Skip to content

Keep a series of owner-reviewed changes in iteration - #118

Merged
mzored merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/iteration-series-in-kernel
Sep 9, 2026
Merged

Keep a series of owner-reviewed changes in iteration#118
mzored merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
fix/iteration-series-in-kernel

Conversation

@mzored

@mzored mzored commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Result

A series of small changes the owner reviews stays in iteration until they ask for delivery, whether or not they name a workflow. Before this, only a session that invoked skiphow-fast-fixes got that behavior.

Scope

  • plugins/skiphow/skills/skiphow/SKILL.md: the iteration paragraph. The deferred-check regime no longer depends on "an explicitly bounded iteration session", a state nothing outside an invoked workflow could enter. It is keyed on what the owner says, holds back push, shared integration and delivery tests exactly as the fast-fixes rule does, and keeps one clause of deference so an invoked workflow's own agreement still outlasts a bare acceptance.
  • evals/cases.json: one microcase, iteration-series-announced-once, for a series announced once and then continued with bare edits.
  • docs/decisions.md (amends the 4.4.0 iteration-shape record), docs/evidence.md, docs/guide.md, docs/outcome-contract.md, site/evidence/index.html.
  • VERSION, both plugin manifests, the three eval instrument files, CHANGELOG.md 4.7.3.

No new file, no new step, no mandatory gate or persistent state. skiphow-fast-fixes is unchanged.

Observed defect

Two installed 4.7.1 sessions in the maintainer's own projects on 2026-09-09. In the session where the owner announced a screen review in ordinary language inside a running longrun programme, a 105-minute stretch of screen edits produced twelve guarded-integration invocations, five merges into the shared development branch, and five whole-backend-suite runs of two and a half to four minutes, plus repairs to tests the next edit invalidated. In the session where the owner typed the workflow command, the deferral held and the one wide run followed an explicit request to integrate. Two projects and two tasks, so this is an observation, not a controlled pair. Session content is not retained in this repository.

Tests and package evidence

python scripts/check.py passes, including the corpus validator on the new case. git diff --check is clean. Versions are aligned across VERSION, both manifests, evals/cases.json, evals/cto-cases.json, evals/host-smoke.json and the site.

Blockers and unverified limits

  • Cross-host review is blocked, not passed. codex exec returned a usage-limit error with a reset date of 2026-09-15, so the Codex round for this change did not run. An independent review on the same host stood in. It raised four qualifying findings, all confirmed against the files and fixed here: the kernel had stopped deferring to an invoked workflow and so contradicted skiphow-fast-fixes on an accepting turn; the canonical contract and the kernel disagreed on when a series ends; the decision record claimed an isolated variable two field sessions cannot establish; and the raised rule held back less than its source rule, leaving push unheld outside the workflow.
  • The corrected behavior is UNVERIFIED on both hosts. No paid behavioral session was run; iteration-series-announced-once is the unrun scenario that would show it.
  • The failing session had also been given the same rule by its own repository's instruction file and broke that too, after four compactions had removed both from context. No package text survives a compaction, so this change removes a readable defect in the text and removes nothing about context loss.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

The kernel recognized a stream of small changes the owner will look at
as an iteration, then sent each one to delivery, because the rule that
feedback and acceptance keep the work in iteration lived only in the
fast-fixes workflow and the kernel reached it only through "an
explicitly bounded iteration session" - a state nothing outside an
invoked workflow could enter.

Two installed 4.7.1 sessions on 2026-09-09 show the effect: the session
where the owner announced the review in ordinary language carried each
screen edit through guarded integration, twelve invocations and five
merges into the shared branch with five whole-backend-suite runs in
105 minutes, while the session where the owner typed the workflow
command held. The two are an observation, not a controlled pair.

Raise the rule into the kernel, phrased from what the owner says rather
than from a session state, holding back push, shared integration and
delivery tests as its source rule does, and keep one clause of
deference so an invoked workflow's agreement still outlasts a bare
acceptance. Add one corpus case for a series announced once and then
continued with bare edits.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@mzored
mzored merged commit d1a4259 into main Sep 9, 2026
1 check passed
@mzored
mzored deleted the fix/iteration-series-in-kernel branch September 9, 2026 22:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant