feat(polecat): self-cleaning model and new review formulas
Polecats now self-clean when done: - gt done always exits session (no more --exit flag needed) - gt done requests self-nuke (sandbox cleanup) - No idle polecats - done means gone - Refinery re-implements on conflict (never sends work back) New formulas: - mol-polecat-review-pr: review external PRs, approve/reject - mol-polecat-code-review: review code, file beads for findings Docs updated: - polecat-lifecycle.md: self-cleaning model, identity vs session - polecat-CLAUDE.md: updated contract and completion protocol - mol-polecat-work: updated for self-cleaning Implementation beads filed: - gt-yrz4k: gt done always exits - gt-fqcst: polecat self-nuke mechanism - gt-zdmde: abstract work unit completion Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
gus
318
internal/formula/formulas/mol-polecat-code-review.formula.toml
Normal file
318
internal/formula/formulas/mol-polecat-code-review.formula.toml
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,318 @@
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Review code and file beads for issues found.
|
||||
|
||||
This molecule guides a polecat through a code review task - examining a portion
|
||||
of the codebase for bugs, security issues, code quality problems, or improvement
|
||||
opportunities. The output is a set of beads capturing actionable findings.
|
||||
|
||||
## Polecat Contract (Self-Cleaning Model)
|
||||
|
||||
You are a self-cleaning worker. You:
|
||||
1. Receive work via your hook (pinned molecule + review scope)
|
||||
2. Work through molecule steps using `bd ready` / `bd close <step>`
|
||||
3. Complete and self-clean via `gt done` (submit findings + nuke yourself)
|
||||
4. You are GONE - your findings are recorded in beads
|
||||
|
||||
**Self-cleaning:** When you run `gt done`, you submit your findings, nuke your
|
||||
sandbox, and exit. There is no idle state. Done means gone.
|
||||
|
||||
**Important:** This formula defines the template. Your molecule already has step
|
||||
beads created from it. Use `bd ready` to find them - do NOT read this file directly.
|
||||
|
||||
**You do NOT:**
|
||||
- Fix the issues yourself (file beads, let other polecats fix)
|
||||
- Scope creep into unrelated areas
|
||||
- Wait for someone to act on findings (you're done after filing)
|
||||
|
||||
## Variables
|
||||
|
||||
| Variable | Source | Description |
|
||||
|----------|--------|-------------|
|
||||
| scope | hook_bead | What to review (file path, directory, or description) |
|
||||
| issue | hook_bead | The tracking issue for this review task |
|
||||
| focus | hook_bead | Optional focus area (security, performance, etc.) |
|
||||
|
||||
## Failure Modes
|
||||
|
||||
| Situation | Action |
|
||||
|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| Scope too broad | Mail Witness, request narrower scope |
|
||||
| Can't understand code | Mail Witness for context |
|
||||
| Critical issue found | Mail Witness immediately, then continue |"""
|
||||
formula = "mol-polecat-code-review"
|
||||
version = 1
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "load-context"
|
||||
title = "Load context and understand the review scope"
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Initialize your session and understand what you're reviewing.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Prime your environment:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt prime # Load role context
|
||||
bd prime # Load beads context
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Check your hook:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt hook # Shows your pinned molecule and hook_bead
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The hook_bead describes your review scope. Read the tracking issue:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd show {{issue}} # Full issue details
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Understand the scope:**
|
||||
- What files/directories are in scope?
|
||||
- Is there a specific focus (security, performance, correctness)?
|
||||
- What's the context - why is this review happening?
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Locate the code:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# If scope is a path:
|
||||
ls -la {{scope}}
|
||||
head -100 {{scope}} # Quick look at the code
|
||||
|
||||
# If scope is a directory:
|
||||
find {{scope}} -type f -name "*.go" | head -20
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**5. Check for recent changes:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
git log --oneline -10 -- {{scope}}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** You understand what you're reviewing and why."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "survey-code"
|
||||
title = "Survey the code structure"
|
||||
needs = ["load-context"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Get a high-level understanding before diving into details.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Understand the structure:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# For a directory:
|
||||
tree {{scope}} -L 2
|
||||
|
||||
# For a file:
|
||||
wc -l {{scope}} # How big is it?
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Identify key components:**
|
||||
- What are the main types/structs?
|
||||
- What are the public functions?
|
||||
- What are the dependencies?
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Read the tests (if any):**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
find {{scope}} -name "*_test.go" | xargs head -50
|
||||
```
|
||||
Tests often reveal intended behavior.
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Note initial impressions:**
|
||||
- Is the code well-organized?
|
||||
- Are there obvious patterns or anti-patterns?
|
||||
- What areas look risky?
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** You have a mental map of the code structure."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "detailed-review"
|
||||
title = "Perform detailed code review"
|
||||
needs = ["survey-code"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Systematically review the code for issues.
|
||||
|
||||
**Review checklist:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Category | Look For |
|
||||
|----------|----------|
|
||||
| **Correctness** | Logic errors, off-by-one, nil handling, race conditions |
|
||||
| **Security** | Injection, auth bypass, secrets in code, unsafe operations |
|
||||
| **Error handling** | Swallowed errors, missing checks, unclear error messages |
|
||||
| **Performance** | N+1 queries, unnecessary allocations, blocking calls |
|
||||
| **Maintainability** | Dead code, unclear naming, missing comments on complex logic |
|
||||
| **Testing** | Untested paths, missing edge cases, flaky tests |
|
||||
|
||||
**Focus on {{focus}} if specified.**
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Read through the code:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
cat {{scope}} # For single file
|
||||
# Or read files systematically for a directory
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. For each issue found, note:**
|
||||
- File and line number
|
||||
- Category (bug, security, performance, etc.)
|
||||
- Severity (critical, high, medium, low)
|
||||
- Description of the issue
|
||||
- Suggested fix (if obvious)
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Don't fix issues yourself:**
|
||||
Your job is to find and report, not fix. File beads.
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** You've reviewed all code in scope and noted issues."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "prioritize-findings"
|
||||
title = "Prioritize and categorize findings"
|
||||
needs = ["detailed-review"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Organize your findings by priority and category.
|
||||
|
||||
**Priority levels:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Priority | Description | Action |
|
||||
|----------|-------------|--------|
|
||||
| P0 | Security vulnerability, data loss risk | Mail Witness immediately |
|
||||
| P1 | Bug affecting users, broken functionality | File as bug, high priority |
|
||||
| P2 | Code quality issue, potential future bug | File as task |
|
||||
| P3 | Improvement opportunity, nice-to-have | File as task, low priority |
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Sort your findings:**
|
||||
Group by priority, then by category.
|
||||
|
||||
**2. For P0 issues:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt mail send {{rig}}/witness -s "CRITICAL: Security issue found" -m "Scope: {{scope}}
|
||||
Issue: {{issue}}
|
||||
Finding: <description of critical issue>
|
||||
Location: <file:line>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Prepare bead descriptions:**
|
||||
For each finding, prepare:
|
||||
- Clear title
|
||||
- File/line location
|
||||
- Description of the issue
|
||||
- Why it matters
|
||||
- Suggested fix (if known)
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** Findings prioritized and ready to file."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "file-beads"
|
||||
title = "File beads for all findings"
|
||||
needs = ["prioritize-findings"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Create beads for each finding.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. For bugs (P0, P1):**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd create --type=bug --priority=1 \
|
||||
--title="<clear description of bug>" \
|
||||
--description="Found during code review of {{scope}}.
|
||||
|
||||
Location: <file:line>
|
||||
|
||||
Issue:
|
||||
<description>
|
||||
|
||||
Impact:
|
||||
<why this matters>
|
||||
|
||||
Suggested fix:
|
||||
<if known>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. For code quality issues (P2, P3):**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd create --type=task --priority=2 \
|
||||
--title="<clear description>" \
|
||||
--description="Found during code review of {{scope}}.
|
||||
|
||||
Location: <file:line>
|
||||
|
||||
Issue:
|
||||
<description>
|
||||
|
||||
Suggestion:
|
||||
<how to improve>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Track filed beads:**
|
||||
Note each bead ID as you create them.
|
||||
|
||||
**4. If no issues found:**
|
||||
That's a valid outcome! Note that the code review passed.
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** All findings filed as beads."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "summarize-review"
|
||||
title = "Summarize review results"
|
||||
needs = ["file-beads"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Update the tracking issue with review summary.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Create summary:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd update {{issue}} --notes "Code review complete.
|
||||
|
||||
Scope: {{scope}}
|
||||
Focus: {{focus}}
|
||||
|
||||
Findings:
|
||||
- P0 (critical): <count>
|
||||
- P1 (high): <count>
|
||||
- P2 (medium): <count>
|
||||
- P3 (low): <count>
|
||||
|
||||
Beads filed:
|
||||
<list of bead IDs>
|
||||
|
||||
Overall assessment:
|
||||
<brief summary - healthy, needs attention, significant issues, etc.>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Sync beads:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd sync
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** Tracking issue updated with summary."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "complete-and-exit"
|
||||
title = "Complete review and self-clean"
|
||||
needs = ["summarize-review"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Signal completion and clean up. You cease to exist after this step.
|
||||
|
||||
**Self-Cleaning Model:**
|
||||
Once you run `gt done`, you're gone. The command:
|
||||
1. Syncs beads (final sync)
|
||||
2. Nukes your sandbox
|
||||
3. Exits your session immediately
|
||||
|
||||
**Run gt done:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt done
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**What happens next (not your concern):**
|
||||
- Other polecats may be assigned to fix the issues you found
|
||||
- Witness may escalate critical findings
|
||||
- The codebase improves based on your findings
|
||||
|
||||
You are NOT involved in any of that. You're gone. Done means gone.
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** Beads synced, sandbox nuked, session exited."""
|
||||
|
||||
[vars]
|
||||
[vars.scope]
|
||||
description = "What to review - file path, directory, or description"
|
||||
required = true
|
||||
|
||||
[vars.issue]
|
||||
description = "The tracking issue for this review task"
|
||||
required = true
|
||||
|
||||
[vars.focus]
|
||||
description = "Optional focus area (security, performance, correctness, etc.)"
|
||||
required = false
|
||||
283
internal/formula/formulas/mol-polecat-review-pr.formula.toml
Normal file
283
internal/formula/formulas/mol-polecat-review-pr.formula.toml
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,283 @@
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Review an external PR and decide on merge/reject/revise.
|
||||
|
||||
This molecule guides a polecat through reviewing a pull request from an external
|
||||
contributor. The polecat reviews code quality, tests, and alignment with project
|
||||
standards, then approves, requests changes, or files followup beads.
|
||||
|
||||
## Polecat Contract (Self-Cleaning Model)
|
||||
|
||||
You are a self-cleaning worker. You:
|
||||
1. Receive work via your hook (pinned molecule + PR reference)
|
||||
2. Work through molecule steps using `bd ready` / `bd close <step>`
|
||||
3. Complete and self-clean via `gt done` (submit findings + nuke yourself)
|
||||
4. You are GONE - your review is recorded in beads
|
||||
|
||||
**Self-cleaning:** When you run `gt done`, you submit your findings, nuke your
|
||||
sandbox, and exit. There is no idle state. Done means gone.
|
||||
|
||||
**Important:** This formula defines the template. Your molecule already has step
|
||||
beads created from it. Use `bd ready` to find them - do NOT read this file directly.
|
||||
|
||||
**You do NOT:**
|
||||
- Merge the PR yourself (maintainer or Refinery does that)
|
||||
- Push to the PR branch (it's external)
|
||||
- Wait for contributor response (you're done after review)
|
||||
|
||||
## Variables
|
||||
|
||||
| Variable | Source | Description |
|
||||
|----------|--------|-------------|
|
||||
| pr_url | hook_bead | The PR URL to review |
|
||||
| issue | hook_bead | The tracking issue for this review task |
|
||||
|
||||
## Failure Modes
|
||||
|
||||
| Situation | Action |
|
||||
|-----------|--------|
|
||||
| PR is stale/unmergeable | Note in review, request rebase |
|
||||
| Tests fail | Note in review, request fixes |
|
||||
| Major issues found | File followup beads, request changes |
|
||||
| Unclear requirements | Mail Witness for guidance |"""
|
||||
formula = "mol-polecat-review-pr"
|
||||
version = 1
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "load-context"
|
||||
title = "Load context and understand the PR"
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Initialize your session and understand the PR you're reviewing.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Prime your environment:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt prime # Load role context
|
||||
bd prime # Load beads context
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Check your hook:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt hook # Shows your pinned molecule and hook_bead
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The hook_bead references the PR to review. Read the tracking issue:
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd show {{issue}} # Full issue details including PR URL
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Fetch the PR:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gh pr view {{pr_url}} --json title,body,author,files,commits
|
||||
gh pr diff {{pr_url}} # See the actual changes
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Understand the PR:**
|
||||
- What is the PR trying to accomplish?
|
||||
- What files are changed?
|
||||
- Is there a linked issue?
|
||||
- Does the PR description explain the "why"?
|
||||
|
||||
**5. Check PR status:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gh pr checks {{pr_url}} # CI status
|
||||
gh pr view {{pr_url}} --json mergeable,reviewDecision
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** You understand the PR's purpose and scope."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "review-code"
|
||||
title = "Review the code changes"
|
||||
needs = ["load-context"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Perform a thorough code review of the PR.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Review the diff systematically:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gh pr diff {{pr_url}}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Check for common issues:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Category | Look For |
|
||||
|----------|----------|
|
||||
| Correctness | Logic errors, edge cases, null handling |
|
||||
| Security | Injection, auth bypass, exposed secrets |
|
||||
| Style | Naming, formatting, consistency with codebase |
|
||||
| Tests | Are changes tested? Do tests cover edge cases? |
|
||||
| Docs | Are docs updated if needed? |
|
||||
| Scope | Does PR stay focused? Any scope creep? |
|
||||
|
||||
**3. For each file changed:**
|
||||
- Does the change make sense?
|
||||
- Is it consistent with existing patterns?
|
||||
- Are there any red flags?
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Note issues found:**
|
||||
Keep a running list of:
|
||||
- Blocking issues (must fix before merge)
|
||||
- Suggestions (nice to have)
|
||||
- Questions (need clarification)
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** You have reviewed all changes and noted issues."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "check-tests"
|
||||
title = "Verify tests and CI"
|
||||
needs = ["review-code"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Ensure tests pass and coverage is adequate.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Check CI status:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gh pr checks {{pr_url}}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
All required checks should pass. If not, note which are failing.
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Review test changes:**
|
||||
- Are there new tests for new functionality?
|
||||
- Do tests cover edge cases?
|
||||
- Are tests readable and maintainable?
|
||||
|
||||
**3. If tests are missing:**
|
||||
Note this as a blocking issue - new code should have tests.
|
||||
|
||||
**4. Check for test-only changes:**
|
||||
If PR is test-only, ensure tests are meaningful and not just
|
||||
padding coverage numbers.
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** You've verified test status and coverage."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "make-decision"
|
||||
title = "Decide: approve, request changes, or needs discussion"
|
||||
needs = ["check-tests"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Make your review decision.
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision matrix:**
|
||||
|
||||
| Situation | Decision |
|
||||
|-----------|----------|
|
||||
| Clean code, tests pass, good scope | APPROVE |
|
||||
| Minor issues, easily fixed | REQUEST_CHANGES (with specific feedback) |
|
||||
| Major issues, needs rework | REQUEST_CHANGES (with detailed explanation) |
|
||||
| Unclear requirements or scope | NEEDS_DISCUSSION (mail Witness) |
|
||||
| Security concern | BLOCK (mail Witness immediately) |
|
||||
|
||||
**1. If APPROVE:**
|
||||
The PR is ready to merge. Note any minor suggestions as comments
|
||||
but don't block on them.
|
||||
|
||||
**2. If REQUEST_CHANGES:**
|
||||
Be specific about what needs to change. Provide examples if helpful.
|
||||
The contributor should be able to act on your feedback.
|
||||
|
||||
**3. If NEEDS_DISCUSSION:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt mail send {{rig}}/witness -s "PR review needs discussion" -m "PR: {{pr_url}}
|
||||
Issue: {{issue}}
|
||||
Question: <what needs clarification>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**4. If BLOCK (security):**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt mail send {{rig}}/witness -s "SECURITY: PR blocked" -m "PR: {{pr_url}}
|
||||
Issue: {{issue}}
|
||||
Concern: <security issue found>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** You've made a clear decision with rationale."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "submit-review"
|
||||
title = "Submit the review on GitHub"
|
||||
needs = ["make-decision"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Submit your review via GitHub.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Submit the review:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# For APPROVE:
|
||||
gh pr review {{pr_url}} --approve --body "LGTM. <brief summary of what's good>"
|
||||
|
||||
# For REQUEST_CHANGES:
|
||||
gh pr review {{pr_url}} --request-changes --body "<detailed feedback>"
|
||||
|
||||
# For COMMENT (needs discussion):
|
||||
gh pr review {{pr_url}} --comment --body "<questions or discussion points>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Add inline comments if needed:**
|
||||
If you have specific line-by-line feedback, add those via GitHub UI
|
||||
or additional `gh pr comment` calls.
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** Review submitted on GitHub."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "file-followups"
|
||||
title = "File beads for any followup work"
|
||||
needs = ["submit-review"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Create beads for any followup work discovered during review.
|
||||
|
||||
**1. For issues found that are outside PR scope:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd create --type=bug --title="Found during PR review: <description>" \
|
||||
--description="Discovered while reviewing {{pr_url}}.
|
||||
|
||||
<details of the issue>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**2. For improvements suggested but not required:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd create --type=task --title="Improvement: <description>" \
|
||||
--description="Suggested during review of {{pr_url}}.
|
||||
|
||||
<details of the improvement>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**3. Update the tracking issue:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd update {{issue}} --notes "Review complete. Decision: <APPROVE|REQUEST_CHANGES|etc>
|
||||
Followups filed: <list of bead IDs if any>"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** All followup work captured as beads."""
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "complete-and-exit"
|
||||
title = "Complete review and self-clean"
|
||||
needs = ["file-followups"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Signal completion and clean up. You cease to exist after this step.
|
||||
|
||||
**Self-Cleaning Model:**
|
||||
Once you run `gt done`, you're gone. The command:
|
||||
1. Syncs beads
|
||||
2. Nukes your sandbox
|
||||
3. Exits your session immediately
|
||||
|
||||
**Run gt done:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
bd sync
|
||||
gt done
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**What happens next (not your concern):**
|
||||
- Maintainer or Refinery acts on your review
|
||||
- Contributor responds to feedback
|
||||
- PR gets merged, revised, or closed
|
||||
|
||||
You are NOT involved in any of that. You're gone. Done means gone.
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** Beads synced, sandbox nuked, session exited."""
|
||||
|
||||
[vars]
|
||||
[vars.pr_url]
|
||||
description = "The PR URL to review"
|
||||
required = true
|
||||
|
||||
[vars.issue]
|
||||
description = "The tracking issue for this review task"
|
||||
required = true
|
||||
@@ -1,26 +1,29 @@
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Full polecat work lifecycle from assignment through MR submission.
|
||||
Full polecat work lifecycle from assignment through completion.
|
||||
|
||||
This molecule guides a polecat through a complete work assignment. Each step
|
||||
has clear entry/exit criteria and specific commands to run. A polecat can
|
||||
crash after any step and resume from the last completed step.
|
||||
|
||||
## Polecat Contract (Ephemeral Model)
|
||||
## Polecat Contract (Self-Cleaning Model)
|
||||
|
||||
You are an ephemeral worker. You:
|
||||
You are a self-cleaning worker. You:
|
||||
1. Receive work via your hook (pinned molecule + issue)
|
||||
2. Work through molecule steps using `bd ready` / `bd close <step>`
|
||||
3. Submit to merge queue via `gt done`
|
||||
4. Become recyclable - Refinery handles the rest
|
||||
3. Complete and self-clean via `gt done` (submit + nuke yourself)
|
||||
4. You are GONE - Refinery merges from MQ
|
||||
|
||||
**Self-cleaning:** When you run `gt done`, you push your work, submit to MQ,
|
||||
nuke your sandbox, and exit. There is no idle state. Done means gone.
|
||||
|
||||
**Important:** This formula defines the template. Your molecule already has step
|
||||
beads created from it. Use `bd ready` to find them - do NOT read this file directly.
|
||||
|
||||
**You do NOT:**
|
||||
- Push directly to main (Refinery merges)
|
||||
- Push directly to main (Refinery merges from MQ)
|
||||
- Close your own issue (Refinery closes after merge)
|
||||
- Wait for merge (you're done at MR submission)
|
||||
- Handle rebase conflicts (Refinery dispatches fresh polecats for that)
|
||||
- Wait for merge (you're gone after `gt done`)
|
||||
- Handle rebase conflicts (Refinery spawns fresh polecats for that)
|
||||
|
||||
## Variables
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -407,30 +410,23 @@ bd sync
|
||||
|
||||
[[steps]]
|
||||
id = "submit-and-exit"
|
||||
title = "Submit to merge queue and exit"
|
||||
title = "Submit work and self-clean"
|
||||
needs = ["prepare-for-review"]
|
||||
description = """
|
||||
Submit your work to the merge queue. You become recyclable after this.
|
||||
Submit your work and clean up. You cease to exist after this step.
|
||||
|
||||
**Ephemeral Polecat Model:**
|
||||
Once you submit, you're done. The Refinery will:
|
||||
1. Process your merge request
|
||||
2. Handle rebasing (mechanical rebases done automatically)
|
||||
3. Close your issue after successful merge
|
||||
4. Create conflict-resolution tasks if needed (fresh polecat handles those)
|
||||
**Self-Cleaning Model:**
|
||||
Once you run `gt done`, you're gone. The command:
|
||||
1. Pushes your branch to origin
|
||||
2. Creates an MR bead in the merge queue
|
||||
3. Nukes your sandbox (worktree removal)
|
||||
4. Exits your session immediately
|
||||
|
||||
**1. Submit with gt done:**
|
||||
**Run gt done:**
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
gt done
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This single command:
|
||||
- Creates an MR bead in the merge queue
|
||||
- Notifies the Witness (POLECAT_DONE)
|
||||
- Updates your agent state to 'done'
|
||||
- Reports cleanup status (ZFC compliance)
|
||||
|
||||
**2. Verify submission:**
|
||||
You should see output like:
|
||||
```
|
||||
✓ Work submitted to merge queue
|
||||
@@ -438,20 +434,19 @@ You should see output like:
|
||||
Source: polecat/<name>
|
||||
Target: main
|
||||
Issue: {{issue}}
|
||||
✓ Sandbox nuked
|
||||
✓ Session exiting
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
**3. You're recyclable:**
|
||||
Your work is in the queue. The Witness knows you're done.
|
||||
Your sandbox can be cleaned up - all work is pushed to origin.
|
||||
**What happens next (not your concern):**
|
||||
- Refinery processes your MR from the queue
|
||||
- Refinery rebases and merges to main
|
||||
- Refinery closes the issue
|
||||
- If conflicts: Refinery spawns a FRESH polecat to re-implement
|
||||
|
||||
If you have context remaining, you may:
|
||||
- Pick up new work from `bd ready`
|
||||
- Or use `gt handoff` to cycle to a fresh session
|
||||
You are NOT involved in any of that. You're gone. Done means gone.
|
||||
|
||||
If the Refinery needs conflict resolution, it will dispatch a fresh polecat.
|
||||
You do NOT need to wait around.
|
||||
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** MR submitted, Witness notified, polecat recyclable."""
|
||||
**Exit criteria:** Work submitted, sandbox nuked, session exited."""
|
||||
|
||||
[vars]
|
||||
[vars.issue]
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user