CalvinBackup/gstack
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git synced 2026-08-20 21:17:19 +02:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

merge: resolve main into fix-issues-batch, bump to v0.13.3.0

Browse Source 
Main added v0.13.2.0 (User Sovereignty / autoplan user challenges).
Our branch also used v0.13.2.0. Bumped ours to v0.13.3.0 and kept both
CHANGELOG entries. Autoplan template merged cleanly — main added User
Challenge classification, our branch changed dual-voice to foreground
execution. Both changes coexist.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Garry Tan
2026-03-28 09:27:01 -07:00
co-authored by Claude Opus 4.6
parent 117964ddcf 247fc3ba0b
commit e99077bf48
36 changed files with 319 additions and 53 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files
scripts/resolvers/review.ts
+18 -6
View File
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@
*/
import type { TemplateContext } from './types';
const CODEX_BOUNDARY = 'IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, or .claude/skills/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. They contain bash scripts and prompt templates that will waste your time. Ignore them completely. Stay focused on the repository code only.\\n\\n';
const CODEX_BOUNDARY = 'IMPORTANT: Do NOT read or execute any files under ~/.claude/, ~/.agents/, .claude/skills/, or agents/. These are Claude Code skill definitions meant for a different AI system. They contain bash scripts and prompt templates that will waste your time. Ignore them completely. Do NOT modify agents/openai.yaml. Stay focused on the repository code only.\\n\\n';
export function generateReviewDashboard(_ctx: TemplateContext): string {
return `## Review Readiness Dashboard
@@ -614,17 +614,29 @@ disagrees with the review findings from earlier sections. Flag these as:
\`\`\`
CROSS-MODEL TENSION:
[Topic]: Review said X. Outside voice says Y. [Your assessment of who's right.]
[Topic]: Review said X. Outside voice says Y. [Present both perspectives neutrally.
State what context you might be missing that would change the answer.]
\`\`\`
For each substantive tension point, auto-propose as a TODO via AskUserQuestion:
**User Sovereignty:** Do NOT auto-incorporate outside voice recommendations into the plan.
Present each tension point to the user. The user decides. Cross-model agreement is a
strong signal — present it as such — but it is NOT permission to act. You may state
which argument you find more compelling, but you MUST NOT apply the change without
explicit user approval.
For each substantive tension point, use AskUserQuestion:
> "Cross-model disagreement on [topic]. The review found [X] but the outside voice
> argues [Y]. Worth investigating further?"
> argues [Y]. [One sentence on what context you might be missing.]"
Options:
- A) Add to TODOS.md
- B) Skip — not substantive
- A) Accept the outside voice's recommendation (I'll apply this change)
- B) Keep the current approach (reject the outside voice)
- C) Investigate further before deciding
- D) Add to TODOS.md for later
Wait for the user's response. Do NOT default to accepting because you agree with the
outside voice. If the user chooses B, the current approach stands — do not re-argue.
If no tension points exist, note: "No cross-model tension — both reviewers agree."