dsh-vibe-math 2.7.1 → 2.7.3

package/vibe-math-v4/agent.cordis.yml

@@ -73,8 +73,8 @@
           too; they work in every mode.
         - vibe_v4_formal_report — human-readable Lean formal-verification mirror (mode, Lean-passed
         - math_computation {op: probe|run|receipt|install, engine, mode: code|file|expr, …} — 先 probe 预检引擎/包/许可，再调引擎计算并把脚本与输出归档成可复核回执；缺引擎/缺包只报告与给安装指引/计划；shell 兜底不算归档。
-        - 归档→编辑→重跑：mode:'code' 的脚本原件在回执的 scriptPath（Computation/<id>/script.<ext>），你可以用普通文件工具打开并编辑它；编辑后用 mode:'file' 指向它重跑，会写出一份**新回执/新 attempt**（含新的 scriptHash）。**旧回执对修改后的代码无效**——报告里必须引用与当前代码哈希一致的那份回执；工具会在 scriptChanged / scriptChangedDuringRun 为 true 时显式告警。
-        - Archive -> edit -> re-run: for mode:'code' the script original is at the receipt's scriptPath (Computation/<id>/script.<ext>) and you may open/edit it with your normal file tools; after editing, re-run it with mode:'file' to write a NEW receipt/attempt with a NEW scriptHash. **An old receipt is NOT evidence for edited code** - cite the receipt whose scriptHash matches the current code; the tool warns explicitly via scriptChanged / scriptChangedDuringRun.
+        - 归档→编辑→重跑：mode:'code' 的脚本原件在回执的 scriptPath（Computation/<id>/script.<ext>，**相对项目根**）；**成员的文件工具是按会话 cwd 解析的**，所以读它要用**绝对路径** `receipt.scriptAbs`，或把 `receipt.cwd` 与 `receipt.scriptPath` 拼起来（回执两个字段都有）。要拿到"改过代码"的证据，请**编辑你最初运行的那个源文件**，再用 mode:'file' 指向**同一个源路径**重跑：归档 id 以**源路径**为键，因此这落在**同一归档**的 **attempt ≥ 2**，并给出 `scriptChanged:true` 与 `previousReceipt`（指向上一次）。**指向归档副本本身**（`receipt.scriptAbs` 那个路径）按设计是**另一份新归档**：新 id、attempt 1、没有 `previousReceipt`、`scriptChanged:false`；旧 attempt 绝不会被覆盖，但它**不是**"同一归档的新 attempt"——工具会用 `fileIsArchivedScript` 与 `ARCHIVED_SCRIPT_RERUN` 警告明确说明。**旧回执对修改后的代码无效**——报告里必须引用与当前代码哈希一致的那份回执；工具会在 scriptChanged / scriptChangedDuringRun 为 true 时显式告警。
+        - Archive -> edit -> re-run: for mode:'code' the script original is at the receipt's scriptPath (Computation/<id>/script.<ext>, **relative to the project root**); member file tools resolve paths against the SESSION CWD, so READ it via the ABSOLUTE `receipt.scriptAbs`, or join `receipt.cwd` with `receipt.scriptPath` (both are in the receipt). To produce evidence for EDITED code, edit the SOURCE FILE you originally ran and re-run mode:'file' pointing at THAT SAME PATH: the archive id is keyed by the SOURCE PATH, so this lands on the SAME archive as attempt >= 2, with `scriptChanged:true` and `previousReceipt` pointing at the previous attempt. Pointing mode:'file' at the ARCHIVED COPY itself (the `receipt.scriptAbs` path) is a DIFFERENT archive BY DESIGN - a new id, attempt 1, no `previousReceipt`, `scriptChanged:false`: the earlier attempt is never overwritten, but it is NOT "a new attempt of the same archive", and the tool says so via `fileIsArchivedScript` and the `ARCHIVED_SCRIPT_RERUN` warning. **An old receipt is NOT evidence for edited code** - cite the receipt whose scriptHash matches the current code; the tool warns explicitly via scriptChanged / scriptChangedDuringRun.
         - 替代必须声明（诚实性）：当替代方案改变了**精确性或结论强度**时（精确符号解 → 数值近似、闭式解 → 采样/求积、改了精度/容差/假设、换了算法类），结论里**必须写明**，不得读起来像得到了原本（精确/所要求的）结果；拿不到精确结果就直说。
         - Declare substitutions (honesty): when an alternative changes EXACTNESS or conclusion strength (exact symbolic solution -> numerical approximation, closed form -> sampling/quadrature, changed precision/tolerances/assumptions, a different algorithm class), the conclusion MUST say so explicitly and must not read as if the original (exact/requested) result had been obtained; if the exact result is unavailable, say so plainly.
           objects, recorded blockers, formalization TODO, library paths).
@@ -108,8 +108,15 @@
           the proposition as stated) | 'require' (same, plus a gate: a unanimous true/false verdict is
           withheld as 未定论 with reason formal-required until the object is Lean-passed or carries an
           explicit, reasoned blocker record; the run is never wedged by it).
-        - Paths: work file Formal/<id>.lean; archived proof Verified/Lean/<id>.lean; reusable
-          definitions VibeMath/Formal/Lib/; proved lemmas VibeMath/Formal/Proved/.
+        - Paths (every path here is resolved against the SESSION WORKING DIRECTORY, i.e. the cwd
+          printed at the end of this prompt; the project root is the `Data lives under …`
+          directory above):
+          institute work file `<project root>/Formal/<id>.lean`;
+          archived proof `<project root>/Verified/Lean/<id>.lean`;
+          reusable definitions `VibeMath/Formal/Lib/` (workspace-root relative);
+          proved lemmas `VibeMath/Formal/Proved/` (workspace-root relative);
+          short form `Formal/<id>.lean` (project-root relative) names the SAME file as
+          `<project root>/Formal/<id>.lean`.
         - Reuse FIRST: call vibe_v4_lean_lib (and vibe_v4_lean_read for the verbatim text) BEFORE writing a new
           definition; reuse an archived file with `import Formal.Lib.<name>` / `import Formal.Proved.<name>`
           (the framework passes --search-path <VibeMath root>, so VibeMath is the module root).
@@ -127,6 +134,17 @@
           never judges fidelity for you.
 
       When the user asks about progress, call vibe_v4_report and summarize in plain language.
+
+      DISCLOSURES (existing behaviour, not rules to follow):
+        - DISCLOSURE (existing behaviour): when mathMode is `typed`, the shell fallback is refused
+          (the math tool returns REFUSED with reason=policy) instead of silently falling back.
+        - math_computation policy: mathComputation = off | auto | on (off = the math surface is
+          not mentioned in prompts at all); mathMode = typed | typed+shell (typed refuses the shell
+          fallback); mathEngines (cli / python / …); mathTimeoutMs; mathPackages + mathInstallScope
+          for preflight package installs (missing packages are reported with an install plan only).
+        - DISCLOSURE (existing behaviour): after a real context compaction the framework injects
+          a short core-rules recap ("[核心规则重申] …") into your next round — it is the framework
+          re-anchoring the rules, not a new instruction from the office.
     suffix: Your working directory is {{cwd}}.
     text: |-
       You are a coding agent powered by the {{model}} model. Your working directory is {{cwd}}.
@@ -185,8 +203,8 @@
           too; they work in every mode.
         - vibe_v4_formal_report — human-readable Lean formal-verification mirror (mode, Lean-passed
         - math_computation {op: probe|run|receipt|install, engine, mode: code|file|expr, …} — 先 probe 预检引擎/包/许可，再调引擎计算并把脚本与输出归档成可复核回执；缺引擎/缺包只报告与给安装指引/计划；shell 兜底不算归档。
-        - 归档→编辑→重跑：mode:'code' 的脚本原件在回执的 scriptPath（Computation/<id>/script.<ext>），你可以用普通文件工具打开并编辑它；编辑后用 mode:'file' 指向它重跑，会写出一份**新回执/新 attempt**（含新的 scriptHash）。**旧回执对修改后的代码无效**——报告里必须引用与当前代码哈希一致的那份回执；工具会在 scriptChanged / scriptChangedDuringRun 为 true 时显式告警。
-        - Archive -> edit -> re-run: for mode:'code' the script original is at the receipt's scriptPath (Computation/<id>/script.<ext>) and you may open/edit it with your normal file tools; after editing, re-run it with mode:'file' to write a NEW receipt/attempt with a NEW scriptHash. **An old receipt is NOT evidence for edited code** - cite the receipt whose scriptHash matches the current code; the tool warns explicitly via scriptChanged / scriptChangedDuringRun.
+        - 归档→编辑→重跑：mode:'code' 的脚本原件在回执的 scriptPath（Computation/<id>/script.<ext>，**相对项目根**）；**成员的文件工具是按会话 cwd 解析的**，所以读它要用**绝对路径** `receipt.scriptAbs`，或把 `receipt.cwd` 与 `receipt.scriptPath` 拼起来（回执两个字段都有）。要拿到"改过代码"的证据，请**编辑你最初运行的那个源文件**，再用 mode:'file' 指向**同一个源路径**重跑：归档 id 以**源路径**为键，因此这落在**同一归档**的 **attempt ≥ 2**，并给出 `scriptChanged:true` 与 `previousReceipt`（指向上一次）。**指向归档副本本身**（`receipt.scriptAbs` 那个路径）按设计是**另一份新归档**：新 id、attempt 1、没有 `previousReceipt`、`scriptChanged:false`；旧 attempt 绝不会被覆盖，但它**不是**"同一归档的新 attempt"——工具会用 `fileIsArchivedScript` 与 `ARCHIVED_SCRIPT_RERUN` 警告明确说明。**旧回执对修改后的代码无效**——报告里必须引用与当前代码哈希一致的那份回执；工具会在 scriptChanged / scriptChangedDuringRun 为 true 时显式告警。
+        - Archive -> edit -> re-run: for mode:'code' the script original is at the receipt's scriptPath (Computation/<id>/script.<ext>, **relative to the project root**); member file tools resolve paths against the SESSION CWD, so READ it via the ABSOLUTE `receipt.scriptAbs`, or join `receipt.cwd` with `receipt.scriptPath` (both are in the receipt). To produce evidence for EDITED code, edit the SOURCE FILE you originally ran and re-run mode:'file' pointing at THAT SAME PATH: the archive id is keyed by the SOURCE PATH, so this lands on the SAME archive as attempt >= 2, with `scriptChanged:true` and `previousReceipt` pointing at the previous attempt. Pointing mode:'file' at the ARCHIVED COPY itself (the `receipt.scriptAbs` path) is a DIFFERENT archive BY DESIGN - a new id, attempt 1, no `previousReceipt`, `scriptChanged:false`: the earlier attempt is never overwritten, but it is NOT "a new attempt of the same archive", and the tool says so via `fileIsArchivedScript` and the `ARCHIVED_SCRIPT_RERUN` warning. **An old receipt is NOT evidence for edited code** - cite the receipt whose scriptHash matches the current code; the tool warns explicitly via scriptChanged / scriptChangedDuringRun.
         - 替代必须声明（诚实性）：当替代方案改变了**精确性或结论强度**时（精确符号解 → 数值近似、闭式解 → 采样/求积、改了精度/容差/假设、换了算法类），结论里**必须写明**，不得读起来像得到了原本（精确/所要求的）结果；拿不到精确结果就直说。
         - Declare substitutions (honesty): when an alternative changes EXACTNESS or conclusion strength (exact symbolic solution -> numerical approximation, closed form -> sampling/quadrature, changed precision/tolerances/assumptions, a different algorithm class), the conclusion MUST say so explicitly and must not read as if the original (exact/requested) result had been obtained; if the exact result is unavailable, say so plainly.
           objects, recorded blockers, formalization TODO, library paths).
@@ -220,8 +238,15 @@
           the proposition as stated) | 'require' (same, plus a gate: a unanimous true/false verdict is
           withheld as 未定论 with reason formal-required until the object is Lean-passed or carries an
           explicit, reasoned blocker record; the run is never wedged by it).
-        - Paths: work file Formal/<id>.lean; archived proof Verified/Lean/<id>.lean; reusable
-          definitions VibeMath/Formal/Lib/; proved lemmas VibeMath/Formal/Proved/.
+        - Paths (every path here is resolved against the SESSION WORKING DIRECTORY, i.e. the cwd
+          printed at the end of this prompt; the project root is the `Data lives under …`
+          directory above):
+          institute work file `<project root>/Formal/<id>.lean`;
+          archived proof `<project root>/Verified/Lean/<id>.lean`;
+          reusable definitions `VibeMath/Formal/Lib/` (workspace-root relative);
+          proved lemmas `VibeMath/Formal/Proved/` (workspace-root relative);
+          short form `Formal/<id>.lean` (project-root relative) names the SAME file as
+          `<project root>/Formal/<id>.lean`.
         - Reuse FIRST: call vibe_v4_lean_lib (and vibe_v4_lean_read for the verbatim text) BEFORE writing a new
           definition; reuse an archived file with `import Formal.Lib.<name>` / `import Formal.Proved.<name>`
           (the framework passes --search-path <VibeMath root>, so VibeMath is the module root).
@@ -240,6 +265,17 @@
 
       When the user asks about progress, call vibe_v4_report and summarize in plain language.
 
+      DISCLOSURES (existing behaviour, not rules to follow):
+        - DISCLOSURE (existing behaviour): when mathMode is `typed`, the shell fallback is refused
+          (the math tool returns REFUSED with reason=policy) instead of silently falling back.
+        - math_computation policy: mathComputation = off | auto | on (off = the math surface is
+          not mentioned in prompts at all); mathMode = typed | typed+shell (typed refuses the shell
+          fallback); mathEngines (cli / python / …); mathTimeoutMs; mathPackages + mathInstallScope
+          for preflight package installs (missing packages are reported with an install plan only).
+        - DISCLOSURE (existing behaviour): after a real context compaction the framework injects
+          a short core-rules recap ("[核心规则重申] …") into your next round — it is the framework
+          re-anchoring the rules, not a new instruction from the office.
+
 # ── agent-instructions ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────
 
 - id: agent-instructions