delegation-recursion bug fix	v2.3 noted delegation as a pattern; the recursion bug (file-edit agent → worker → nagent-file-edit → ...) was discovered and fixed post-v2.3.	New "Delegation rewrite" cluster (§6) documenting the bug, the fix, and the rationale.
The hooks pattern (per-turn proof injection)	Did not exist at v2.3. The case studies depend on it.	New "Hooks" cluster (§3) + the case-study methodology cluster (§9) + deep-dives (§10, §11).
Operating rules: sampling justifies replacing the machine	v2.3 cited context/data-oriented-design.md as Acton's canonical rule set but did not deep-dive its evolution. The a1f0680 commit expands it with Q9.	New "Operating rules" cluster (§8).
The case-study pattern as a reusable abstraction	Did not exist (no case studies existed at v2.3).	New "Case-study methodology" cluster (§9) + deep-dives (§10, §11).

2.4 Honest gaps in v3 (the source-read pass may surface more)

The 11-cluster scheme is based on commit subjects + substantive commit messages + the case-study READMEs. It is NOT yet based on a full source-read of the new code. v3's authoring plan includes a source-read pass per cluster that may:

• Surface new clusters not visible from commit subjects (likely candidates: .nagent/ runtime state directory layout, bin/nagent-distill internals, the data-oriented-design.md expansion's downstream effects).
• Argue for merging two existing clusters (likely candidates: campaigns + safety net, which both touch failure recovery).
• Reveal that a cluster's description is wrong (e.g., the "merge/graduate" semantics may not be what they appear to be from commit subjects).

The cluster scheme is a working hypothesis that the v3 plan's Phase 1 audit pass will validate or adjust.

---

3. Goals

The goals of v3, in priority order:

1. Capture the 24-commit nagent evolution since v2.3 baseline. Surface the new patterns, the bug fixes, the new subsystems, and the new providers. Each new pattern gets source-read citations, not just commit-subject paraphrases.
2. Document the case-study pattern as a reusable abstraction. Both case-study repos share a 4-prompt methodology + proof harness + optimization log + committed-input sha256 freeze. This is itself a pattern worth deep-diving — and Manual Slop could adapt parts of it (per the candidate decisions in decisions.md).
3. Preserve v2.3's reasoning. v3 does not delete v2.3. The 14-pattern analysis stands; the 16 candidates evolve; the historical reviews stay as-is in the track directory.
4. Surface v3-specific decisions for the deferred Manual Slop rebuild. Per the user's deferred-rebuild plan (per spec.md §10 of the existing track), v3 candidates are inputs to that future rebuild. v3's decisions.md makes the new candidates explicit.
5. Cross-reference sibling reviews (fable_review_20260617, intent_dsl_survey_20260612, superpowers_review_20260619) so the user can read all four reviews as a unified corpus.

3.1 Stretch goals (if scope allows)

• A cross-track synthesis section that compares the operating rules across nagent, Fable, the project's own conductor/code_styleguides/data_oriented_design.md, and the superpowers plugin's using-superpowers skill. Likely OUT OF SCOPE for v3 (it would be its own followup); flagged here for awareness.

---

4. Functional Requirements

These are the "what v3 must produce" requirements.

4.1 The 11 cluster sections (the meat)

Each cluster gets one dedicated section in nagent_review_v3_20260619.md. Each section follows this template:

### §N. Cluster name (n commits)

**Source:** <list of commit SHAs + paths>
**One-liner:** <what this cluster adds>
**Pattern(s) vs v2.3:** <which of v2.3's 14 patterns this extends/supersedes/introduces>
**Manual Slop implications:** <what Manual Slop should consider doing>
**Decision candidate:** <the decision.md entry, or "no candidate" with rationale>
**Cross-refs:** <sibling review references, if any>
**Source-read citations:** <file:line citations for the actual code>

The 11 clusters, in canonical order:

§	Cluster	Source	Pattern vs v2.3
§1	Campaigns	nagent 24cf16d, 199a36b, f3ec090, c1d2cad, 6443d70, 7a7e242	NEW (didn't exist at v2.3)
§2	Conversation safety net	nagent 38d3d4f, 6426a67	NEW
§3	Hooks	nagent a4fb141 + both case studies	NEW (used by case studies)
§4	Project-local roots	nagent 54c8741, 557dd39, 0b9d1a2, 023e23a	NEW pattern (extends v2.3 §3 "conversations are editable state")
§5	Provider expansion	nagent bdfa2a6, 5075f6e, 2edc7ee	UPDATE (v2.3 had 5 providers; v3 has 6 + per-model context windows)
§6	Delegation rewrite	nagent d56f0f0, 65787a6, 315fe9e	UPDATE (v2.3 §9 "disposable sub-conversations" updated with recursion-bug fix + context-isolation rationale)
§7	Robustness	nagent 065168c, 6b762da, 12c35b7, 49e07f3	UPDATE (v2.3 §5 "the loop" extended with new failure modes)
§8	Operating rules	nagent a1f0680	UPDATE (v2.3 cited data-oriented-design.md; v3 deep-dives the Q9 expansion)
§9	Case-study methodology	both repos (cross-cutting)	NEW (the reusable abstraction Acton is iterating on)
§10	PEP case study	macton/pep-copt	NEW (deep-dive: 2.04× speedup, byte-identical output)
§11	Collisions case study	macton/differentiable-collisions-optc	NEW (deep-dive: 102× speedup, distance-tolerance contract)

4.2 Side artifacts (the supporting structure)

4.2.1 nagent_review_v3_20260619.md — the main review

Structure:

• Frontmatter: Title, Status, Date, Owner, Reading guide (mirrors v2.3 §0).
• §0 TL;DR: 1-2 paragraphs summarizing v3's findings. The 11 clusters + the case studies in 200-300 words.
• §1 Reading guide + lineage note: How to read v3 alongside v2.3. What changed. What's preserved.
• §2-12 The 11 clusters (one section per cluster, per the §4.1 template).
• §13 Decisions: Pointer to decisions.md.
• §14 Cross-references: Pointer to the sibling reviews + the bridge doc.
• §15 References: SHAs, URLs, file paths.

Total target: 5,500-6,500 LOC (parity with v2.3's 4,969).

4.2.2 comparison_table.md — refreshed side-by-side

Format: same as v2.3 (one row per cluster + one row per existing v2.3 pattern that v3 updates). Columns: nagent pattern | Manual Slop equivalent | Verdict (PARITY / PARTIAL / GAP / ARCH-DIFF / SUBSUMED) | Notes.

Target: 30+ rows (11 v3 clusters + 14 v2.3 patterns updated + 5 sibling-review cross-refs).

4.2.3 decisions.md — refreshed candidate list

Structure:

• Top section: v2.3 → v3 status mapping. For each of v2.3's 16 candidates, mark: PROMOTE / SUPERSEDE / STILL-OPEN / WITHDRAW. Rationale for each.
• New candidates from v3 clusters. ~10-14 new candidates from the new material. Each follows the v2.3 candidate template (Goal / Context / File:line citations / Cross-refs).
• Priority. HIGH / MEDIUM / LOW per candidate.

Target: 25-30 entries total.

4.2.4 nagent_takeaways_v3_20260619.md — the bridge doc

Structure (mirrors superpowers_review_20260619/spec.md §3.5):

1. TL;DR (1 paragraph): what v3 takeaways add over v2.3 takeaways.
2. Cross-reference table (~10-15 rows): one row per v3 takeaway that touches a v2.3 candidate. Columns: v3 takeaway | v2.3 candidate | relationship (subsumes / extends / contradicts / independent).
3. The new v3 candidates not in v2.3 (the ~10-14 from decisions.md): one paragraph each, with verdict evidence.
4. The v2.3 candidates v3 supersedes (likely 2-5): one paragraph each, with rationale.
5. Sibling-review pointers: fable_review, intent_dsl_survey, superpowers_review.

Target: ~150 LOC.

4.3 Cross-references (sibling reviews)

v3's nagent_takeaways_v3_20260619.md cross-references:

Sibling	Reference point in v3
fable_review_20260617	Inline §8 (operating rules) + the bridge doc.
intent_dsl_survey_20260612	Inline §9 (case-study methodology) + the bridge doc.
superpowers_review_20260619	Inline §9 (case-study methodology, process parallel) + the bridge doc.

Per the superpowers_review spec §3 template, each cluster section that touches a sibling ends with a Cross-refs: line citing the relevant section.

---

5. Non-Functional Requirements

These are the "what shape v3 must take" requirements.

5.1 Format commitment (5 commitments)

v3 reaffirms v2.3's 4 commitments and adds 1 new:

#	Commitment	Source
1	7-column tables: Symbol | Name | Signature | Semantics | Example | Borrowed from | Shape	v2.3 §4.4
2	No JSON code blocks (JSON → tables)	v2.3 §4.4
3	SSDL shape tags ({ssdl} markers)	v2.3 §4.4
4	Survey grammar primitives in code examples (name := value, for x .. n, if cond { ... }, tape { ... }, try { ... } recover { ... }, sandbox { ... }, audit msg, fuzzy { ... })	v2.3 §4.4
5	NEW: Source-read citation discipline — every cluster section cites ≥3 source paths (commit SHA + path:line, OR prompts/*.md line range, OR bin/*.py line range). No claim is grounded in commit subjects alone.	v2.1 preamble, hardened for v3

5.2 Authoring tier + discipline

• Tier: Tier 1 Orchestrator sole-authored (no Tier 3 dispatch).
• Per-cluster authoring shape: 5-step pass — (1) source read of the cluster's commits + any referenced files, (2) pattern identification vs. v2.3's 14 patterns, (3) Manual Slop implications, (4) candidate entry into decisions.md, (5) cross-references to sibling reviews where applicable.
• Phase structure: 14 phases (per §3 of the v3 plan, produced by writing-plans after this spec is approved).
• Commits: one commit per cluster phase. Atomic rollback per cluster. Git notes attached to each. Per-task commit SHAs recorded in state.toml.

5.3 Filename convention

• Spec: conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/spec_v3.md (this file).
• Plan: conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/plan_v3.md (produced by writing-plans).
• Main review: conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/nagent_review_v3_20260619.md.
• Bridge doc: conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/nagent_takeaways_v3_20260619.md.
• comparison_table.md + decisions.md: refreshed in place (no version-suffix).
• Date convention: 20260619 (the day the source state was captured, matching v2.3's 20260612 filename pattern). Open question for user review: is 20260619 the right date, or should v3 use today's date (20260620)?

5.4 Track-state hygiene

• metadata.json refreshed in place (v3 fields).
• state.toml updated as phases complete (one entry per phase).
• conductor/tracks.md NOT modified (per the "B. Same track" decision).
• Git notes attached to every phase commit.

---

6. Architecture Reference

6.1 Existing project docs v3 depends on

• conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/spec.md — the v2.3 spec. The "what we knew on 2026-06-08" reference.
• conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md — the v2.3 canonical review.
• conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/comparison_table.md — the v2.3 comparison table (will be REPLACED).
• conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/decisions.md — the v2.3 candidates (will be REPLACED).
• conductor/tracks/nagent_review_20260608/nagent_takeaways_20260608.md — the v2.3-era bridge doc (KEEP, unchanged).
• conductor/code_styleguides/data_oriented_design.md — the project's canonical DOD reference, itself derived from Acton's context/data-oriented-design.md. v3's §8 (Operating rules) cluster ties back to this.
• conductor/code_styleguides/cache_friendly_context.md — references nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md §3.2 + §5. v3 updates the references if §3/§5 change in v3.
• conductor/code_styleguides/knowledge_artifacts.md — references nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md §3.1 + §4. v3 updates the references.
• conductor/code_styleguides/agent_memory_dimensions.md — references nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md §2.8. v3 updates the references.
• docs/guide_meta_boundary.md — the Application vs Meta-Tooling distinction. Load-bearing context for v3 (mirrors v2.3 §2).
• conductor/workflow.md — the workflow conventions v3 follows (TDD, per-task commits, format commitments).
• conductor/product-guidelines.md — the project styleguides v3 follows (1-space indent for Python; markdown is not subject to this rule).

6.2 Sibling reviews v3 cross-references

• conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/ — the Fable system prompt review. v3's §8 (Operating rules) cross-refs Fable's analysis of the Mythos system prompt.
• conductor/tracks/intent_dsl_survey_20260612/ — the intent-DSL survey. v3's §9 (Case-study methodology) cross-refs the survey's clusters.
• conductor/tracks/superpowers_review_20260619/ — the superpowers plugin review (in plan phase as of 2026-06-19). v3's §9 cross-refs the superpowers brainstorming skill as a process parallel.

6.3 External sources v3 reviews

• macton/nagent at commit a1f0680 (2026-06-18 23:51:28 UTC) — https://github.com/macton/nagent
• macton/nagent at commit eb6be32a (2026-06-12 00:25:50 UTC) — the v2.3 baseline.
• macton/pep-copt at main (5 commits) — https://github.com/macton/pep-copt
• macton/differentiable-collisions-optc at main (5 commits) — https://github.com/macton/differentiable-collisions-optc

---

7. Verification Criteria

These are the "definition of done" for v3. The metadata.json verification_criteria field will contain:

1. Coverage. All 11 clusters present in nagent_review_v3_20260619.md, each as a dedicated section (no merge, no drop). Verified by table-of-contents check.
2. Source-read citations. Every cluster section cites ≥3 source paths (commit SHA + path:line, OR prompts/*.md line range, OR bin/*.py line range). No claim is grounded in commit subjects alone. Verified by grep for the citation pattern.
3. Case-study evidence. Clusters 9, 10, 11 cite the actual prompts/create-*.md, OPTIMIZATION-LOG.md, and prove-optimized-harness.sh content (not paraphrases of the READMEs). Verified by content-presence check.
4. Format commitment. All 5 commitments verified by grep:
   • No JSON blocks in main review (```json absent in nagent_review_v3_20260619.md).
   • 7-column tables present in comparison_table.md (a row beginning with | Symbol | is found).
   • SSDL shape tags present ({ssdl} markers appear in code examples).
   • Survey grammar used in code examples (at least one of: name := value, for x .. n, tape { ... }, try { ... } recover { ... }, sandbox { ... }, audit msg, fuzzy { ... }).
   • Source-read citations present (per cluster, at least 3 of: a 7+-char commit SHA reference, a path/to/file.py:L[0-9]+ reference, a prompts/[a-z_-]+.md reference, a bin/[a-z_-]+ reference, or an OPTIMIZATION-LOG / harness script reference).
5. decisions.md candidates. ~25-30 entries (v2.3's 16 + v3's new ~10-14). Top of file includes v2.3 → v3 status mapping. Verified by line count + manual inspection of the status mapping.
6. nagent_takeaways_v3 bridge. 5-part structure present: TL;DR + cross-reference table + new v3 takeaways + v2.3-superseded + sibling-review pointer. Verified by section-heading check.
7. Track artifacts. spec_v3.md (this file) + plan_v3.md (produced by writing-plans) committed; metadata.json refreshed; state.toml updated as phases complete; conductor/tracks.md not modified.
8. Commits. One commit per cluster phase; git notes attached per task; per-task commit SHAs recorded in state.toml.

A v3 verification_criteria_audit.sh script (added to scripts/ if v3 surfaces a need; otherwise inline grep checks) will enforce #4 mechanically. The other 7 are verified manually by reading.

---

8. Out of Scope

v3 explicitly does NOT do the following (each is a potential followup track):

• Implement the candidates. decisions.md lists candidates; the user's deferred Manual Slop rebuild consumes them. v3 is research-only.
• Replace v2.3. v2.3 stands as historical. v3 supersedes it for the canonical going forward but does not delete it.
• Deep-dive the Fable system prompt. That's fable_review_20260617. v3 cross-refs it.
• Review the superpowers plugin. That's superpowers_review_20260619. v3 cross-refs it.
• Survey intent-based DSLs. That's intent_dsl_survey_20260612. v3 cross-refs it.
• Synthesize across the four review corpora. A potential future track (cross-review synthesis). v3 sets up the cross-refs but does not do the synthesis.
• Commit any of the case-study prompts/*.md files to this repo. The case-study repos are external; their content is referenced by URL, not committed locally.
• Modify any project source code (src/*.py, tests/*.py, conductor/*.md, .opencode/*, AGENTS.md). v3 is research-only.
• Tier 3 dispatch. Tier 1 sole-authored, mirroring v2.3 and fable_review_20260617.

---

9. See Also

9.1 In this track directory

• spec.md — the v2.3 spec. The "what we knew on 2026-06-08" reference. v3 sits alongside it.
• plan.md — the v2.3 plan. v3's plan (plan_v3.md) sits alongside it.
• nagent_review_v2_3_20260612.md — the v2.3 canonical review. v3 supersedes it.
• nagent_review_v2_20260612.md — the v2 review.
• nagent_review_v2_1_20260612.md — the v2.1 delta (user-revised).
• nagent_review_v2_2_20260612.md — the v2.2 delta (Tier 1-synthesized).
• report.md — the original v1 review.
• comparison_table.md — will be REPLACED by v3 content.
• decisions.md — will be REPLACED by v3 content.
• nagent_takeaways_20260608.md — the v2.3-era bridge doc. KEEP unchanged.

9.2 Sibling reviews (cross-referenced in v3)

• conductor/tracks/fable_review_20260617/ — the Fable system prompt review.
• conductor/tracks/intent_dsl_survey_20260612/ — the intent-based DSL survey.
• conductor/tracks/superpowers_review_20260619/ — the superpowers plugin review.

9.3 External sources

• macton/nagent at commit a1f0680 (2026-06-18) — the v3 review baseline.
• macton/pep-copt at main — the PEP image compression case study.
• macton/differentiable-collisions-optc at main — the collision detection case study.

9.4 Project docs

• conductor/workflow.md — the workflow conventions v3 follows.
• conductor/product-guidelines.md — the project styleguides v3 follows.
• conductor/code_styleguides/data_oriented_design.md — the project's canonical DOD reference, itself derived from Acton's context/data-oriented-design.md.
• docs/guide_meta_boundary.md — the Application vs Meta-Tooling distinction (load-bearing context for the verdict structure).