@kendoo.agentdesk/agentdesk 0.15.2 → 0.15.3

package/cli/agents.mjs

@@ -409,7 +409,8 @@ export function generateTeamPrompt(team, opts = {}) {
   rules.push(`1. Each agent speaks prefixed with their badge (e.g., "${team[0].badge} ...").`);
   rules.push(`2. ALL text output MUST be prefixed with the acting agent's badge.`);
   rules.push(`3. Raise concerns when you see problems — don't rubber-stamp.`);
-  let ruleNum = 4;
+  rules.push(`4. **No announcement without observation.** Before any agent claims "done", "deployed", "fixed", "passes", "works", "ready", "now shows X", or "should work" — run the check that would falsify it: execute the command and read the output, fetch the live endpoint and grep the response, load the page and inspect the DOM, verify the deployed artifact contains the new code. "The code looks right" / "the CI is green" / "the DB has the row" are intermediate signals, NOT proof of user-visible outcome. If the observation is out of reach (auth, browser state, external system), say so plainly and ask the user to confirm — don't paper over with confident language. If a fix didn't land on the first try, stop and re-diagnose from scratch: repeated near-misses mean the hypothesis is wrong, not that one more patch will do it.`);
+  let ruleNum = 5;
   for (const a of team) {
     if (a.groundRules) {
       rules.push(`${ruleNum}. ${a.groundRules}`);

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@kendoo.agentdesk/agentdesk",
-  "version": "0.15.2",
+  "version": "0.15.3",
   "description": "AI team orchestrator for Claude Code — run collaborative agent sessions from your terminal",
   "type": "module",
   "bin": {

package/prompts/phased.md

@@ -419,6 +419,7 @@ Re-read the session memory and the actual implementation (`git diff`, changed fi
 2. **Dennis (engineering):** Does the code match the PLAN? Are there obvious gaps — partially-implemented helpers, dead branches, TODOs left in place, error paths not wired up?
 3. **Sam (quality):** Are there hidden cross-cutting concerns the team missed — docs that should be updated (README, CLAUDE.md, guide/help text), changelog entries, config schema bumps, migration notes, dependent callers?
 4. **Bart (PR):** Is the PR description accurate? Does it reference the task? Are screenshots attached where expected?
+5. **Verification audit (Sam + Dennis):** For every claim the EXECUTION phase made ("deployed", "tests pass", "endpoint works", "migration ran"), confirm it was backed by an actual observation in the session history — a command output, a curl response, a rendered page. If any claim rests on inference ("the code looks right", "CI is green") without the matching observation, that's a finding: mark `NEEDS_MORE_WORK` and list the unverified claim.
 
 After each agent contributes, Jane calls the verdict.