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>
2026-01-10 17:11:55 -08:00
parent ad6386809c
commit 8219fd5abe
8 changed files with 1349 additions and 90 deletions
--- a/internal/formula/formulas/mol-polecat-code-review.formula.toml
+++ b/internal/formula/formulas/mol-polecat-code-review.formula.toml
@@ -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