fix: clarify retro workflow and evaluate compare instructions

Include compare mode in the frontier judge excerpt, define metric sources and snapshot ordering, and preserve the existing prompt-size budget.

Co-authored-by: OpenAI Codex <noreply@openai.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
2026-09-09 05:08:30 +00:00
co-authored by OpenAI Codex
parent eb4fd65ed3
commit 2e624adf20
9 changed files with 182 additions and 176 deletions
+1
View File
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
- Frontier judges have enough output budget for thinking and JSON. Workflow evals read generated sections in execution order, without duplicated content.
- Ship and plan reviews keep approval gates with the parent agent, preserve readiness checks, and use project-native test commands. QA scoring and monitoring rules are explicit; Aside drive options wait for a successful readiness probe.
- Benchmark timing uses the navigation entry's actual fields. Deploy setup collects missing configuration, and failed vendored upgrades restore their backup instead of deleting it.
- Retro reports distinguish verified merges from PR references, use the session date for snapshots, and define report ordering. The quality eval includes compare-mode instructions instead of cutting them off.
## [1.81.0.0] - 2026-09-06