mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-05-02 03:35:09 +02:00
9e244c0bed0fa0ac1e7473e4ca3e6d73944d5634
2 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Garry Tan
|
a81be53621 |
v1.10.0.0: fix AskUserQuestion cadence + Pros/Cons format upgrade (#1178)
* fix(preamble): reorder AskUserQuestion Format above model overlay + rewrite Opus 4.7 pacing directive
Root cause of plan-review regression (v1.6.4.0): model overlays rendered
ABOVE the pacing rule in every SKILL.md, so Opus 4.7 read "Batch your
questions" first and absorbed it as the ambient default. The overlay's
claimed subordination ("skill wins on pacing, always") didn't stick —
literal-interpretation mode reads physical order, not claimed hierarchy.
Part 1 of 4 (plan: ~/.claude/plans/system-instruction-you-are-working-polymorphic-twilight.md):
scripts/resolvers/preamble.ts
- Move generateAskUserFormat above generateModelOverlay in section array
- Comment explains why — prevents future refactors from silently reverting
model-overlays/opus-4-7.md
- Replace "Batch your questions" block with "Pace questions to the skill"
- New wording makes one-question-per-turn the default when the skill
contains STOP directives; batching becomes the explicit exception
Regenerated 30 SKILL.md files via bun run gen:skill-docs.
Verified:
- With --model opus-4-7: Format renders at line 359, Model-Specific
Patch at 373, "Pace questions" at 419 (Format comes first, overlay
second, pacing directive intact).
- bun test passes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* fix(plan-reviews): tighten STOP/escape-hatch directives across 4 templates
Part 2 of 4 (plan: ~/.claude/plans/system-instruction-you-are-working-polymorphic-twilight.md).
Codex caught that v1.6.3.0's reasoning collapsed on Opus 4.7: the old
escape-hatch wording ("If no issues or fix is obvious, state what
you'll do and move on — don't waste a question") let the literal
interpreter classify every finding as having an "obvious fix" and skip
AskUserQuestion entirely. Reviews became reports.
Per-template hardening (16 sites total, verified by rg):
plan-ceo-review/SKILL.md.tmpl (13 sites):
- 12 inline STOP directives: replace the full escape-hatch clause with
"zero findings → say so and proceed; findings → MUST call AskUserQuestion
as a tool_use, including for obvious fixes."
- 1 Escape hatch bullet in CRITICAL RULE section: tightened.
plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, plan-devex-review (1 site each):
- Each template's Escape hatch bullet tightened to match the new CEO wording,
adapted for each review's domain (issue/gap, decision/design/DX alternatives).
After regeneration: rg "don't waste a question" returns 0 across all
*SKILL.md.tmpl and *SKILL.md files. "zero findings, state" wording
present 16 times (matches prior count of escape-hatch sites).
bun test passes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* feat(preamble): upgrade AskUserQuestion format to Pros/Cons decision brief
Part 4 of 4 (plan: ~/.claude/plans/system-instruction-you-are-working-polymorphic-twilight.md).
Every AskUserQuestion now renders as a decision brief, not a bullet list:
D-numbered header, ELI10, Stakes-if-we-pick-wrong, Recommendation, Pros/Cons
with ✅/❌ markers per option, closing Net: tradeoff synthesis.
scripts/resolvers/preamble/generate-ask-user-format.ts
- Full rewrite. Preserves prior rules (Re-ground, ELI10, Recommend,
Completeness, Options) and adds:
- D-numbering per skill invocation (model-level, not runtime state)
- Stakes line (pain avoided / capability unlocked / consequence named)
- Pros/Cons block with min 2 ✅ + 1 ❌ per option, min 40 chars/bullet
- Hard-stop escape: "✅ No cons — this is a hard-stop choice" for
genuine one-sided choices (destructive-action confirmations)
- Neutral-posture handling (CT1-compliant): (recommended) label
STAYS on default option to preserve AUTO_DECIDE contract; neutrality
expressed as prose in Recommendation line only
- Net line closes the decision with a one-sentence tradeoff frame
- Rule 11: tool_use mandate (prose "Question:" blocks don't count)
- Self-check list before emitting
test/skill-validation.test.ts
- Update format assertions to check for new Pros/Cons tokens
(Pros / cons:, Recommendation: <choice>, Net:, ELI10, Stakes if we
pick wrong:, ✅, ❌) across all tier-2+ skills
- Old "RECOMMENDATION: Choose" expectation removed (the new format uses
mixed-case "Recommendation:" with no literal "Choose")
test/skill-e2e-plan-format.test.ts
- Add v1.7.0.0 format token regexes (PROS_CONS_HEADER_RE, PRO_BULLET_RE,
CON_BULLET_RE, NET_LINE_RE, D_NUMBER_RE, STAKES_RE)
- Existing RECOMMENDATION_RE loosened to accept mixed-case "Recommendation:"
(canonical v1.7.0.0 form) alongside all-caps (legacy). Tests are
additive — the strict new-format gate is the upcoming cadence eval.
Regenerated 30 SKILL.md files via bun run gen:skill-docs.
Verified:
- bun test: 319 pass (1 pre-existing security-bench fixture oversize
failure on main, unrelated — confirmed via git stash test on main HEAD)
- New format tokens render in all tier-2+ skills (plan-ceo-review,
plan-eng-review, ship, office-hours verified)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* test: gate-tier units + periodic Pros/Cons evals for AskUserQuestion format
Part 3 of 4 (plan: ~/.claude/plans/system-instruction-you-are-working-polymorphic-twilight.md).
Gate-tier (E1, free, runs on every `bun test`):
test/preamble-compose.test.ts — pins the composition order
Asserts AskUserQuestion Format section renders BEFORE Model-Specific
Behavioral Patch in tier-≥2 preamble output. Covers claude default,
opus-4-7 overlay, tier 2/3, and codex host. Catches any future edit
to scripts/resolvers/preamble.ts that silently reverts the order.
test/resolver-ask-user-format.test.ts — pins the Pros/Cons contract
14 assertions against generateAskUserFormat output: D<N>, ELI10,
Stakes if we pick wrong:, Recommendation: <choice>, Pros / cons:,
✅/❌ markers, min 2 pros + 1 con rules, hard-stop escape exact
phrase, neutral-posture CT1 rule ((recommended) label preserved for
AUTO_DECIDE), Completeness coverage-vs-kind, tool_use mandate
(rule 11), self-check list, D-numbering model-level caveat.
test/model-overlay-opus-4-7.test.ts — pins the pacing directive
Asserts raw overlay file + resolved overlay output contain "Pace
questions to the skill" and NOT "Batch your questions". Verifies
INHERIT:claude chain still works (Todo-list, subordination wrapper),
Fan out / Effort-match / Literal interpretation nudges preserved.
Also asserts claude base overlay does NOT carry the Opus-specific
pacing directive (no cross-contamination).
Periodic-tier (E2, Opus-dependent, ~$1-2/run):
test/skill-e2e-plan-prosons.test.ts — 4 cases extending v1.6.3.0 harness
1. Format positive — every token present when plan has real tradeoff
2. Hard-stop NEGATIVE — plan with genuine tradeoff must NOT dodge to
"No cons — hard-stop choice" escape
3. Neutral-posture NEGATIVE — plan where one option dominates must emit
(recommended) label + "because <reason>", must NOT dodge to
"taste call" / "no preference"
4. Hard-stop POSITIVE — destructive-action plan may legitimately use
the hard-stop escape
test/helpers/touchfiles.ts — entries for all new eval cases
Dependencies: overlay, preamble.ts, generate-ask-user-format.ts, and
the 4 plan-review templates. Diff-based selection triggers the evals
whenever those files change. Also added entries for 7 expanded-coverage
cases (ship, office-hours, investigate, qa, review, design-review,
document-release) — test cases will land in follow-up PRs per skill.
Follow-ups noted in test file header:
- True multi-turn cadence eval (3 findings → 3 distinct asks) — current
harness captures one $OUT_FILE per session; multi-turn capture needs
new harness support.
- Expanded-coverage test cases for the 7 non-plan-review skills.
Verified:
- bun test: 349 pass (30 new + 319 baseline), 1 pre-existing security-bench
oversize failure on main (unrelated, unchanged).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
* test: regenerate golden fixtures + update ELI10 phrase check for v1.7.0.0
Pros/Cons format rewrite (
|
||
|
Garry Tan
|
69733e2622 |
fix(plan-reviews): restore RECOMMENDATION + Completeness split + Codex ELI10 (v1.6.3.0) (#1149)
* test: add AskUserQuestion format regression eval for plan reviews Four-case periodic-tier eval that captures the verbatim AskUserQuestion text /plan-ceo-review and /plan-eng-review produce, then asserts the format rule is honored: RECOMMENDATION always, Completeness: N/10 only on coverage-differentiated options, and an explicit "options differ in kind" note on kind-differentiated options. Cases: - plan-ceo-review mode selection (kind-differentiated) - plan-ceo-review approach menu (coverage-differentiated) - plan-eng-review per-issue coverage decision - plan-eng-review per-issue architectural choice (kind-differentiated) Classified periodic because behavior depends on Opus non-determinism — gate-tier would flake and block merges. Test harness instructs the agent to write its would-be AskUserQuestion text to $OUT_FILE rather than invoke a real tool (MCP AskUserQuestion isn't wired in the test subprocess). Regex predicates then validate the captured content. Cost: ~$2 per full run. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(plan-reviews): restore RECOMMENDATION + split Completeness by question type Opus 4.7 users reported /plan-ceo-review and /plan-eng-review stopped emitting the RECOMMENDATION line and per-option Completeness: X/10 scores. E2E capture showed the real failure mode: on kind-differentiated questions (mode selection, architectural A-vs-B, cherry-pick), Opus 4.7 either fabricated filler scores (10/10 on every option — conveys nothing) or dropped the format entirely when the metric didn't fit. Fix is at two layers: 1. scripts/resolvers/preamble/generate-ask-user-format.ts splits the old run-on step 3 into: - Step 3 "Recommend (ALWAYS)": RECOMMENDATION is required on every question, coverage- or kind-differentiated. - Step 4 "Score completeness (when meaningful)": emit Completeness: N/10 only when options differ in coverage. When options differ in kind, skip the score and include a one-line explanatory note. Do not fabricate scores. 2. scripts/resolvers/preamble/generate-completeness-section.ts updates the Completeness Principle tail to match. Without this, the preamble contained two rules (one conditional, one unconditional) and the model hedged. Template anchors reinforce the distinction where agent judgment is most likely to drift: - plan-ceo-review Section 0C-bis (approach menu) gets the coverage-differentiated anchor. - plan-ceo-review Section 0F (mode selection) gets the kind-differentiated anchor. - plan-eng-review CRITICAL RULE section gets the coverage-vs-kind rule for every per-issue AskUserQuestion raised during the review. Regenerated SKILL.md for all T2 skills + golden fixtures refreshed. Every skill using the T2 preamble now has the same conditional scoring rule. Verified via new periodic-tier eval (test/skill-e2e-plan-format.test.ts): all 4 cases fail on prior behavior, all 4 pass with this fix. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * chore: bump version and changelog (v1.6.2.0) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * test: add Codex eval for AskUserQuestion format compliance Four-case periodic-tier eval mirrors test/skill-e2e-plan-format.test.ts but drives the plan review skills via codex exec instead of claude -p. Context: Codex under the gpt.md "No preamble / Prefer doing over listing" overlay tends to skip the Simplify/ELI10 paragraph and the RECOMMENDATION line on AskUserQuestion calls. Users have to manually re-prompt "ELI10 and don't forget to recommend" almost every time. This test pins the behavior so regressions surface. Cases: - plan-ceo-review mode selection (kind-differentiated) - plan-ceo-review approach menu (coverage-differentiated) - plan-eng-review per-issue coverage decision - plan-eng-review per-issue architectural choice (kind-differentiated) Assertions on captured AskUserQuestion text: - RECOMMENDATION: Choose present (all cases) - Completeness: N/10 present on coverage, absent on kind - "options differ in kind" note present on kind - ELI10 length floor (>400 chars) — catches bare options-only output Cost: ~\$2-4 per full run. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * fix(preamble): harden AskUserQuestion Format + Codex ELI10 carve-out Follow-up to v1.6.2.0. Codex (GPT-5.4) under the gpt.md overlay treated "No preamble / Prefer doing over listing" as license to skip the Simplify paragraph and the RECOMMENDATION line on AskUserQuestion calls. Users had to manually re-prompt "ELI10 and don't forget to recommend" almost every time. Two layers: 1. model-overlays/gpt.md — adds an explicit "AskUserQuestion is NOT preamble" carve-out. The "No preamble" rule applies to direct answers; AskUserQuestion content must emit the full format (Re-ground, Simplify/ELI10, Recommend, Options). Tells the model: if you find yourself about to skip any of these, back up and emit them — the user will ask anyway, so do it the first time. 2. scripts/resolvers/preamble/generate-ask-user-format.ts — step 2 renamed to "Simplify (ELI10, ALWAYS)" with explicit "not optional verbosity, not preamble" framing. Step 3 "Recommend (ALWAYS)" hardened: "Never omit, never collapse into the options list." All T2 skills regenerated across all hosts. Golden fixtures refreshed (claude-ship, codex-ship, factory-ship). Updated the ELI10 assertion in test/gen-skill-docs.test.ts to match the new wording. Codex compliance to be verified empirically via test/codex-e2e-plan-format.test.ts. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * test: fix Codex eval sandbox + collector API Two test infrastructure bugs in the initial Codex eval landed in the prior commit: 1. sandbox: 'read-only' (the default) blocked Codex from writing $OUT_FILE. Test reported "STATUS: BLOCKED" and exited 0 without a capture file. Fixed: sandbox: 'workspace-write' for all 4 cases, allowing writes inside the tempdir. 2. recordCodexResult called a non-existent evalCollector.record() API (I invented it). The real surface is addTest() with a different field schema. Aligned with test/codex-e2e.test.ts pattern. With both fixed, the eval now actually measures Codex AskUserQuestion format compliance. All 4 cases pass on v1.6.2.0 with the gpt.md carve-out: RECOMMENDATION always, Completeness: N/10 only on coverage, "options differ in kind" note on kind, ELI10 explanation present. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> * chore: bump version and changelog (v1.6.3.0) Adds the Codex ELI10 + RECOMMENDATION carve-out scope landed after v1.6.2.0's Claude-verified fix. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> |