Christian Nennemann
f9afca0c58
Remove duplicated routing tables, verbose JSON event examples, writing/prose domain template (belongs in domains/colette-bridge), --start-from section (belongs in run skill), and redundant checklist. Consolidate three Agent() templates into one compact template. Preserve all routing rules, decision logic, and feedback format.
141 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown
141 lines
4.7 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
name: act-phase
|
|
description: |
|
|
Use after the Check phase completes. Collects reviewer findings, routes fixes, applies them, decides whether to exit or cycle.
|
|
<example>Automatically loaded during orchestration after Check phase</example>
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
# Act Phase
|
|
|
|
Turn Check phase findings into fixes, then decide: exit or cycle.
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Check output → Collect → Deduplicate → Route → Fix → Exit or Cycle
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Step 1: Collect and Consolidate Findings
|
|
|
|
Parse all reviewer outputs into one table grouped by severity (CRITICAL / WARNING / INFO):
|
|
|
|
| # | Source | Location | Category | Description | Suggested Fix |
|
|
|---|--------|----------|----------|-------------|---------------|
|
|
| 1 | guardian | src/auth/handler.ts:48 | security | Empty string bypasses validation | Add length check |
|
|
|
|
### Deduplication
|
|
|
|
Same file + same category + similar description = one finding. Use the higher severity, credit all sources (e.g. `guardian + skeptic`).
|
|
|
|
### Cross-Cycle Tracking (cycle > 1)
|
|
|
|
Compare against prior cycle findings:
|
|
- **Resolved** — no longer present, mark resolved, do not re-raise
|
|
- **Persisting** — same location + category, increment `cycle_count`
|
|
- **New** — first appearance, `cycle_count: 1`
|
|
|
|
Finding persisting 2+ cycles = flag for escalation (see Step 4).
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Step 2: Fix Routing
|
|
|
|
This is the **canonical routing table** (single source of truth for the whole system):
|
|
|
|
| Source | Category | Routes to | Reason |
|
|
|--------|----------|-----------|--------|
|
|
| Guardian | security, breaking-change | Creator | Design must change |
|
|
| Guardian | reliability, dependency | Creator | Architectural decision needed |
|
|
| Skeptic | design, scalability | Creator | Assumptions need revision |
|
|
| Sage | quality, consistency | Maker | Implementation refinement |
|
|
| Sage | testing | Maker | Test gap, not design flaw |
|
|
| Trickster | reliability (design flaw) | Creator | Needs redesign |
|
|
| Trickster | reliability (test gap), testing | Maker | Needs more tests |
|
|
|
|
**Disambiguation:** If the fix requires changing the approach → Creator. If it requires changing code within the existing approach → Maker.
|
|
|
|
### Direct Fix (no agent)
|
|
|
|
Apply with Edit tool when **all** are true:
|
|
- Mechanical (typo, naming, formatting, import order)
|
|
- No behavioral change
|
|
- No test update needed
|
|
- Single file
|
|
|
|
### Maker Fix (spawn agent)
|
|
|
|
Spawn a targeted Maker when the fix involves code logic, tests, multiple files, or behavioral changes. Batch findings in the same file area into one Maker spawn.
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
Agent(
|
|
description: "Fix: <description>",
|
|
prompt: "You are the MAKER archetype.
|
|
Branch: <maker's branch>
|
|
Findings:
|
|
1. [CRITICAL] file:line — issue → suggested fix
|
|
2. [WARNING] file:line — issue → suggested fix
|
|
Rules: fix ONLY these issues, add/update tests if behavior changes,
|
|
run tests, commit each fix separately as 'fix: <description>'.
|
|
Do NOT refactor surrounding code.",
|
|
isolation: "worktree",
|
|
mode: "bypassPermissions"
|
|
)
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### Design Fix (route to Creator)
|
|
|
|
Design findings are NOT fixed in Act. Collect them into `act-feedback.md` for the Creator in the next cycle (see Step 5).
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Step 3: Fix Application
|
|
|
|
Apply in severity order: CRITICAL → WARNING → INFO. Within same severity, group by file.
|
|
|
|
For each fix:
|
|
1. Apply the change (direct edit or via Maker agent)
|
|
2. Emit `fix.applied` event with source, finding, file, severity, before/after
|
|
3. For non-trivial fixes: re-run only the originating reviewer scoped to changed files. New findings from re-check get added with source `re-check:<reviewer>`
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Step 4: Exit Decision
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
CRITICAL = 0 AND criteria met → EXIT: proceed to merge
|
|
CRITICAL = 0 AND criteria NOT met → CYCLE: feedback to Creator
|
|
CRITICAL > 0 AND cycles remaining → CYCLE: build feedback, go to Plan
|
|
CRITICAL > 0 AND no cycles left → STOP: report unresolved to user
|
|
Same CRITICAL persists 2+ cycles → ESCALATE: ask user for guidance
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Emit `cycle.boundary` event with: cycle number, max_cycles, critical/warning/info remaining, fixes applied, next action.
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
## Step 5: Cycle Feedback
|
|
|
|
When cycling back, produce `act-feedback.md`:
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
## Cycle N → Cycle N+1
|
|
|
|
### For Creator (design changes needed)
|
|
| # | Source | Severity | Category | Issue | Cycles Open |
|
|
|---|--------|----------|----------|-------|-------------|
|
|
|
|
### For Maker (implementation fixes needed)
|
|
| # | Source | Severity | Category | Issue | Cycles Open |
|
|
|---|--------|----------|----------|-------|-------------|
|
|
|
|
### Resolved This Cycle
|
|
| # | Source | Issue | How Resolved |
|
|
|---|--------|-------|--------------|
|
|
|
|
### Persisting Issues (escalation candidates)
|
|
| # | Source | Issue | Cycles Open | Action |
|
|
|---|--------|-------|-------------|--------|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Route findings into Creator vs Maker sections using the routing table in Step 2.
|