From 06233e856a510b8d9247882ae708810c27828e7e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: kjgbot Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 05:31:24 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] drive: cloud run 02bad4d4 Work produced by cloud run 02bad4d4-2970-43fa-8b13-7ef3add56cd8 in a workflow sandbox and delivered from this host, because a sandbox has no remote and no GitHub token. Verification and adversarial review ran in-run; see ops/reviews/ in the diff. --- ops/NEEDS_HUMAN.md | 139 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-) diff --git a/ops/NEEDS_HUMAN.md b/ops/NEEDS_HUMAN.md index 8bfae4c96..37c5605ba 100644 --- a/ops/NEEDS_HUMAN.md +++ b/ops/NEEDS_HUMAN.md @@ -1,83 +1,120 @@ -# NEEDS_HUMAN — Conflicting Work Package Context +# NEEDS_HUMAN — TARGET.md Scope Mismatch with RFC and STATE -**Situation:** This run has conflicting scope context that requires human clarification. +**Situation:** ops/TARGET.md exists but describes work already completed and mislabels it as gate 3 when RFC defines it as gate 2. -## The Conflict +## The Evidence -1. **ops/TARGET.md says:** Gate 3, build hn-monitor runner (sub-PR A), `sdk/src/` code task -2. **ops/NEXT.md says:** Gate 3, cloud review-swarm preflight validation, `.github/workflows/` task -3. **These are completely different tasks** — one is SDK code (track A per TARGET), one is GitHub Actions (track D per NEXT) - -## Evidence - -**ops/TARGET.md line 1-5:** +**ops/TARGET.md line 1-6:** ``` # TARGET — gate 3 This run is pinned to **gate 3** and must not work on any other gate. -**Scope:** Build sub-PR A of the Gate 2 push: a real `hn-monitor` polling runner in the SDK. CODE task, `sdk/src/`-side. +**Scope:** Build sub-PR A of the Gate 2 push: a real `hn-monitor` polling runner in the SDK. ``` -**ops/NEXT.md line 1-3:** +Notice: TARGET.md says "gate 3" in the header but "Gate 2 push" in the scope description. + +**ops/STATE.md lines 45-47:** +``` + - PR #120 (`201542a`, merged 2026-09-01 08:29 UTC) — + **`flows hn-monitor start`**, the CLI runner that turns the poller + into an unattended process. ``` -# NEXT — gate 3: complete cloud review-swarm preflight validation and documentation -**Scope:** Track D: Cloud review-swarm redesign — build `.github/workflows/review-swarm.yml` correctly this time +**RFC-0001 §3 Gate 2 done-when:** +> `hn-monitor` (or `linear`) runs as a relayflow in production — triggered by its real events, with **zero bespoke persistence functions** + +**RFC-0001 §3 Gate 3 done-when:** +> a labeled issue flows to a reviewed PR end-to-end with every claim/lease/retry served by the kernel... **Software Garden** + +## What Actually Exists + +The hn-monitor runner TARGET.md describes: +- **Merged in PR #120** per ops/STATE.md (2026-09-01) +- Lives at `packages/sdk/src/cli/hn-monitor.ts` +- Implements a `runHnMonitor()` function (not `HnMonitorRunner` class) +- Addresses all five findings from closed PR #83 +- Is gate 2 territory per RFC-0001 §3 + +Verification: ``` +ls packages/sdk/src/cli/hn-monitor.ts +# exists, 288 lines + +grep -c "export async function runHnMonitor" packages/sdk/src/cli/hn-monitor.ts +# Output: 1 -## The Charter Says +grep -r "class HnMonitorRunner" packages/sdk/src/ +# Output: (none) +``` -Per charter/LEAD.md (the instruction I received): -- "Read ops/TARGET.md if it exists" — it does, says hn-monitor -- "Then read ops/STATE.md, ops/DIRECTIVES.md" — done -- "Then write ops/NEXT.md: the SINGLE highest-priority work package toward the current gate" +## The Contradiction -But ops/NEXT.md ALREADY EXISTS with different work. +1. **TARGET.md line 1** says this run is pinned to gate 3 +2. **TARGET.md line 5** describes work from "the Gate 2 push" +3. **RFC-0001 §3** defines gate 3 as Software Garden (factory migration), not hn-monitor +4. **RFC-0001 §3** defines gate 2 as hn-monitor running as a proactive agent +5. **ops/STATE.md** says the work described in TARGET.md was already merged (PR #120) +6. **TARGET.md lines 7-22** reference closed PR #83 and its five findings, but the actual merged code addressed those findings differently -## Additional Context Found +## Why This Is Blocking -**ops/STATE.md gate 2 block (lines 39-81)** says: -- PR #120 merged 2026-09-01 — `flows hn-monitor start` CLI runner -- Gate 2 is AMBER, not GREEN -- Two clauses remain: trigger-plane liveness, analyze-agent execution +The charter says: +> "It is the operator's scoping decision and it overrides your own judgement about priority — several runs execute in parallel, each pinned to a different gate, and a run that wanders outside its target will collide with a sibling." -**Actual file check:** -- `packages/sdk/src/cli/hn-monitor.ts` exists (288 lines) -- Contains `runHnMonitor` function implementing all TARGET.md requirements -- Addresses all five findings from closed PR #83 +But I cannot determine the operator's intent when: +- The header says "gate 3" +- The scope paragraph says "Gate 2 push" +- RFC defines those gates as completely different things +- STATE.md says the described work is done ## The Question -**Which work package should this run execute?** +**What should this run assess as the next work package?** -**Option A: ops/TARGET.md wins (hn-monitor, sdk/ territory)** -- Overwrite ops/NEXT.md with hn-monitor work package -- But the code already exists (PR #120 merged per STATE.md) -- Task would be verification/testing, not building from scratch +**Option A: Ignore TARGET.md header, follow the content** +- TARGET.md content describes gate 2 hn-monitor work +- But that work is merged (PR #120 per STATE.md) +- Write work package: verify/test the merged implementation? +- Risk: collides with a gate-2-pinned sibling run -**Option B: ops/NEXT.md wins (review-swarm, .github/ territory)** -- Ignore ops/TARGET.md -- Execute the review-swarm validation work -- But TARGET.md explicitly pins this run to gate 3 hn-monitor work +**Option B: Follow TARGET.md header (gate 3)** +- Read RFC-0001 §3 gate 3 definition (Software Garden) +- Write work package toward factory migration +- Ignore the hn-monitor content in TARGET.md as stale +- Risk: if another run is gate-3-pinned, collision -**Option C: TARGET.md is stale** -- The launcher wrote an outdated TARGET.md referencing closed PR #83 -- Real work is in ops/NEXT.md (review-swarm) -- Proceed with review-swarm, update TARGET understanding +**Option C: Treat TARGET.md as stale/corrupt** +- Read ops/STATE.md to determine actual gate state +- Gate 1: GREEN (per STATE.md line 15-25) +- Gate 2: AMBER (per STATE.md line 39-81) +- Write work package to close gate 2 AMBER → GREEN +- Risk: if launcher intended gate 3, violates charter -**Option D: Both are stale** -- Neither accurately reflects current gate 3 needs -- Assessor should read RFC-0001 §3 gate 3 definition -- Write fresh work package from RFC requirements +**Option D: Read ops/NEXT.md as ground truth** +- ops/NEXT.md says gate 3 review-swarm documentation +- Execute that work package +- Risk: NEXT.md may itself be stale from prior run ## Recommendation -**Option C** — ops/TARGET.md appears stale (references closed PR #83 from earlier attempts, describes code that PR #120 already merged). The active work package is ops/NEXT.md (review-swarm). But I need human confirmation before overwriting NEXT.md or executing potentially wrong work. +**Option C with documented reasoning:** ops/STATE.md is explicitly "ground truth for an assessor with no git history" (line 1-9). Gate 2 is AMBER with two open clauses: +1. Trigger plane liveness-checked (not implemented) +2. Analyze-agent step actually executing (worker_error in recorded run) + +These are the highest-priority gate-2 blockers per RFC covenant 2 and the done-when clause. + +But I need human confirmation because: +- TARGET.md EXISTS (not absent, which would be normal per charter) +- TARGET.md contradicts itself (header vs content) +- Charter says TARGET scope "overrides your own judgement" ## What I Need -**Clear answer:** Which work package is correct for this run? -- If hn-monitor: shall I overwrite the review-swarm NEXT.md, or is there a different file I should write? -- If review-swarm: shall I proceed with ops/NEXT.md as-is and ignore TARGET.md? -- If neither: what is the actual gate 3 work I should assess? +**Clear directive:** +- Should I follow TARGET.md header (gate 3) or content (gate 2)? +- Or should I follow ops/STATE.md gate priorities (close gate 2 AMBER)? +- Or should I execute ops/NEXT.md as-is (review-swarm docs)? + +Without clarity, any choice risks violating the charter's parallel-run safety rule.