mirror of
https://github.com/garrytan/gstack.git
synced 2026-09-10 15:09:00 +02:00
Garry TanandClaude Fable 5
2009f89283
In plan mode the scope gate's "What should I review? A/B/C" question is pure
friction: there is no branch diff and the target is the plan being drafted.
Both gates gain an ordered exceptions block, checked BEFORE asking:
1. Plan mode → auto-select B: review the active plan (in context or pasted),
announce it in one line ("Scope gate: plan mode — auto-selected B
(reviewing <target>)") so the user can interrupt; an explicitly different
user-named target still wins; no plan drafted yet → ask as normal.
2. User-named target (outside plan mode): explicit-only — a path, a pasted
doc, or the literal words "branch diff". A passing mention is not naming;
when in doubt, ask.
Outside plan mode with no explicitly-named target, nothing changes. Plan-mode
is checked FIRST because the PTY harness seeds drafts as pasted user messages
(claude-pty-runner.ts:1600) — ordering makes the seeded smokes deterministic.
Pinning: seeded plan-mode smokes assert no gate render + announcement rendered
(eng test 2; new design seeded test); plan-mode-no-op extends to eng/design
(bypass must not misfire outside plan mode; first question must be the gate)
plus a named-target case proving the pasted target is consumed; a drift-guard
asserts the two hand-duplicated exceptions blocks stay identical modulo the
two variant slots and carry the announcement string the detectors pin.
Skeleton ceilings ratcheted with comments (eng 68k, design 89k; eng union
ratio 1.08→1.09) — measured 67,006 B / 88,226 B after regen.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
100 lines
3.9 KiB
TypeScript
100 lines
3.9 KiB
TypeScript
/**
|
|
* plan-design-review plan-mode smoke (periodic, paid, real-PTY).
|
|
*
|
|
* See test/skill-e2e-plan-ceo-plan-mode.test.ts for the shared assertion
|
|
* contract. Exercises the same contract against /plan-design-review.
|
|
*
|
|
* Note: on no-UI-scope branches plan-design-review legitimately short-
|
|
* circuits to plan_ready without firing AskUserQuestion. Both 'asked' and
|
|
* 'plan_ready' are valid pass outcomes.
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
import { describe, test, expect } from 'bun:test';
|
|
import {
|
|
runPlanSkillObservation,
|
|
assertReportAtBottomIfPlanWritten,
|
|
} from './helpers/claude-pty-runner';
|
|
|
|
const shouldRun = !!process.env.EVALS && process.env.EVALS_TIER === 'periodic';
|
|
const describeE2E = shouldRun ? describe : describe.skip;
|
|
|
|
// UI-heavy seed with guaranteed design gaps (center-aligned everything, no
|
|
// empty states, no responsive intent) so the review has real findings to
|
|
// surface. Inline twin of the eng smoke's SEED_PLAN_FORCING_FINDINGS —
|
|
// FORCING_FLOOR_DESIGN from forcing-finding-seeds.ts is NOT reusable here:
|
|
// it embeds a write-to-/tmp instruction shaped for the floor check's
|
|
// followUpPrompt, which would trip strictPlanWrites as a silent_write.
|
|
const SEED_PLAN_UI_HEAVY = `
|
|
# Plan: Marketing landing page
|
|
|
|
## Layout
|
|
All headings, taglines, and body copy will be center-aligned for a
|
|
"clean modern look." The hero h1 sits 8px above the subhead; the CTA
|
|
button has the same visual weight as the "Learn more" link beside it.
|
|
|
|
## Pages
|
|
- / (hero, 3-column features grid, testimonials carousel, footer)
|
|
- /pricing (3 tier cards)
|
|
|
|
## States
|
|
Only the happy path is designed. No empty states, no error states,
|
|
no loading states. Mobile: "stacks on mobile."
|
|
`;
|
|
|
|
describeE2E('plan-design-review plan-mode smoke (periodic)', () => {
|
|
test('reaches a terminal outcome (asked or plan_ready) without silent writes', async () => {
|
|
const obs = await runPlanSkillObservation({
|
|
skillName: 'plan-design-review',
|
|
inPlanMode: true,
|
|
timeoutMs: 300_000,
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
if (obs.outcome === 'silent_write' || obs.outcome === 'exited' || obs.outcome === 'timeout') {
|
|
throw new Error(
|
|
`plan-design-review plan-mode smoke FAILED: outcome=${obs.outcome}\n` +
|
|
`summary: ${obs.summary}\n` +
|
|
`elapsed: ${obs.elapsedMs}ms\n` +
|
|
`--- evidence (last 2KB visible) ---\n${obs.evidence}`,
|
|
);
|
|
}
|
|
expect(['asked', 'plan_ready']).toContain(obs.outcome);
|
|
assertReportAtBottomIfPlanWritten(obs);
|
|
}, 360_000);
|
|
|
|
// Plan-mode scope-gate bypass: with a seeded UI-heavy plan in plan mode,
|
|
// the gate must NOT render its "What should I review?" menu — it
|
|
// auto-selects B and announces it, then proceeds to the pre-review audit
|
|
// and mockups. Mirrors the eng smoke's seeded STOP-gate test, without
|
|
// --disallowedTools (native AUQ available is the common path here).
|
|
test('scope gate auto-selects B when a plan is seeded in plan mode', async () => {
|
|
const obs = await runPlanSkillObservation({
|
|
skillName: 'plan-design-review',
|
|
inPlanMode: true,
|
|
initialPlanContent: SEED_PLAN_UI_HEAVY,
|
|
timeoutMs: 300_000,
|
|
});
|
|
|
|
if (
|
|
obs.outcome === 'wrote_findings_before_asking' ||
|
|
obs.outcome === 'auto_decided' ||
|
|
obs.outcome === 'silent_write' ||
|
|
obs.outcome === 'exited' ||
|
|
obs.outcome === 'timeout'
|
|
) {
|
|
throw new Error(
|
|
`plan-design plan-mode bypass FAILED: outcome=${obs.outcome}\n` +
|
|
`summary: ${obs.summary}\nelapsed: ${obs.elapsedMs}ms\n` +
|
|
`--- evidence (last 2KB) ---\n${obs.evidence}`,
|
|
);
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
expect(['asked', 'plan_ready']).toContain(obs.outcome);
|
|
assertReportAtBottomIfPlanWritten(obs);
|
|
|
|
// The bypass contract (exception ordering makes this deterministic even
|
|
// though the seed arrives as a pasted user message).
|
|
expect(obs.scopeGateQuestionObserved ?? false).toBe(false);
|
|
expect(obs.scopeGateAutoSelectObserved ?? false).toBe(true);
|
|
}, 360_000);
|
|
});
|