@pmelab/gtd 6.11.0 → 6.12.0

package/README.md

@@ -118,9 +118,12 @@ which steering file you create:
 Both flows converge on the same tail: an agent hands you a `.gtd/REVIEW.md`
 checkbox review of the diff — tick a box as you review each hunk (ticking just
 records "I read this"), and leave a **comment** to request changes: a note on a
-line, or a direct code edit. Any comment sends a build + re-review round (a
-re-review covering only the follow-through, and a hand-edit is treated as your
-own fix the agent completes without reverting your lines); ticking every box
+line, an inline `// TODO`-style comment in the code, or a direct code edit. Any
+comment sends a build + re-review round — an agent first turns your comments
+into an explicit instruction list, then a build turn implements it (a re-review
+then covers only the follow-through, and a hand-edit is treated as your own fix
+the agent completes without reverting your lines; a comment can't be silently
+dropped — a build turn that addresses nothing is refused). Ticking every box
 with no comment is the sign-off, which collapses the whole cycle into one commit
 (a **squash finale** whose message an agent drafts). Stepping with a box still
 unticked and no comment is refused (finish reviewing first), as is deleting

package/dist/gtd.bundle.mjs

@@ -189103,6 +189103,8 @@ const isCommitState = (state) => state.commit !== void 0;
 const isReviewWindowState = (def, state) => def.states[state]?.reviewWindow === true;
 /** True when `state` anchors the review window's diff base (see `StateDef.reviewBase`). Safe for an unknown state name (returns `false`). */
 const isReviewBaseState = (def, state) => def.states[state]?.reviewBase === true;
+/** True when a step at `state` must be refused if its only change is deleting the state's `file:` (see `StateDef.requireProgress`). Safe for an unknown state name (returns `false`). */
+const isRequireProgressState = (def, state) => def.states[state]?.requireProgress === true;
 /** The workflow's declared review-entry state name (see `StateDef.reviewEntry`) — `gtd review <commitish>` (`src/program.ts`) enters this state to start a new review process. `undefined` when no state declares one; `validateDefinition` guarantees at most one does, so the first (only) match wins. */
 const reviewEntryStateOf = (def) => {
 	for (const [name, state] of Object.entries(def.states)) if (state.reviewEntry === true) return name;
@@ -189472,6 +189474,19 @@ const validateReviewEntry = (name, state) => {
 	if (state.initial === true) errors.push(`state "${name}": the initial state cannot declare "reviewEntry"`);
 	return errors;
 };
+/**
+* `requireProgress`, when present, is forbidden on a commit state (never at
+* rest — same rule family as `reviewWindow`/`reviewBase`) and REQUIRES a
+* `file:`: the edge gate refuses a turn whose sole change is deleting that
+* file, so a state with no `file:` to name has nothing to guard.
+*/
+const validateRequireProgress = (name, state) => {
+	if (state.requireProgress === void 0) return [];
+	const errors = [];
+	if (isCommitState(state)) errors.push(`state "${name}": a commit state cannot declare "requireProgress"`);
+	if (state.file === void 0) errors.push(`state "${name}": "requireProgress" requires "file"`);
+	return errors;
+};
 /** At most one state may declare `reviewEntry: true` — `gtd review <commitish>` (`src/program.ts`) needs a single, unambiguous state name to enter (see `reviewEntryStateOf`). */
 const validateReviewEntryUniqueness = (def, names) => {
 	const entryNames = names.filter((name) => def.states[name].reviewEntry === true);
@@ -189538,7 +189553,8 @@ const validateState = (def, name, names) => {
 		...validateFile(name, state),
 		...validateMode(def, name, state),
 		...validateReviewWindow(name, state),
-		...validateReviewEntry(name, state)
+		...validateReviewEntry(name, state),
+		...validateRequireProgress(name, state)
 	];
 };
 /**
@@ -189786,7 +189802,8 @@ const KNOWN_STATE_KEYS = /* @__PURE__ */ new Set([
 	"mode",
 	"reviewWindow",
 	"reviewBase",
-	"reviewEntry"
+	"reviewEntry",
+	"requireProgress"
 ]);
 const KNOWN_TOP_KEYS = /* @__PURE__ */ new Set([
 	"vars",
@@ -190040,7 +190057,8 @@ const assembleStateDef = (parts) => ({
 		mode: parts.mode,
 		reviewWindow: parts.reviewWindow,
 		reviewBase: parts.reviewBase,
-		reviewEntry: parts.reviewEntry
+		reviewEntry: parts.reviewEntry,
+		requireProgress: parts.requireProgress
 	}),
 	...assembleContentFields(parts.content)
 });
@@ -190064,7 +190082,8 @@ const compileState = (name, raw, configDir, errors, inlineFileRefs) => {
 		mode: compileMode(raw, name, errors),
 		reviewWindow: compileBooleanFlag(raw, "reviewWindow", name, errors),
 		reviewBase: compileBooleanFlag(raw, "reviewBase", name, errors),
-		reviewEntry: compileBooleanFlag(raw, "reviewEntry", name, errors)
+		reviewEntry: compileBooleanFlag(raw, "reviewEntry", name, errors),
+		requireProgress: compileBooleanFlag(raw, "requireProgress", name, errors)
 	});
 };
 /**
@@ -190290,6 +190309,10 @@ const workflowJsonSchema = {
 					reviewEntry: {
 						type: "boolean",
 						description: "Marks the (at most one) state `gtd review <commitish>` enters to start a brand new process reviewing <commitish>..HEAD. Forbidden on a commit state and on the initial state."
+					},
+					requireProgress: {
+						type: "boolean",
+						description: "When true, a step at this state is refused if its only pending change is deleting the state's own `file:` — a work-free turn that discards its input without addressing it. A `NOTHING ACTIONABLE` sentinel file is exempt (a legitimately non-actionable round makes no code change). Requires a `file:`. Forbidden on a commit state."
 					}
 				}
 			}
@@ -191473,7 +191496,7 @@ var WorktreeReader = class WorktreeReader extends Tag("WorktreeReader")() {
 };
 //#endregion
 //#region src/workflows/unified.yaml
-var unified_default = "# The unified gtd workflow template — written verbatim into `.gtdrc.json`\n# (nested under a `workflow:` key) by `gtd init` (no argument). gtd ships no\n# default workflow: a repo picks this bundled template with `gtd init`, and a\n# state command run with no workflow configured fails (see src/Config.ts).\n# See STATES.md §10 for the full walkthrough.\n#\n# Compiled through the exact same `compileWorkflowConfig` a user's `.gtdrc`\n# `workflow:` key goes through — no privileged code path\n# (src/workflows/templates.ts does the compiling). Every content string below\n# is INLINE (no `./`-relative file references): the bundled template ships\n# inside a single-file build (`dist/gtd.bundle.mjs`), so its content must\n# already be resolved at BUILD time. `gtd init` DERIVES the scaffolded\n# `.gtdrc.json` from this inline source (`renderInitScaffold`): each agent\n# state's `prompt:` is written out as an editable `gtd-prompts/<state>.md`\n# file; human `message:`/check `script:`/the `done` `commit:` body stay inline.\n#\n# ── Three entry points, one shared tail ────────────────────────────────────\n#\n# The initial `idle` state FORKS on which steering file the human creates:\n#\n#   * .gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md -> the ADVANCED flow (product + technical Q&A,\n#     package decomposition, per-package parallel build + agentic spec-review).\n#   * anything else (e.g. .gtd/TODO.md) -> the SIMPLE flow (one grilling Q&A\n#     loop, a monolithic build, no decomposition, no agentic review).\n#\n# A third entry, `gtd review <commitish>`, jumps straight to `reviewing`\n# (reviewEntry) to review a foreign branch through the same shared tail.\n#\n# All three converge at `reviewing` -> `await-review`. Ticking a REVIEW.md box\n# means only \"I reviewed this hunk\"; a COMMENT (not an unticked box) is what asks\n# for changes. Every human step at `await-review` goes to `review-deciding`,\n# which inspects the step and routes:\n#   * no comment (every box ticked, no REVIEW.md note, no code edit) -> the diff\n#     is a bare REVIEW.md deletion -> squashing -> done (the ONLY path to the\n#     finale — the whole cycle collapses into one commit).\n#   * any comment — a note in REVIEW.md OR a hand-edit to code — ->\n#     review-deciding writes REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md -> feedback-building implements\n#     it (completing any code the human hand-edited, never reverting their\n#     lines) -> checking -> reviewing regenerates an INCREMENTAL REVIEW.md\n#     (review-deciding carries `reviewBase: true`, so each feedback round's\n#     review + checkout window covers only `last-review..HEAD`, i.e. the agent's\n#     follow-through, not the human's own edit) -> await-review, looping until\n#     sign-off.\n# Two dead ends never commit: the sign-off gate (src/program.ts) REFUSES a step\n# that leaves a box unticked with no comment (finish reviewing first) and a\n# deleted REVIEW.md (restore it and tick the boxes).\n#\n# The shared health segment (`checking`/`fixing`/`escalate`) serves the simple\n# build and the feedback loop — its green edge targets\n# `reviewing`. The advanced per-package loop keeps its OWN health triple\n# (`adv-checking`/`adv-fixing`/`adv-escalate`) because its green edge targets\n# the per-package `spec-review` gate instead.\n#\n# KNOWN LIMITATION: `on` pattern keys are NOT Eta templates — they keep the\n# LITERAL `.gtd/...` paths matching these vars' DEFAULT values. Repointing a\n# file var changes what templates read/write WITHOUT changing what the `on`\n# patterns match, desyncing the machine (see docs/configuration.md).\n\nvars:\n  testCommand: npm test\n  todoFile: .gtd/TODO.md\n  requirementsFile: .gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md\n  architectureFile: .gtd/ARCHITECTURE.md\n  packagesDir: .gtd/packages\n  nextFile: .gtd/NEXT.md\n  reviewFile: .gtd/REVIEW.md\n  reviewFeedbackFile: .gtd/REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md\n  feedbackFile: .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\n  specFeedbackFile: .gtd/SPEC_FEEDBACK.md\n  commitMsgFile: .gtd/COMMIT_MSG.md\n  # The two opaque model tiers every agent state draws from — repoint them here\n  # (or via a top-level `.gtdrc` `vars:` key / a `GTD_VAR_plannerModel` env var)\n  # to change every state on that tier at once. `plannerModel` (default \"smart\")\n  # is the heavier tier for the one-shot planning/architecting/review turns;\n  # `coderModel` (default \"base\") is the tier for the build/fix turns.\n  plannerModel: smart\n  coderModel: base\n\nstates:\n  # ── Shared entry ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n  idle:\n    actor: human\n    initial: true\n    # Every human-gate `message:` below closes with the same rendered \"What\n    # each change does next\" list, built from `it.edges` (the resting state's\n    # own `on` edges — each edge's `describe:` is the single source of truth).\n    message: |\n      No active gtd cycle.\n\n      To start one, create a steering file describing what you want built:\n\n      - `.gtd/TODO.md` — a short sketch — starts the SIMPLE flow (plan, build,\n        review).\n      - `.gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md` — the product requirements — starts the ADVANCED\n        flow (product + technical Q&A, package decomposition, parallel build,\n        per-package agentic review).\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"* .gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md\":\n        to: adv-grilling\n        describe: >-\n          Save the product requirements to `.gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md` to start the\n          ADVANCED flow — the agent develops them through product then technical\n          Q&A, decomposes the work into packages, and builds each in parallel\n          (**adv-grilling**).\n      \"* **\":\n        to: grilling\n        describe: >-\n          Save a short sketch to `.gtd/TODO.md` (or any other change) to start\n          the SIMPLE flow — the agent reads it, explores the codebase, and\n          develops it into a concrete implementation plan (**grilling**).\n\n  # ── Simple flow: one Q&A loop, monolithic build ───────────────────────────\n  grilling:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.todoFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: plan\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to develop.\n\n      `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` holds a short sketch of what to build (or\n      feedback from a prior review lap). Read it, explore the codebase, and\n      develop it into a concrete implementation plan.\n\n      For every question you cannot settle yourself, add it under a\n      `## Open Questions` heading near the top, one `### <question>`\n      sub-heading each, its body your suggested answer in plain prose (always\n      suggest one — the human accepts it by leaving it untouched, or overrides\n      it by editing it). Omit the section entirely once there are none.\n\n      If `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` already carries a `## Open Questions`\n      section from a previous lap, the human has now responded to that whole\n      batch: fold every one of those questions into the plan — the human's edit\n      where they gave one, your own suggestion where they left it untouched (an\n      untouched suggestion IS acceptance) — and MOVE each resolved\n      `### <question>` block down into a `## Answered Questions` section at the\n      bottom. Raise any genuinely new questions under `## Open Questions`.\n\n      Leave `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` uncommitted and finish your turn — do\n      not commit, and do not run `gtd step agent` yourself; the harness does\n      that.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": grilling-answer\n\n  grilling-answer:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.todoFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    message: |\n      `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` holds the plan under development, with any\n      open questions under `## Open Questions` — each carrying a suggested\n      answer. Answer a question by editing its body in place; leave a\n      suggestion untouched to accept it.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"C\":\n        to: building\n        describe: >-\n          Change nothing to accept every suggested answer as-is and move on to\n          implementation (**building**).\n      \"* **\":\n        to: grilling\n        describe: >-\n          Edit the plan — answer a question, add detail, or raise a new one — to\n          send it back for another round of grilling (**grilling**).\n\n  building:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.todoFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create or edit anything under `.gtd/` except deleting\n      `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to delete once its\n      work is complete.\n\n      The plan to implement is: <%~ it.read(it.vars.todoFile) %>\n\n      Read that plan and implement it in full. Use TDD discipline: one test,\n      then the implementation that passes it, then the next — never write all\n      the tests first.\n\n      Delete `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` once the work it describes is complete\n      and verified. Leave everything else uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": checking\n\n  # ── Advanced flow: product + technical Q&A ────────────────────────────────\n  adv-grilling:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: plan\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to develop.\n\n      `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` holds the product requirements (or\n      feedback from a prior review lap). Read it, explore the codebase, and\n      develop it into a concrete, PRODUCT-level plan in this one turn.\n\n      Scope: product and user-facing decisions only. Leave implementation\n      details (file/module structure, data models, tech-stack choices) for the\n      next phase (`<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>`).\n\n      For every remaining open question, add it under a `## Open Questions`\n      heading near the top, one `### <question>` sub-heading each, its body your\n      suggested answer in plain prose (always suggest one). Omit the section\n      once there are none. On a return lap, fold the whole answered batch into\n      the plan and move each resolved `### <question>` block down into a\n      `## Answered Questions` section at the bottom.\n\n      Leave `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": adv-grilling-answer\n\n  adv-grilling-answer:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    message: |\n      `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` holds the product plan under\n      development, with any open questions under `## Open Questions` — each\n      carrying a suggested answer. Answer a question by editing its body in\n      place; leave a suggestion untouched to accept it.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"C\":\n        to: architecting\n        describe: >-\n          Change nothing to accept the product plan and move on to technical\n          architecting (**architecting**).\n      \"* **\":\n        to: adv-grilling\n        describe: >-\n          Edit the product plan — answer a question, add detail, or raise a new\n          one — to send it back for another round (**adv-grilling**).\n\n  architecting:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.architectureFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: plan\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` and `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>`,\n      which this prompt tells you to write and delete respectively.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` (the converged product plan) and\n      develop `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` from it in this one turn:\n      file/module structure, data models, library/tech-stack choices,\n      error-handling strategy — the *how*, building on the *what* already\n      settled. Do not re-open product-level decisions; treat them as settled.\n\n      For every remaining open question, add it under a `## Open Questions`\n      heading exactly as the grilling phase does (one `### <question>` each, its\n      body your suggested answer). Omit the section once there are none. On a\n      return lap, fold the whole answered batch in and move each resolved block\n      down into a `## Answered Questions` section at the bottom.\n\n      Once `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` is written, delete\n      `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` — its content has been folded in and it\n      must not linger. Leave everything uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": architecting-answer\n\n  architecting-answer:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.architectureFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    message: |\n      `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` holds the technical plan under\n      development, with any open questions under `## Open Questions`. Answer a\n      question by editing its body in place; leave a suggestion untouched to\n      accept it.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"C\":\n        to: decompose\n        describe: >-\n          Change nothing to accept the technical plan and move on to decomposing\n          the work into packages (**decompose**).\n      \"* **\":\n        to: architecting\n        describe: >-\n          Edit the technical plan to send it back for another round\n          (**architecting**).\n\n  # ── Advanced flow: decomposition + per-package parallel build loop ─────────\n  decompose:\n    actor: agent\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except the\n      package files this prompt tells you to write (under\n      `<%= it.vars.packagesDir %>/`), and `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>`,\n      which it tells you to delete.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` (the converged technical plan) and\n      decompose it into an ordered set of WORK PACKAGES, one file each under\n      `<%= it.vars.packagesDir %>/` (e.g. `<%= it.vars.packagesDir %>/01-name.md`,\n      `<%= it.vars.packagesDir %>/02-name.md`, ...). Order the packages so the\n      test suite can pass again after each one lands.\n\n      Each package file describes a set of INDEPENDENT tasks that can be\n      implemented concurrently without ordering constraints between them — a\n      single build turn will fan them out to parallel subagents. Give each task\n      a clear description, acceptance criteria as `- [ ]` checkboxes, and the\n      relevant paths. Also state the package's overall requirement so it can be\n      reviewed against its spec. Do NOT put ordering-dependent tasks in the same\n      package — split them across ordered packages instead.\n\n      No package file may reference any other `.gtd/` file. Once the package\n      files are written, delete `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>`. Leave\n      everything uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* .gtd/packages/**\": picking\n\n  picking:\n    actor: check\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn (the package queue arbiter) — the loop driver executes\n      # this verbatim, then steps the check actor. Mechanics only: take the\n      # first package file (by name) under the packages dir into NEXT.md, or\n      # remove NEXT.md when the queue is empty. What NEXT.md's presence/absence\n      # MEANS (another package to build vs. the queue closing out to review) is\n      # decided by this state's own `on` rules at capture time — never here.\n      set +e\n      # Hoist the NEXT path once, at the TOP: Eta's autoTrim eats the newline\n      # after an interpolation tag, so no tag may be the last token on a line —\n      # it would glue the next line's `else`/`fi` onto it and break the script.\n      # Below this point everything is plain bash.\n      nextFile=\"<%~ it.vars.nextFile %>\"\n      next=$(ls <%~ it.vars.packagesDir %>/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -n 1)\n      if [ -n \"$next\" ]; then\n        printf '%s' \"$next\" > \"$nextFile\"\n      else\n        rm -f \"$nextFile\"\n      fi\n    on:\n      \"D .gtd/NEXT.md\": reviewing\n      \"* .gtd/NEXT.md\": adv-building\n      \"C\": reviewing\n\n  adv-building:\n    actor: agent\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/`; in\n      particular do NOT delete the package file (the `spec-review` gate reads it\n      after you) and never touch `<%= it.vars.nextFile %>` — the `picking` state\n      owns it.\n\n      The package to implement is: <%~ it.read(it.vars.nextFile) %>\n\n      That file describes a set of INDEPENDENT tasks. Implement ALL of them in\n      this one turn, fanning the independent tasks out to parallel subagents\n      where your harness supports it — each task is self-contained and can be\n      built concurrently. Implement EXACTLY the tasks this package describes — no\n      more, no less; leave every other package file untouched. Use TDD\n      discipline within each task.\n\n      Leave the package file in place and everything else uncommitted, then\n      finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": adv-checking\n\n  adv-checking:\n    actor: check\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn — run the suite; a red run records .gtd/FEEDBACK.md, a\n      # green run cleans it up. The `on` rules decide what that means.\n      set +e\n      mkdir -p .gtd\n      # Hoist the feedback path once, at the TOP: Eta's autoTrim eats the\n      # newline after an interpolation tag, so no tag may be the last token on\n      # a line — it would glue the next line's `else`/`fi` onto it and break\n      # the script. Below this point everything is plain bash.\n      feedback=\"<%~ it.vars.feedbackFile %>\"\n      <%~ it.vars.testCommand %> > .gtd/.check-output 2>&1\n      code=$?\n      if [ \"$code\" -ne 0 ]; then\n        if [ -s .gtd/.check-output ]; then\n          mv .gtd/.check-output \"$feedback\"\n        else\n          rm -f .gtd/.check-output\n          printf 'the test command failed with exit code %s and produced no output.' \"$code\" > \"$feedback\"\n        fi\n      else\n        rm -f .gtd/.check-output\n        rm -f \"$feedback\"\n      fi\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": adv-fixing\n      \"M .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": adv-fixing\n      \"D .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": spec-review\n      \"C\": spec-review\n\n  adv-fixing:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: fix\n    retry:\n      max: 3\n      otherwise: adv-escalate\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to address.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` (the failing test output) and fix the\n      code so the suite passes. Keep the change focused — do not refactor\n      unrelated code. If the feedback is wrong, empty or delete\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` instead of \"fixing\" a non-issue.\n\n      Leave everything uncommitted and finish your turn — do not commit.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": adv-checking\n\n  adv-escalate:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>\n    message: |\n      The agent could not get the check to pass after repeated attempts.\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` holds the last failing output.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"* **\":\n        to: adv-checking\n        describe: >-\n          Fix the failure yourself — edit the code and/or\n          `.gtd/FEEDBACK.md` — to re-run the check (**adv-checking**).\n\n  spec-review:\n    actor: agent\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: review\n    # Bounded per cycle: once entered `max` times, a transition into it is\n    # redirected to `closing` (force-close the package and move on — the\n    # unresolved concern is deferred to the shared human review at the tail,\n    # which sees the whole diff anyway). NOTE the cap is PROCESS-scoped, so it\n    # pools across packages — the same documented limitation the shared\n    # `fixing` cap has (see STATES.md / docs/configuration.md).\n    retry:\n      max: 3\n      otherwise: closing\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent reviewing a freshly-built work package\n      against its own spec. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own state — never\n      create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to write\n      when — and only when — you find problems.\n\n      The package spec is: <%~ it.read(it.vars.nextFile) %>\n\n      Read that spec, then verify the package's implementation (the diff below)\n      against it: are all its tasks done, acceptance criteria met, and the code\n      sound and consistent with the codebase?\n\n      - If it fully satisfies the spec, write NOTHING and finish your turn — a\n        clean turn is your approval.\n      - If it does not, write `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>` listing the\n        concrete problems for a fix turn to address. Be specific.\n\n      Do not fix anything yourself and do not delete the package file — a later\n      step owns that. Finish your turn.\n      <% if (it.processDiff.trim()) { %>\n\n      ## Diff under review\n\n      ```diff\n      <%~ it.processDiff %>\n      ```\n      <% } %>\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/SPEC_FEEDBACK.md\": spec-fix\n      \"M .gtd/SPEC_FEEDBACK.md\": spec-fix\n      \"D .gtd/SPEC_FEEDBACK.md\": closing\n      \"C\": closing\n\n  spec-fix:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: fix\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to address\n      and then delete.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>` (the reviewer's concerns about the\n      current package) and the package spec (`<%= it.read(it.vars.nextFile) %>`),\n      then fix the code to resolve every concern. Keep the change focused.\n\n      Delete `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>` once every concern is addressed.\n      Leave everything else uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": adv-checking\n\n  closing:\n    actor: check\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn (the package closer) — remove the just-reviewed package\n      # file (its path is in NEXT.md) plus any leftover spec feedback, so\n      # `picking` selects the NEXT package (or falls through to review when the\n      # queue is empty). Reached on approval (spec-review clean) and on the\n      # spec-review retry cap (force-close, deferring the concern to the tail).\n      set +e\n      pkg=$(cat <%~ it.vars.nextFile %> 2>/dev/null)\n      [ -n \"$pkg\" ] && rm -f \"$pkg\"\n      rm -f <%~ it.vars.specFeedbackFile %> <%~ it.vars.nextFile %>\n    on:\n      \"* **\": picking\n\n  # ── Shared health segment (simple build, feedback loop, code-only edits) ──\n  checking:\n    actor: check\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn — run the suite; a red run records .gtd/FEEDBACK.md, a\n      # green run cleans it up. The `on` rules decide what that means.\n      set +e\n      mkdir -p .gtd\n      # Hoist the feedback path once, at the TOP: Eta's autoTrim eats the\n      # newline after an interpolation tag, so no tag may be the last token on\n      # a line — it would glue the next line's `else`/`fi` onto it and break\n      # the script. Below this point everything is plain bash.\n      feedback=\"<%~ it.vars.feedbackFile %>\"\n      <%~ it.vars.testCommand %> > .gtd/.check-output 2>&1\n      code=$?\n      if [ \"$code\" -ne 0 ]; then\n        if [ -s .gtd/.check-output ]; then\n          mv .gtd/.check-output \"$feedback\"\n        else\n          rm -f .gtd/.check-output\n          printf 'the test command failed with exit code %s and produced no output.' \"$code\" > \"$feedback\"\n        fi\n      else\n        rm -f .gtd/.check-output\n        rm -f \"$feedback\"\n      fi\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": fixing\n      \"M .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": fixing\n      \"D .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": reviewing\n      \"C\": reviewing\n\n  fixing:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: fix\n    retry:\n      max: 3\n      otherwise: escalate\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to address.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` (the failing test output) and fix the\n      code so the suite passes. Keep the change focused — do not refactor\n      unrelated code. If the feedback is wrong, empty or delete\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` instead of \"fixing\" a non-issue.\n\n      Leave everything uncommitted and finish your turn — do not commit.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": checking\n\n  escalate:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>\n    message: |\n      The agent could not get the check to pass after repeated attempts.\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` holds the last failing output.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"* **\":\n        to: checking\n        describe: >-\n          Fix the failure yourself — edit the code and/or `.gtd/FEEDBACK.md` —\n          to re-run the check (**checking**).\n\n  # ── Shared tail: agent review -> human review -> squash finale ────────────\n  reviewing:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFile %>\n    mode: review\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: review\n    # `gtd review <commitish>` (a plain non-gtd branch, e.g. a colleague's PR)\n    # enters here directly, recording the resolved base as a `Gtd-Review-Base:`\n    # trailer on its empty entry commit — everything below then reuses the same\n    # reviewing/await-review/feedback machinery over <commitish>..HEAD.\n    reviewEntry: true\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to write.\n\n      Write `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>` to help a human review the diff below in\n      this EXACT format:\n\n      - First non-blank line: `# Review: <%= it.currentCommit.slice(0, 7) %>`\n      - Somewhere in the document: `<!-- base: <%= it.startCommit %> -->`\n      - At least one `## <Chunk Title>` heading, grouping hunks semantically\n        (same feature/refactor/fix, even across files) — a short explanation of\n        what changed and why, then one `- [ ] ./path/to/file.ts#42 — note` file\n        pointer per hunk (checkboxes are for the human to tick, not you; every\n        path is `./`-relative, with an optional `#line` and an optional\n        ` — note`).\n\n      The diff below is `it.reviewDiff` — on a feedback round it covers ONLY the\n      changes made since the previous review, so you review just what changed,\n      not items already signed off. Leave `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>`\n      uncommitted and finish your turn.\n      <% if (it.reviewDiff.trim()) { %>\n\n      ## Full diff under review\n\n      ```diff\n      <%~ it.reviewDiff %>\n      ```\n      <% } %>\n    on:\n      \"* **\": await-review\n\n  await-review:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFile %>\n    mode: review\n    # While the cycle rests here, gtd opens a \"review checkout window\": raw HEAD\n    # is rewound to the review base (the most-recent `review-deciding` commit —\n    # so a feedback round shows only `last-review..HEAD` — or the process start\n    # on the first review) with the working tree untouched, surfacing the diff\n    # as ordinary uncommitted changes. It closes on the next invocation.\n    #\n    # Every human step here routes to `review-deciding`, which decides sign-off\n    # vs. feedback from the step's CONTENT (a comment, not a tick). Ticking a box\n    # only records \"I reviewed this hunk\". Two dead ends can't be told apart by a\n    # file-pattern edge, so the sign-off gate (`enforceReviewSignoffGate` in\n    # src/program.ts) catches them BEFORE the step commits and refuses: an\n    # unfinished review (a box still `- [ ]` with no comment) and a deleted\n    # REVIEW.md.\n    reviewWindow: true\n    message: |\n      `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>` holds the review record for the cycle — one\n      `- [ ]` checkbox per reviewable item, grouped into chunks. Tick a box\n      (`- [x]`) as you review each hunk; ticking only records that you've read\n      it, it is not sign-off.\n\n      When you've been through the whole diff, run `gtd step human`:\n\n      - Tick EVERY box and leave no comment — no note in\n        `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>`, no code edit — to sign off and collapse the\n        cycle into one commit (**squashing**).\n      - Leave a comment to request changes — a note on a\n        `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>` line, or a direct code edit — to send it to a\n        build + re-review round (**review-deciding** → **feedback-building**). A\n        code edit counts as your own fix: the agent completes the follow-through\n        it implies and never reverts your lines.\n\n      Stepping with a box still unticked and no comment is refused (finish\n      reviewing first); so is deleting `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>`.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": review-deciding\n\n  review-deciding:\n    actor: check\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFile %>\n    mode: review\n    # Anchors the INCREMENTAL review base: its most-recent in-process commit is\n    # the point the previous review round ended, so the next `reviewing` turn\n    # (and the review checkout window) covers only the changes since then. On\n    # the first review there is no such commit, so the base is the cycle start.\n    reviewBase: true\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn — decide the human's review step from its CONTENT. HEAD is\n      # the human's `await-review -> review-deciding` commit; HEAD^ is the\n      # `reviewing` commit that wrote the agent's original REVIEW.md (the sign-off\n      # gate refuses an incomplete step, so review-deciding is entered exactly\n      # once per round — nothing commits in between). It is FEEDBACK when the\n      # human left a comment: a note in REVIEW.md (any edit beyond a \"[ ]\"->\"[x]\"\n      # tick) OR a hand-edit to any non-.gtd/ file this round. Otherwise it is a\n      # clean sign-off. Either way, remove REVIEW.md; what the resulting diff\n      # MEANS is decided by this state's own `on` rules — the A/M\n      # REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md rows are declared BEFORE the D REVIEW.md row so a\n      # feedback round (which also deletes REVIEW.md) is captured as feedback,\n      # not mistaken for a sign-off.\n      set +e\n      mkdir -p .gtd\n      # Hoist the paths once, at the TOP: Eta's autoTrim eats the newline after\n      # an interpolation tag, so no tag may be the last token on a line — it\n      # would glue the next line onto it and break the script. Below this point\n      # everything is plain bash.\n      reviewFile=\"<%~ it.vars.reviewFile %>\"\n      reviewFeedbackFile=\"<%~ it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>\"\n      # Which non-.gtd/ files did the human hand-edit this round?\n      codeFiles=$(git diff-tree --no-commit-id --name-only -r HEAD | grep -v '^\\.gtd/')\n      # A note is any REVIEW.md change beyond a checkbox flip: normalize every\n      # \"[ ]\"/\"[x]\" to a placeholder, then compare the agent's original (HEAD^)\n      # against the human's version (HEAD).\n      notes=\"\"\n      before=$(git show \"HEAD^:$reviewFile\" 2>/dev/null | sed -E 's/\\[[ xX]\\]/[_]/g')\n      after=$(git show \"HEAD:$reviewFile\" 2>/dev/null | sed -E 's/\\[[ xX]\\]/[_]/g')\n      if [ \"$before\" != \"$after\" ]; then notes=1; fi\n      if [ -n \"$codeFiles\" ] || [ -n \"$notes\" ]; then\n        {\n          echo \"Review feedback to address, then delete this file. The human reviewed the diff and asked for the changes below.\"\n          echo \"Build on their own edits: complete only the follow-through each change implies (callers, tests, types, docs). Treat any lines the human wrote as final — never revert or rewrite them.\"\n          if [ -n \"$notes\" ]; then\n            echo\n            echo \"## Notes left in the review (ticked items are approved — act on the notes)\"\n            echo\n            echo '```diff'\n            git show HEAD --format= -- \"$reviewFile\"\n            echo '```'\n          fi\n          if [ -n \"$codeFiles\" ]; then\n            echo\n            echo \"## Code the human hand-edited this round — already committed, build on top\"\n            echo\n            echo '```diff'\n            git show HEAD --format= -- $codeFiles\n            echo '```'\n          fi\n        } > \"$reviewFeedbackFile\"\n      fi\n      rm -f \"$reviewFile\"\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md\": feedback-building\n      \"M .gtd/REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md\": feedback-building\n      \"D .gtd/REVIEW.md\": squashing\n\n  feedback-building:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent addressing review feedback. `.gtd/`\n      holds this workflow's own state — never create, edit, or delete anything\n      under `.gtd/` except `<%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>`, which this\n      prompt tells you to address and then delete.\n\n      The review feedback to address is: <%~ it.read(it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile) %>\n\n      Implement exactly those changes — no Q&A, no re-planning. Use TDD\n      discipline. When the feedback includes code the human hand-edited this\n      round, that edit is ALREADY committed: treat their lines as final, build ON\n      TOP of them to complete only the follow-through they imply (callers, tests,\n      types, docs), and never revert or rewrite what they changed. Delete\n      `<%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>` once every item is addressed. Leave\n      everything else uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": checking\n\n  squashing:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. The cycle is approved and done.\n      `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own state — never create, edit, or delete\n      anything under `.gtd/` except `<%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>`, which this\n      prompt tells you to write.\n\n      Leave `<%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>` uncommitted and finish your turn —\n      entering this file squashes everything this process retains into one\n      commit using its content as the message. The diff below is exactly what\n      that commit will contain: `it.retainedDiff`, the changes THIS process\n      made (its trace/retry boundary onward). For a normal build cycle that is\n      the whole feature; for a `gtd review` process it is only the fixes made\n      during the review — NOT the changeset that was under review.\n      <% if (it.retainedDiff.trim()) { %>\n\n      Write `<%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>` with ONE conventional-commits message\n      for the changes below (subject line `type(scope): subject`, imperative\n      mood, <= 72 characters; a body explaining the why, trade-offs, and key\n      decisions). Plain text, no markdown wrapper.\n\n      ## Retained diff\n\n      ```diff\n      <%~ it.retainedDiff %>\n      ```\n      <% } else { %>\n\n      This process retained NO changes (a clean review sign-off with no fixes).\n      Write `<%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>` with exactly this one line and\n      nothing else:\n\n      chore: human review\n      <% } %>\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/COMMIT_MSG.md\": done\n      \"M .gtd/COMMIT_MSG.md\": done\n\n  done:\n    commit: |\n      <%~ it.read(it.vars.commitMsgFile) %>\n\n      Token cost: <%= it.processCost %>\n      <% it.processCostByModel.forEach(function(m){ %>\n      - <%= m.model %>: <%= m.cost %>\n      <% }) %>\n";
+var unified_default = "# The unified gtd workflow template — written verbatim into `.gtdrc.json`\n# (nested under a `workflow:` key) by `gtd init` (no argument). gtd ships no\n# default workflow: a repo picks this bundled template with `gtd init`, and a\n# state command run with no workflow configured fails (see src/Config.ts).\n# See STATES.md §10 for the full walkthrough.\n#\n# Compiled through the exact same `compileWorkflowConfig` a user's `.gtdrc`\n# `workflow:` key goes through — no privileged code path\n# (src/workflows/templates.ts does the compiling). Every content string below\n# is INLINE (no `./`-relative file references): the bundled template ships\n# inside a single-file build (`dist/gtd.bundle.mjs`), so its content must\n# already be resolved at BUILD time. `gtd init` DERIVES the scaffolded\n# `.gtdrc.json` from this inline source (`renderInitScaffold`): each agent\n# state's `prompt:` is written out as an editable `gtd-prompts/<state>.md`\n# file; human `message:`/check `script:`/the `done` `commit:` body stay inline.\n#\n# ── Three entry points, one shared tail ────────────────────────────────────\n#\n# The initial `idle` state FORKS on which steering file the human creates:\n#\n#   * .gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md -> the ADVANCED flow (product + technical Q&A,\n#     package decomposition, per-package parallel build + agentic spec-review).\n#   * anything else (e.g. .gtd/TODO.md) -> the SIMPLE flow (one grilling Q&A\n#     loop, a monolithic build, no decomposition, no agentic review).\n#\n# A third entry, `gtd review <commitish>`, jumps straight to `reviewing`\n# (reviewEntry) to review a foreign branch through the same shared tail.\n#\n# All three converge at `reviewing` -> `await-review`. Ticking a REVIEW.md box\n# means only \"I reviewed this hunk\"; a COMMENT (not an unticked box) is what asks\n# for changes. Every human step at `await-review` goes to `review-deciding`,\n# which inspects the step and routes:\n#   * no comment (every box ticked, no REVIEW.md note, no code edit) -> the diff\n#     is a bare REVIEW.md deletion -> squashing -> done (the ONLY path to the\n#     finale — the whole cycle collapses into one commit).\n#   * any comment — a note in REVIEW.md OR a hand-edit to code — ->\n#     review-deciding writes REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md -> feedback-building implements\n#     it (completing any code the human hand-edited, never reverting their\n#     lines) -> checking -> reviewing regenerates an INCREMENTAL REVIEW.md\n#     (review-deciding carries `reviewBase: true`, so each feedback round's\n#     review + checkout window covers only `last-review..HEAD`, i.e. the agent's\n#     follow-through, not the human's own edit) -> await-review, looping until\n#     sign-off.\n# Two dead ends never commit: the sign-off gate (src/program.ts) REFUSES a step\n# that leaves a box unticked with no comment (finish reviewing first) and a\n# deleted REVIEW.md (restore it and tick the boxes).\n#\n# The shared health segment (`checking`/`fixing`/`escalate`) serves the simple\n# build and the feedback loop — its green edge targets\n# `reviewing`. The advanced per-package loop keeps its OWN health triple\n# (`adv-checking`/`adv-fixing`/`adv-escalate`) because its green edge targets\n# the per-package `spec-review` gate instead.\n#\n# KNOWN LIMITATION: `on` pattern keys are NOT Eta templates — they keep the\n# LITERAL `.gtd/...` paths matching these vars' DEFAULT values. Repointing a\n# file var changes what templates read/write WITHOUT changing what the `on`\n# patterns match, desyncing the machine (see docs/configuration.md).\n\nvars:\n  testCommand: npm test\n  todoFile: .gtd/TODO.md\n  requirementsFile: .gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md\n  architectureFile: .gtd/ARCHITECTURE.md\n  packagesDir: .gtd/packages\n  nextFile: .gtd/NEXT.md\n  reviewFile: .gtd/REVIEW.md\n  reviewRawFile: .gtd/REVIEW_RAW.md\n  reviewFeedbackFile: .gtd/REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md\n  feedbackFile: .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\n  specFeedbackFile: .gtd/SPEC_FEEDBACK.md\n  commitMsgFile: .gtd/COMMIT_MSG.md\n  # The two opaque model tiers every agent state draws from — repoint them here\n  # (or via a top-level `.gtdrc` `vars:` key / a `GTD_VAR_plannerModel` env var)\n  # to change every state on that tier at once. `plannerModel` (default \"smart\")\n  # is the heavier tier for the one-shot planning/architecting/review turns;\n  # `coderModel` (default \"base\") is the tier for the build/fix turns.\n  plannerModel: smart\n  coderModel: base\n\nstates:\n  # ── Shared entry ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────\n  idle:\n    actor: human\n    initial: true\n    # Every human-gate `message:` below closes with the same rendered \"What\n    # each change does next\" list, built from `it.edges` (the resting state's\n    # own `on` edges — each edge's `describe:` is the single source of truth).\n    message: |\n      No active gtd cycle.\n\n      To start one, create a steering file describing what you want built:\n\n      - `.gtd/TODO.md` — a short sketch — starts the SIMPLE flow (plan, build,\n        review).\n      - `.gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md` — the product requirements — starts the ADVANCED\n        flow (product + technical Q&A, package decomposition, parallel build,\n        per-package agentic review).\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"* .gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md\":\n        to: adv-grilling\n        describe: >-\n          Save the product requirements to `.gtd/REQUIREMENTS.md` to start the\n          ADVANCED flow — the agent develops them through product then technical\n          Q&A, decomposes the work into packages, and builds each in parallel\n          (**adv-grilling**).\n      \"* **\":\n        to: grilling\n        describe: >-\n          Save a short sketch to `.gtd/TODO.md` (or any other change) to start\n          the SIMPLE flow — the agent reads it, explores the codebase, and\n          develops it into a concrete implementation plan (**grilling**).\n\n  # ── Simple flow: one Q&A loop, monolithic build ───────────────────────────\n  grilling:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.todoFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: plan\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to develop.\n\n      `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` holds a short sketch of what to build (or\n      feedback from a prior review lap). Read it, explore the codebase, and\n      develop it into a concrete implementation plan.\n\n      For every question you cannot settle yourself, add it under a\n      `## Open Questions` heading near the top, one `### <question>`\n      sub-heading each, its body your suggested answer in plain prose (always\n      suggest one — the human accepts it by leaving it untouched, or overrides\n      it by editing it). Omit the section entirely once there are none.\n\n      If `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` already carries a `## Open Questions`\n      section from a previous lap, the human has now responded to that whole\n      batch: fold every one of those questions into the plan — the human's edit\n      where they gave one, your own suggestion where they left it untouched (an\n      untouched suggestion IS acceptance) — and MOVE each resolved\n      `### <question>` block down into a `## Answered Questions` section at the\n      bottom. Raise any genuinely new questions under `## Open Questions`.\n\n      Leave `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` uncommitted and finish your turn — do\n      not commit, and do not run `gtd step agent` yourself; the harness does\n      that.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": grilling-answer\n\n  grilling-answer:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.todoFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    message: |\n      `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` holds the plan under development, with any\n      open questions under `## Open Questions` — each carrying a suggested\n      answer. Answer a question by editing its body in place; leave a\n      suggestion untouched to accept it.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"C\":\n        to: building\n        describe: >-\n          Change nothing to accept every suggested answer as-is and move on to\n          implementation (**building**).\n      \"* **\":\n        to: grilling\n        describe: >-\n          Edit the plan — answer a question, add detail, or raise a new one — to\n          send it back for another round of grilling (**grilling**).\n\n  building:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.todoFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create or edit anything under `.gtd/` except deleting\n      `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to delete once its\n      work is complete.\n\n      The plan to implement is: <%~ it.read(it.vars.todoFile) %>\n\n      Read that plan and implement it in full. Use TDD discipline: one test,\n      then the implementation that passes it, then the next — never write all\n      the tests first.\n\n      Delete `<%= it.vars.todoFile %>` once the work it describes is complete\n      and verified. Leave everything else uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": checking\n\n  # ── Advanced flow: product + technical Q&A ────────────────────────────────\n  adv-grilling:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: plan\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to develop.\n\n      `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` holds the product requirements (or\n      feedback from a prior review lap). Read it, explore the codebase, and\n      develop it into a concrete, PRODUCT-level plan in this one turn.\n\n      Scope: product and user-facing decisions only. Leave implementation\n      details (file/module structure, data models, tech-stack choices) for the\n      next phase (`<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>`).\n\n      For every remaining open question, add it under a `## Open Questions`\n      heading near the top, one `### <question>` sub-heading each, its body your\n      suggested answer in plain prose (always suggest one). Omit the section\n      once there are none. On a return lap, fold the whole answered batch into\n      the plan and move each resolved `### <question>` block down into a\n      `## Answered Questions` section at the bottom.\n\n      Leave `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": adv-grilling-answer\n\n  adv-grilling-answer:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    message: |\n      `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` holds the product plan under\n      development, with any open questions under `## Open Questions` — each\n      carrying a suggested answer. Answer a question by editing its body in\n      place; leave a suggestion untouched to accept it.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"C\":\n        to: architecting\n        describe: >-\n          Change nothing to accept the product plan and move on to technical\n          architecting (**architecting**).\n      \"* **\":\n        to: adv-grilling\n        describe: >-\n          Edit the product plan — answer a question, add detail, or raise a new\n          one — to send it back for another round (**adv-grilling**).\n\n  architecting:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.architectureFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: plan\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` and `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>`,\n      which this prompt tells you to write and delete respectively.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` (the converged product plan) and\n      develop `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` from it in this one turn:\n      file/module structure, data models, library/tech-stack choices,\n      error-handling strategy — the *how*, building on the *what* already\n      settled. Do not re-open product-level decisions; treat them as settled.\n\n      For every remaining open question, add it under a `## Open Questions`\n      heading exactly as the grilling phase does (one `### <question>` each, its\n      body your suggested answer). Omit the section once there are none. On a\n      return lap, fold the whole answered batch in and move each resolved block\n      down into a `## Answered Questions` section at the bottom.\n\n      Once `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` is written, delete\n      `<%= it.vars.requirementsFile %>` — its content has been folded in and it\n      must not linger. Leave everything uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": architecting-answer\n\n  architecting-answer:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.architectureFile %>\n    mode: qa\n    message: |\n      `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` holds the technical plan under\n      development, with any open questions under `## Open Questions`. Answer a\n      question by editing its body in place; leave a suggestion untouched to\n      accept it.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"C\":\n        to: decompose\n        describe: >-\n          Change nothing to accept the technical plan and move on to decomposing\n          the work into packages (**decompose**).\n      \"* **\":\n        to: architecting\n        describe: >-\n          Edit the technical plan to send it back for another round\n          (**architecting**).\n\n  # ── Advanced flow: decomposition + per-package parallel build loop ─────────\n  decompose:\n    actor: agent\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except the\n      package files this prompt tells you to write (under\n      `<%= it.vars.packagesDir %>/`), and `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>`,\n      which it tells you to delete.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>` (the converged technical plan) and\n      decompose it into an ordered set of WORK PACKAGES, one file each under\n      `<%= it.vars.packagesDir %>/` (e.g. `<%= it.vars.packagesDir %>/01-name.md`,\n      `<%= it.vars.packagesDir %>/02-name.md`, ...). Order the packages so the\n      test suite can pass again after each one lands.\n\n      Each package file describes a set of INDEPENDENT tasks that can be\n      implemented concurrently without ordering constraints between them — a\n      single build turn will fan them out to parallel subagents. Give each task\n      a clear description, acceptance criteria as `- [ ]` checkboxes, and the\n      relevant paths. Also state the package's overall requirement so it can be\n      reviewed against its spec. Do NOT put ordering-dependent tasks in the same\n      package — split them across ordered packages instead.\n\n      No package file may reference any other `.gtd/` file. Once the package\n      files are written, delete `<%= it.vars.architectureFile %>`. Leave\n      everything uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* .gtd/packages/**\": picking\n\n  picking:\n    actor: check\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn (the package queue arbiter) — the loop driver executes\n      # this verbatim, then steps the check actor. Mechanics only: take the\n      # first package file (by name) under the packages dir into NEXT.md, or\n      # remove NEXT.md when the queue is empty. What NEXT.md's presence/absence\n      # MEANS (another package to build vs. the queue closing out to review) is\n      # decided by this state's own `on` rules at capture time — never here.\n      set +e\n      # Hoist the NEXT path once, at the TOP: Eta's autoTrim eats the newline\n      # after an interpolation tag, so no tag may be the last token on a line —\n      # it would glue the next line's `else`/`fi` onto it and break the script.\n      # Below this point everything is plain bash.\n      nextFile=\"<%~ it.vars.nextFile %>\"\n      next=$(ls <%~ it.vars.packagesDir %>/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -n 1)\n      if [ -n \"$next\" ]; then\n        printf '%s' \"$next\" > \"$nextFile\"\n      else\n        rm -f \"$nextFile\"\n      fi\n    on:\n      \"D .gtd/NEXT.md\": reviewing\n      \"* .gtd/NEXT.md\": adv-building\n      \"C\": reviewing\n\n  adv-building:\n    actor: agent\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/`; in\n      particular do NOT delete the package file (the `spec-review` gate reads it\n      after you) and never touch `<%= it.vars.nextFile %>` — the `picking` state\n      owns it.\n\n      The package to implement is: <%~ it.read(it.vars.nextFile) %>\n\n      That file describes a set of INDEPENDENT tasks. Implement ALL of them in\n      this one turn, fanning the independent tasks out to parallel subagents\n      where your harness supports it — each task is self-contained and can be\n      built concurrently. Implement EXACTLY the tasks this package describes — no\n      more, no less; leave every other package file untouched. Use TDD\n      discipline within each task.\n\n      Leave the package file in place and everything else uncommitted, then\n      finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": adv-checking\n\n  adv-checking:\n    actor: check\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn — run the suite; a red run records .gtd/FEEDBACK.md, a\n      # green run cleans it up. The `on` rules decide what that means.\n      set +e\n      mkdir -p .gtd\n      # Hoist the feedback path once, at the TOP: Eta's autoTrim eats the\n      # newline after an interpolation tag, so no tag may be the last token on\n      # a line — it would glue the next line's `else`/`fi` onto it and break\n      # the script. Below this point everything is plain bash.\n      feedback=\"<%~ it.vars.feedbackFile %>\"\n      <%~ it.vars.testCommand %> > .gtd/.check-output 2>&1\n      code=$?\n      if [ \"$code\" -ne 0 ]; then\n        if [ -s .gtd/.check-output ]; then\n          mv .gtd/.check-output \"$feedback\"\n        else\n          rm -f .gtd/.check-output\n          printf 'the test command failed with exit code %s and produced no output.' \"$code\" > \"$feedback\"\n        fi\n      else\n        rm -f .gtd/.check-output\n        rm -f \"$feedback\"\n      fi\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": adv-fixing\n      \"M .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": adv-fixing\n      \"D .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": spec-review\n      \"C\": spec-review\n\n  adv-fixing:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: fix\n    retry:\n      max: 3\n      otherwise: adv-escalate\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to address.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` (the failing test output) and fix the\n      code so the suite passes. Keep the change focused — do not refactor\n      unrelated code. If the feedback is wrong, empty or delete\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` instead of \"fixing\" a non-issue.\n\n      Leave everything uncommitted and finish your turn — do not commit.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": adv-checking\n\n  adv-escalate:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>\n    message: |\n      The agent could not get the check to pass after repeated attempts.\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` holds the last failing output.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"* **\":\n        to: adv-checking\n        describe: >-\n          Fix the failure yourself — edit the code and/or\n          `.gtd/FEEDBACK.md` — to re-run the check (**adv-checking**).\n\n  spec-review:\n    actor: agent\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: review\n    # Bounded per cycle: once entered `max` times, a transition into it is\n    # redirected to `closing` (force-close the package and move on — the\n    # unresolved concern is deferred to the shared human review at the tail,\n    # which sees the whole diff anyway). NOTE the cap is PROCESS-scoped, so it\n    # pools across packages — the same documented limitation the shared\n    # `fixing` cap has (see STATES.md / docs/configuration.md).\n    retry:\n      max: 3\n      otherwise: closing\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent reviewing a freshly-built work package\n      against its own spec. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own state — never\n      create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to write\n      when — and only when — you find problems.\n\n      The package spec is: <%~ it.read(it.vars.nextFile) %>\n\n      Read that spec, then verify the package's implementation (the diff below)\n      against it: are all its tasks done, acceptance criteria met, and the code\n      sound and consistent with the codebase?\n\n      - If it fully satisfies the spec, write NOTHING and finish your turn — a\n        clean turn is your approval.\n      - If it does not, write `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>` listing the\n        concrete problems for a fix turn to address. Be specific.\n\n      Do not fix anything yourself and do not delete the package file — a later\n      step owns that. Finish your turn.\n      <% if (it.processDiff.trim()) { %>\n\n      ## Diff under review\n\n      ```diff\n      <%~ it.processDiff %>\n      ```\n      <% } %>\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/SPEC_FEEDBACK.md\": spec-fix\n      \"M .gtd/SPEC_FEEDBACK.md\": spec-fix\n      \"D .gtd/SPEC_FEEDBACK.md\": closing\n      \"C\": closing\n\n  spec-fix:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: fix\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to address\n      and then delete.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>` (the reviewer's concerns about the\n      current package) and the package spec (`<%= it.read(it.vars.nextFile) %>`),\n      then fix the code to resolve every concern. Keep the change focused.\n\n      Delete `<%= it.vars.specFeedbackFile %>` once every concern is addressed.\n      Leave everything else uncommitted and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": adv-checking\n\n  closing:\n    actor: check\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn (the package closer) — remove the just-reviewed package\n      # file (its path is in NEXT.md) plus any leftover spec feedback, so\n      # `picking` selects the NEXT package (or falls through to review when the\n      # queue is empty). Reached on approval (spec-review clean) and on the\n      # spec-review retry cap (force-close, deferring the concern to the tail).\n      set +e\n      pkg=$(cat <%~ it.vars.nextFile %> 2>/dev/null)\n      [ -n \"$pkg\" ] && rm -f \"$pkg\"\n      rm -f <%~ it.vars.specFeedbackFile %> <%~ it.vars.nextFile %>\n    on:\n      \"* **\": picking\n\n  # ── Shared health segment (simple build, feedback loop, code-only edits) ──\n  checking:\n    actor: check\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn — run the suite; a red run records .gtd/FEEDBACK.md, a\n      # green run cleans it up. The `on` rules decide what that means.\n      set +e\n      mkdir -p .gtd\n      # Hoist the feedback path once, at the TOP: Eta's autoTrim eats the\n      # newline after an interpolation tag, so no tag may be the last token on\n      # a line — it would glue the next line's `else`/`fi` onto it and break\n      # the script. Below this point everything is plain bash.\n      feedback=\"<%~ it.vars.feedbackFile %>\"\n      <%~ it.vars.testCommand %> > .gtd/.check-output 2>&1\n      code=$?\n      if [ \"$code\" -ne 0 ]; then\n        if [ -s .gtd/.check-output ]; then\n          mv .gtd/.check-output \"$feedback\"\n        else\n          rm -f .gtd/.check-output\n          printf 'the test command failed with exit code %s and produced no output.' \"$code\" > \"$feedback\"\n        fi\n      else\n        rm -f .gtd/.check-output\n        rm -f \"$feedback\"\n      fi\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": fixing\n      \"M .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": fixing\n      \"D .gtd/FEEDBACK.md\": reviewing\n      \"C\": reviewing\n\n  fixing:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: fix\n    retry:\n      max: 3\n      otherwise: escalate\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to address.\n\n      Read `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` (the failing test output) and fix the\n      code so the suite passes. Keep the change focused — do not refactor\n      unrelated code. If the feedback is wrong, empty or delete\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` instead of \"fixing\" a non-issue.\n\n      Leave everything uncommitted and finish your turn — do not commit.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": checking\n\n  escalate:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>\n    message: |\n      The agent could not get the check to pass after repeated attempts.\n      `<%= it.vars.feedbackFile %>` holds the last failing output.\n\n      What each change does next (then run `gtd step human`):\n      <% it.edges.forEach(function (e) { if (e.describe) { %>\n      <%~ \"- \" + e.describe + \"\\n\" %>\n      <% } }) %>\n    on:\n      \"* **\":\n        to: checking\n        describe: >-\n          Fix the failure yourself — edit the code and/or `.gtd/FEEDBACK.md` —\n          to re-run the check (**checking**).\n\n  # ── Shared tail: agent review -> human review -> squash finale ────────────\n  reviewing:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFile %>\n    mode: review\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: review\n    # `gtd review <commitish>` (a plain non-gtd branch, e.g. a colleague's PR)\n    # enters here directly, recording the resolved base as a `Gtd-Review-Base:`\n    # trailer on its empty entry commit — everything below then reuses the same\n    # reviewing/await-review/feedback machinery over <commitish>..HEAD.\n    reviewEntry: true\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>`, which this prompt tells you to write.\n\n      Write `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>` to help a human review the diff below in\n      this EXACT format:\n\n      - First non-blank line: `# Review: <%= it.currentCommit.slice(0, 7) %>`\n      - Somewhere in the document: `<!-- base: <%= it.startCommit %> -->`\n      - At least one `## <Chunk Title>` heading, grouping hunks semantically\n        (same feature/refactor/fix, even across files) — a short explanation of\n        what changed and why, then one `- [ ] ./path/to/file.ts#42 — note` file\n        pointer per hunk (checkboxes are for the human to tick, not you; every\n        path is `./`-relative, with an optional `#line` and an optional\n        ` — note`).\n\n      The diff below is `it.reviewDiff` — on a feedback round it covers ONLY the\n      changes made since the previous review, so you review just what changed,\n      not items already signed off. Leave `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>`\n      uncommitted and finish your turn.\n      <% if (it.reviewDiff.trim()) { %>\n\n      ## Full diff under review\n\n      ```diff\n      <%~ it.reviewDiff %>\n      ```\n      <% } %>\n    on:\n      \"* **\": await-review\n\n  await-review:\n    actor: human\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFile %>\n    mode: review\n    # While the cycle rests here, gtd opens a \"review checkout window\": raw HEAD\n    # is rewound to the review base (the most-recent `review-deciding` commit —\n    # so a feedback round shows only `last-review..HEAD` — or the process start\n    # on the first review) with the working tree untouched, surfacing the diff\n    # as ordinary uncommitted changes. It closes on the next invocation.\n    #\n    # Every human step here routes to `review-deciding`, which decides sign-off\n    # vs. feedback from the step's CONTENT (a comment, not a tick). Ticking a box\n    # only records \"I reviewed this hunk\". Two dead ends can't be told apart by a\n    # file-pattern edge, so the sign-off gate (`enforceReviewSignoffGate` in\n    # src/program.ts) catches them BEFORE the step commits and refuses: an\n    # unfinished review (a box still `- [ ]` with no comment) and a deleted\n    # REVIEW.md.\n    reviewWindow: true\n    message: |\n      `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>` holds the review record for the cycle — one\n      `- [ ]` checkbox per reviewable item, grouped into chunks. Tick a box\n      (`- [x]`) as you review each hunk; ticking only records that you've read\n      it, it is not sign-off.\n\n      When you've been through the whole diff, run `gtd step human`:\n\n      - Tick EVERY box and leave no comment — no note in\n        `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>`, no code edit — to sign off and collapse the\n        cycle into one commit (**squashing**).\n      - Leave a comment to request changes — a note on a\n        `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>` line, or a direct code edit — to send it to a\n        build + re-review round (**review-deciding** → **feedback-building**). A\n        code edit counts as your own fix: the agent completes the follow-through\n        it implies and never reverts your lines.\n\n      Stepping with a box still unticked and no comment is refused (finish\n      reviewing first); so is deleting `<%= it.vars.reviewFile %>`.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": review-deciding\n\n  review-deciding:\n    actor: check\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFile %>\n    mode: review\n    # Anchors the INCREMENTAL review base: its most-recent in-process commit is\n    # the point the previous review round ended, so the next `reviewing` turn\n    # (and the review checkout window) covers only the changes since then. On\n    # the first review there is no such commit, so the base is the cycle start.\n    reviewBase: true\n    script: |\n      #!/usr/bin/env bash\n      # gtd check turn — decide the human's review step from its CONTENT. HEAD is\n      # the human's `await-review -> review-deciding` commit; HEAD^ is the\n      # `reviewing` commit that wrote the agent's original REVIEW.md (the sign-off\n      # gate refuses an incomplete step, so review-deciding is entered exactly\n      # once per round — nothing commits in between). It is FEEDBACK when the\n      # human left a comment: a note in REVIEW.md (any edit beyond a \"[ ]\"->\"[x]\"\n      # tick) OR a hand-edit to any non-.gtd/ file this round. Otherwise it is a\n      # clean sign-off. This turn only CAPTURES the raw material into REVIEW_RAW.md\n      # (the `feedback-collecting` agent then turns it into instructions); it does\n      # NOT interpret it. Either way, remove REVIEW.md; what the resulting diff\n      # MEANS is decided by this state's own `on` rules — the A/M REVIEW_RAW.md\n      # rows are declared BEFORE the D REVIEW.md row so a feedback round (which\n      # also deletes REVIEW.md) is captured as feedback, not mistaken for a\n      # sign-off.\n      set +e\n      mkdir -p .gtd\n      # Hoist the paths once, at the TOP: Eta's autoTrim eats the newline after\n      # an interpolation tag, so no tag may be the last token on a line — it\n      # would glue the next line onto it and break the script. Below this point\n      # everything is plain bash.\n      reviewFile=\"<%~ it.vars.reviewFile %>\"\n      reviewRawFile=\"<%~ it.vars.reviewRawFile %>\"\n      # Which non-.gtd/ files did the human hand-edit this round?\n      codeFiles=$(git diff-tree --no-commit-id --name-only -r HEAD | grep -v '^\\.gtd/')\n      # A note is any REVIEW.md change beyond a checkbox flip: normalize every\n      # \"[ ]\"/\"[x]\" to a placeholder, then compare the agent's original (HEAD^)\n      # against the human's version (HEAD).\n      notes=\"\"\n      before=$(git show \"HEAD^:$reviewFile\" 2>/dev/null | sed -E 's/\\[[ xX]\\]/[_]/g')\n      after=$(git show \"HEAD:$reviewFile\" 2>/dev/null | sed -E 's/\\[[ xX]\\]/[_]/g')\n      if [ \"$before\" != \"$after\" ]; then notes=1; fi\n      if [ -n \"$codeFiles\" ] || [ -n \"$notes\" ]; then\n        {\n          echo \"Raw review material captured for classification. The human reviewed the diff and left the feedback below; a downstream agent turns it into an instruction list. This file is machine-captured input, not instructions.\"\n          if [ -n \"$notes\" ]; then\n            echo\n            echo \"## Notes the human added to REVIEW.md this round\"\n            echo\n            echo '```diff'\n            git show HEAD --format= -- \"$reviewFile\"\n            echo '```'\n          fi\n          if [ -n \"$codeFiles\" ]; then\n            echo\n            echo \"## Files the human hand-edited this round (already committed)\"\n            echo\n            echo '```diff'\n            git show HEAD --format= -- $codeFiles\n            echo '```'\n          fi\n        } > \"$reviewRawFile\"\n      fi\n      rm -f \"$reviewFile\"\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/REVIEW_RAW.md\": feedback-collecting\n      \"M .gtd/REVIEW_RAW.md\": feedback-collecting\n      \"D .gtd/REVIEW.md\": squashing\n\n  feedback-collecting:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.plannerModel %>\n    memory: review\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent turning raw review feedback into an\n      explicit instruction list for a builder. `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own\n      state — never create, edit, or delete anything under `.gtd/` except\n      `<%= it.vars.reviewRawFile %>` (delete it when done) and\n      `<%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>` (write it). Do NOT change any other\n      file — you classify, you do not build.\n\n      The raw review material is: <%~ it.read(it.vars.reviewRawFile) %>\n\n      Classify every piece of it into `<%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>` as a\n      flat, numbered instruction list. Each item is `N. ./path/to/file.ts#line —\n      <imperative>`. Read the two RAW sections and apply these rules exactly:\n\n      1. NOTES the human added to REVIEW.md — each note is a MANDATORY change,\n         regardless of whether its checkbox is ticked (ticking means only \"I read\n         this hunk\", never sign-off). Anchor each to the `./path#line` its review\n         item names (or the chunk it sits under). Emit it as a concrete\n         imperative.\n      2. Every COMMENT the human ADDED this round (a `+` line that is a code\n         comment, in the hand-edited files) is a MANDATORY instruction the human\n         is giving the builder — even a plain-prose one, even if its box is\n         ticked. Emit an imperative to satisfy it and note that the comment line\n         itself must be REMOVED once addressed. If a comment turns out to describe\n         behaviour the code already has, the instruction is still \"confirm the\n         code matches and remove the comment line\".\n      3. Every NON-comment code line the human hand-edited is an already-committed\n         INTENT, NOT a do-then-delete item. Emit an instruction that names those\n         files and says: their lines are final — complete ONLY the follow-through\n         they imply (callers, tests, types, docs) and NEVER revert or rewrite\n         them. Do not turn their own edit into a task.\n\n      Split each hand-edited hunk per line: comment `+` lines follow rule 2, the\n      surrounding real code follows rule 3.\n\n      If — and only if — nothing in the raw material is actionable (e.g. the human\n      left only an approving remark), write `<%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>`\n      containing exactly one line: `NOTHING ACTIONABLE — <one-sentence reason>`.\n      Never invent work to satisfy a non-actionable remark.\n\n      Delete `<%= it.vars.reviewRawFile %>`, leave everything else uncommitted,\n      and finish your turn.\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md\": feedback-building\n      \"M .gtd/REVIEW_FEEDBACK.md\": feedback-building\n\n  feedback-building:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    # Refuse a work-free turn: a step whose only pending change is deleting the\n    # instructions file (the original \"captured then discarded\" bug). The edge\n    # gate (`enforceFeedbackProgressGate` in src/program.ts) reads this flag and\n    # exempts a `NOTHING ACTIONABLE` sentinel (a non-actionable review round,\n    # which legitimately makes no code change). The pure engine carries it inert.\n    requireProgress: true\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent addressing review feedback. `.gtd/`\n      holds this workflow's own state — never create, edit, or delete anything\n      under `.gtd/` except `<%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>`, which this\n      prompt tells you to address and then delete.\n\n      The instructions to implement are: <%~ it.read(it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile) %>\n\n      This is a flat instruction list, not a diff — execute every item exactly as\n      written, no Q&A, no re-planning, using TDD discipline:\n\n      - An item that says the human's own lines are final: build ON TOP of them to\n        complete only the follow-through it names (callers, tests, types, docs).\n        NEVER revert or rewrite the lines they already committed.\n      - An item derived from a human comment: satisfy it AND delete that comment\n        line from the code (the human's review comments are transient — none of\n        them survive this round).\n\n      If the file's sole content is a `NOTHING ACTIONABLE` line, make no code\n      change; just delete the instructions file.\n\n      Delete `<%= it.vars.reviewFeedbackFile %>` once every item is addressed.\n      Leave everything else uncommitted and finish your turn. Deleting the\n      instructions file WITHOUT making the changes it asks for is refused — the\n      feedback must actually be addressed.\n    on:\n      \"* **\": checking\n\n  squashing:\n    actor: agent\n    file: <%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>\n    model: <%= it.vars.coderModel %>\n    memory: build\n    prompt: |\n      You are an autonomous coding agent. The cycle is approved and done.\n      `.gtd/` holds this workflow's own state — never create, edit, or delete\n      anything under `.gtd/` except `<%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>`, which this\n      prompt tells you to write.\n\n      Leave `<%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>` uncommitted and finish your turn —\n      entering this file squashes everything this process retains into one\n      commit using its content as the message. The diff below is exactly what\n      that commit will contain: `it.retainedDiff`, the changes THIS process\n      made (its trace/retry boundary onward). For a normal build cycle that is\n      the whole feature; for a `gtd review` process it is only the fixes made\n      during the review — NOT the changeset that was under review.\n      <% if (it.retainedDiff.trim()) { %>\n\n      Write `<%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>` with ONE conventional-commits message\n      for the changes below (subject line `type(scope): subject`, imperative\n      mood, <= 72 characters; a body explaining the why, trade-offs, and key\n      decisions). Plain text, no markdown wrapper.\n\n      ## Retained diff\n\n      ```diff\n      <%~ it.retainedDiff %>\n      ```\n      <% } else { %>\n\n      This process retained NO changes (a clean review sign-off with no fixes).\n      Write `<%= it.vars.commitMsgFile %>` with exactly this one line and\n      nothing else:\n\n      chore: human review\n      <% } %>\n    on:\n      \"A .gtd/COMMIT_MSG.md\": done\n      \"M .gtd/COMMIT_MSG.md\": done\n\n  done:\n    commit: |\n      <%~ it.read(it.vars.commitMsgFile) %>\n\n      Token cost: <%= it.processCost %>\n      <% it.processCostByModel.forEach(function(m){ %>\n      - <%= m.model %>: <%= m.cost %>\n      <% }) %>\n";
 //#endregion
 //#region src/workflows/templates.ts
 /**
@@ -204643,6 +204666,7 @@ const stepAsActor = (invoker, cost, model) => gen(function* () {
 	const context = yield* buildTemplateContext(git, worktree.read, renderedState, invoker, run, vars, rest.def.states[renderedState]?.on, cost ?? 0, model);
 	yield* enforceSteeringGate(worktree.read, invoker, rest, context, decision.kind);
 	yield* enforceReviewSignoffGate(worktree.read, invoker, rest, context, changes, decision.kind);
+	yield* enforceFeedbackProgressGate(invoker, rest, context, changes, decision.kind);
 	const outcome = yield* executeDecision(git, run, executable, context, cost, model);
 	return {
 		state: rest.state,
@@ -204859,6 +204883,53 @@ const enforceReviewSignoffGate = (worktreeRead, invoker, rest, context, changes,
 	});
 	if (verdict.kind === "refuse") return yield* fail$2(new Error(verdict.reason));
 });
+/** The one-line marker `feedback-collecting` writes when a review round left nothing actionable — the ONLY content that lets a `requireProgress` state's instructions file be deleted without a code change (see `classifyFeedbackProgress`). */
+const NOTHING_ACTIONABLE_SENTINEL = "NOTHING ACTIONABLE";
+/**
+* The PURE core of the feedback-progress gate (see `enforceFeedbackProgressGate`).
+* At a `requireProgress` state the `file` is an instruction list the agent must
+* ADDRESS, then delete. Refuse a turn that deletes the file while touching no
+* code (`hasCodeChange` false) — the "review feedback captured then silently
+* discarded" bug. Two escapes ALLOW the step: the file isn't being deleted (the
+* agent left work, or the list, in place), or there IS a code change alongside
+* (real work was done). The one delete-with-no-code exception is a
+* `NOTHING ACTIONABLE` sentinel (`deletedContent`): a legitimately
+* non-actionable round makes no code change by design. Kept separate from the
+* Effect so it is directly unit-tested (see program.test.ts).
+*/
+const classifyFeedbackProgress = (input) => {
+	if (!input.changes.some((c) => c.path === input.file && c.status === "D")) return { kind: "allow" };
+	if (input.changes.some((c) => !c.path.startsWith(".gtd/"))) return { kind: "allow" };
+	if (input.deletedContent.trim().startsWith(NOTHING_ACTIONABLE_SENTINEL)) return { kind: "allow" };
+	return {
+		kind: "refuse",
+		reason: `gtd step ${input.invoker}: ${input.file} was deleted at "${input.stateName}" without addressing its instructions — implement the changes it lists (then delete it), don't just remove the file.`
+	};
+};
+/**
+* The feedback-progress gate (edge, like the sign-off gate above). At a
+* `requireProgress: true` state (the unified template's `feedback-building`), a
+* turn that just deletes the instructions file without doing the work it lists
+* is refused BEFORE it can commit — the pure `classifyFeedbackProgress` decides.
+* A no-op when the state is not a `requireProgress` state or the decision is a
+* squash/no-op. The committed (pre-deletion) file content — read once here —
+* feeds the sentinel exemption.
+*/
+const enforceFeedbackProgressGate = (invoker, rest, context, changes, kind) => gen(function* () {
+	if (kind !== "commit") return;
+	if (!isRequireProgressState(rest.def, rest.state)) return;
+	const file = yield* renderFile(rest.stateDef, context);
+	if (file === void 0) return;
+	const deletedContent = yield* (yield* GitService).readFileAtRef("HEAD", file).pipe(catchAll(() => succeed$3("")));
+	const verdict = classifyFeedbackProgress({
+		file,
+		stateName: rest.state,
+		invoker,
+		changes,
+		deletedContent
+	});
+	if (verdict.kind === "refuse") return yield* fail$2(new Error(verdict.reason));
+});
 /**
 * `gtd validate [--json]`: format (in place) then validate the steering file
 * the resolved rest declares (`file:` rendered, `mode:` selecting how), over

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@pmelab/gtd",
-  "version": "6.11.0",
+  "version": "6.12.0",
   "private": false,
   "description": "Git-aware CLI that emits the next prompt for an autonomous coding agent based on the current repository state",
   "bin": {

package/schema.json

@@ -140,6 +140,10 @@
               "reviewEntry": {
                 "type": "boolean",
                 "description": "Marks the (at most one) state `gtd review <commitish>` enters to start a brand new process reviewing <commitish>..HEAD. Forbidden on a commit state and on the initial state."
+              },
+              "requireProgress": {
+                "type": "boolean",
+                "description": "When true, a step at this state is refused if its only pending change is deleting the state's own `file:` — a work-free turn that discards its input without addressing it. A `NOTHING ACTIONABLE` sentinel file is exempt (a legitimately non-actionable round makes no code change). Requires a `file:`. Forbidden on a commit state."
               }
             }
           }