Repository navigation
afx spawn --resume with a live builder-start.sh lineage creates duplicate live agents in one worktree #1322
Description
Incident (production workspace, 2026-08-01)
A wedged builder's claude PID was killed by the operator — the natural recovery move. Its parent .builder-start.sh loop (by design, for crash recovery) auto-respawned a fresh claude with the original spawn prompt, on the ORIGINAL terminal, unregistered with Tower. The operator's afx spawn <id> --resume then started a second, registered session. Both agents implemented the same plan phase simultaneously in one worktree until the registered one noticed foreign files appearing, reverted its own edits, and escalated. Resolution required a parent-first manual kill of the ghost lineage.
Two layers
- The respawn loop is intentional (crash recovery; Regression (3.2.4): double Ctrl-C on an agent no longer restarts it fresh — classified as deliberate quit #1264/[Bugfix #1267] Builder clean-exit relaunch reruns fresh instead of resuming the ended conversation #1317 refined its semantics: crash → resume-then-fresh, clean exit → fresh). But it converts "kill the wedged claude PID" into a ghost-session factory: the loop cannot distinguish an operator's deliberate kill from a crash. The sanctioned wedge recoveries are
afx interrupt(ESC into the turn) andafx reset(save → clear → re-orient), which exist precisely so operators never signal PIDs directly — but nothing tells an operator that at the moment it matters. afx spawn --resumeperforms no liveness preflight: it consults registry state, not process reality, so it happily spawns into a worktree that already has a live (orphaned) lineage.
Asks
- Preflight on
--resume(and plain respawn): scan for live processes whose command line references.builders/<id>/.builder-start.sh(and/or a live shellper bound to that worktree). If found: refuse, name the PIDs, and print the recipe —afx interrupt <id>/afx reset <id>for a wedge, or parent-first kill for a true orphan.--forceoverrides with eyes open. - Make the loop operator-legible: when the child exits by signal, the relaunch banner should say what just happened and how to stop it ("child killed; relaunching per crash policy — to stop this loop, kill THIS script's PID first, or use afx interrupt/reset").
- Cross-link Terminal-session leak: builder respawns accumulate untracked shellper sessions that cleanup and the Builders view never see #1296 (session accumulation) — same family, worse consequence: this is the live-collision case rather than the zombie case, and Terminal-session leak: builder respawns accumulate untracked shellper sessions that cleanup and the Builders view never see #1296's reuse-or-reap principle covers both.
Credit
Reported by a production workspace architect with full PID/timestamp forensics; their builder's collision behavior (detect foreign edits → revert own → escalate) is the model response and worth encoding in builder guidance.
Activity
waleedkadous commentedon Aug 1, 2026
Additional fallout from the same incident: porch state corruption (last-writer-wins clobber)
Follow-up forensics from the reporting workspace: after the ghost lineage was killed, the surviving session's porch state showed a regression — phase criteria reset to "not yet run",
porch donere-entering an earlier state, and the iteration counter rolled back from the reached 3 to 2 (porch nextre-emitting "Fix issues from iteration 1").Probable mechanism: both agents drove porch in the same worktree pre-kill, and their
status.yamlwrites interleaved — porch's read-modify-write has no concurrency guard because "one builder per worktree" is a spawn-time invariant, not a runtime-enforced one. The duplicate-agent condition breaks that invariant, so the collision corrupts not just working files (which the agents can see and revert) but porch state, which neither agent can detect as corrupted — it just looks like earlier state.Strengthens ask 1 (preflight refusal while a sibling lineage is alive): the blast radius is state-machine integrity, not merely duplicated edits. The reporting workspace resolved correctly by running the machine forward (re-running the review cycle, no state edits) per the #1297 sync-the-work-through-the-machine principle.
waleedkadous commentedon Aug 1, 2026
Enforcement-vs-doctrine datum for the preflight's scope
A production lane reports it was structurally immune to all three porch-state failure classes (#1235 wrong-winner resolution, #1306 stale merged snapshots, this issue's invisible rewind) before any were diagnosed, because its operating discipline is artifact-first: gates read diffs and receipts, stall monitors watch commits and file mtimes, and porch phase values are treated as labels only — never as ground truth to act on.
Implication for scoping: artifact-first operation is a zero-tooling-cost mitigation that already exists in the field, so the preflight doesn't need to carry every guarantee alone — some of the protection can be doctrine. The limit, stated by the reporting architect themselves: doctrine does not protect operators who have not read it, and the invisible-rewind class (state corruption that just looks like earlier state) still warrants runtime detection. Suggested split: preflight/refusal = runtime enforcement (this issue's ask 1); "phase values are labels, anchor decisions on artifacts" = a lessons-ledger entry routed at the next MAINTAIN pass.