feed-the-machine 1.6.1 → 1.7.1

package/ftm-researcher/evals/trigger-accuracy.yaml

@@ -1,39 +1,39 @@
-# ftm-researcher/evals/trigger-accuracy.yaml
-description: Verify ftm-researcher triggers on research requests and not on brainstorm/debug/other
-prompts:
-  - vars:
-      input: "research parallel agent architectures"
-    assert:
-      - type: contains
-        value: "ftm-researcher"
-  - vars:
-      input: "what's the state of the art on LLM fine-tuning"
-    assert:
-      - type: contains
-        value: "ftm-researcher"
-  - vars:
-      input: "find me examples of rate limiting in Go"
-    assert:
-      - type: contains
-        value: "ftm-researcher"
-  - vars:
-      input: "compare Redis vs Memcached"
-    assert:
-      - type: contains
-        value: "ftm-researcher"
-  # Should NOT trigger
-  - vars:
-      input: "I have an idea for a dashboard"
-    assert:
-      - type: not-contains
-        value: "ftm-researcher"
-  - vars:
-      input: "debug this flaky test"
-    assert:
-      - type: not-contains
-        value: "ftm-researcher"
-  - vars:
-      input: "help me brainstorm auth design"
-    assert:
-      - type: not-contains
-        value: "ftm-researcher"
+# ftm-researcher/evals/trigger-accuracy.yaml
+description: Verify ftm-researcher triggers on research requests and not on brainstorm/debug/other
+prompts:
+  - vars:
+      input: "research parallel agent architectures"
+    assert:
+      - type: contains
+        value: "ftm-researcher"
+  - vars:
+      input: "what's the state of the art on LLM fine-tuning"
+    assert:
+      - type: contains
+        value: "ftm-researcher"
+  - vars:
+      input: "find me examples of rate limiting in Go"
+    assert:
+      - type: contains
+        value: "ftm-researcher"
+  - vars:
+      input: "compare Redis vs Memcached"
+    assert:
+      - type: contains
+        value: "ftm-researcher"
+  # Should NOT trigger
+  - vars:
+      input: "I have an idea for a dashboard"
+    assert:
+      - type: not-contains
+        value: "ftm-researcher"
+  - vars:
+      input: "debug this flaky test"
+    assert:
+      - type: not-contains
+        value: "ftm-researcher"
+  - vars:
+      input: "help me brainstorm auth design"
+    assert:
+      - type: not-contains
+        value: "ftm-researcher"

package/ftm-researcher/references/adaptive-search.md

@@ -1,116 +1,116 @@
-# Adaptive Search Protocol
-
-Wave 1 → Wave 2 refinement for Deep mode research.
-
----
-
-## When It Runs
-
-Only in Deep mode. After wave 1 findings are normalized (Phase 1 of synthesis).
-
----
-
-## How It Works
-
-The orchestrator analyzes wave 1 findings across 4 dimensions:
-
-### 1. Coverage Analysis
-
-For each original subtopic:
-- **SATURATED** (3+ findings with diverse sources): Well-covered. Agent can be reassigned.
-- **THIN** (1-2 findings): Partially covered. Same agent gets a refined query.
-- **GAP** (0 findings): Not covered. Agent gets a broader query + alternative search terms.
-
-### 2. Contradiction Detection
-
-- Identify claims where 2+ agents directly contradict each other
-- Mark these subtopics as CONTESTED — wave 2 agents prioritize resolution
-- For each contradiction, note: which agents, which claims, what the disagreement is
-
-### 3. Depth Opportunities
-
-- Identify findings that mention specific tools, libraries, or approaches worth deeper investigation
-- Generate drill-down queries for wave 2
-- Prioritize depth opportunities that the user's response highlighted as important
-
-### 4. Surprise Detection
-
-- Identify findings that don't fit any original subtopic — unexpected angles
-- Generate new subtopics to explore these surprises
-- Surprises are high-value: they represent information the user didn't know to ask about
-
----
-
-## Wave 2 Dispatch
-
-Reassign agents based on analysis:
-
-| Coverage Status | Action |
-|---|---|
-| SATURATED | Reassign agent to a GAP or CONTESTED area |
-| THIN | Same agent, refined query with more specific terms |
-| GAP | Agent gets broader query + alternative search terms |
-| CONTESTED | Assign 2 agents (one per side) to find resolution evidence |
-| SURPRISE | Assign the most relevant agent to explore the unexpected angle |
-
-### Agent Reassignment Rules
-
-1. Prefer reassigning agents whose original domain is closest to the gap
-2. If a GAP exists in the academic domain, reassign Academic Scout even if it was SATURATED
-3. Codebase Analyst is never reassigned — it always re-searches with refined local queries
-4. If all subtopics are SATURATED, focus wave 2 on depth opportunities and surprises
-
-### Context Injection for Wave 2
-
-All wave 2 agents receive:
-- Full wave 1 findings summary (so they don't re-search)
-- Their specific wave 2 mission (gap-fill, deepen, resolve, or explore)
-- Explicit instruction: "Build on wave 1, do not repeat it"
-- The contradiction details if they're resolving a CONTESTED subtopic
-
----
-
-## Merge Protocol
-
-Wave 2 findings merge with wave 1 before entering the synthesis pipeline:
-
-1. Wave 2 findings are added to the findings pool with `wave: 2` marker
-2. The normalize phase (Phase 1) runs again across ALL findings (wave 1 + wave 2)
-3. Deduplication groups wave 1 and wave 2 findings together — if wave 2 confirms a wave 1 finding, the agent_count increases
-4. New wave 2 findings that weren't in wave 1 are added as new unique claims
-5. The wave marker is preserved through synthesis for traceability
-
-### Contradiction Resolution
-
-When wave 2 agents were dispatched to resolve a CONTESTED subtopic:
-- If wave 2 finds evidence strongly supporting one side, the contest is resolved
-- If wave 2 finds evidence supporting both sides, the contest remains but with richer context
-- The pairwise ranking (Phase 3) benefits from the additional evidence
-
----
-
-## Orchestrator Analysis Template
-
-After wave 1 normalization, the orchestrator produces this analysis:
-
-```
-COVERAGE ANALYSIS:
-1. [subtopic]: SATURATED | THIN | GAP — [N findings, M source types]
-2. [subtopic]: SATURATED | THIN | GAP — [N findings, M source types]
-...
-
-CONTRADICTIONS DETECTED:
-- [Agent A] claims [X] vs [Agent B] claims [Y] — on subtopic [Z]
-
-DEPTH OPPORTUNITIES:
-- Finding [N] mentions [specific tool/approach] worth investigating
-- Finding [M] suggests [unexpected constraint] that needs validation
-
-SURPRISES:
-- [Agent] found [unexpected finding] not covered by any original subtopic
-
-WAVE 2 PLAN:
-- [Agent]: [mission] — [refined query]
-- [Agent]: [mission] — [refined query]
-...
-```
+# Adaptive Search Protocol
+
+Wave 1 → Wave 2 refinement for Deep mode research.
+
+---
+
+## When It Runs
+
+Only in Deep mode. After wave 1 findings are normalized (Phase 1 of synthesis).
+
+---
+
+## How It Works
+
+The orchestrator analyzes wave 1 findings across 4 dimensions:
+
+### 1. Coverage Analysis
+
+For each original subtopic:
+- **SATURATED** (3+ findings with diverse sources): Well-covered. Agent can be reassigned.
+- **THIN** (1-2 findings): Partially covered. Same agent gets a refined query.
+- **GAP** (0 findings): Not covered. Agent gets a broader query + alternative search terms.
+
+### 2. Contradiction Detection
+
+- Identify claims where 2+ agents directly contradict each other
+- Mark these subtopics as CONTESTED — wave 2 agents prioritize resolution
+- For each contradiction, note: which agents, which claims, what the disagreement is
+
+### 3. Depth Opportunities
+
+- Identify findings that mention specific tools, libraries, or approaches worth deeper investigation
+- Generate drill-down queries for wave 2
+- Prioritize depth opportunities that the user's response highlighted as important
+
+### 4. Surprise Detection
+
+- Identify findings that don't fit any original subtopic — unexpected angles
+- Generate new subtopics to explore these surprises
+- Surprises are high-value: they represent information the user didn't know to ask about
+
+---
+
+## Wave 2 Dispatch
+
+Reassign agents based on analysis:
+
+| Coverage Status | Action |
+|---|---|
+| SATURATED | Reassign agent to a GAP or CONTESTED area |
+| THIN | Same agent, refined query with more specific terms |
+| GAP | Agent gets broader query + alternative search terms |
+| CONTESTED | Assign 2 agents (one per side) to find resolution evidence |
+| SURPRISE | Assign the most relevant agent to explore the unexpected angle |
+
+### Agent Reassignment Rules
+
+1. Prefer reassigning agents whose original domain is closest to the gap
+2. If a GAP exists in the academic domain, reassign Academic Scout even if it was SATURATED
+3. Codebase Analyst is never reassigned — it always re-searches with refined local queries
+4. If all subtopics are SATURATED, focus wave 2 on depth opportunities and surprises
+
+### Context Injection for Wave 2
+
+All wave 2 agents receive:
+- Full wave 1 findings summary (so they don't re-search)
+- Their specific wave 2 mission (gap-fill, deepen, resolve, or explore)
+- Explicit instruction: "Build on wave 1, do not repeat it"
+- The contradiction details if they're resolving a CONTESTED subtopic
+
+---
+
+## Merge Protocol
+
+Wave 2 findings merge with wave 1 before entering the synthesis pipeline:
+
+1. Wave 2 findings are added to the findings pool with `wave: 2` marker
+2. The normalize phase (Phase 1) runs again across ALL findings (wave 1 + wave 2)
+3. Deduplication groups wave 1 and wave 2 findings together — if wave 2 confirms a wave 1 finding, the agent_count increases
+4. New wave 2 findings that weren't in wave 1 are added as new unique claims
+5. The wave marker is preserved through synthesis for traceability
+
+### Contradiction Resolution
+
+When wave 2 agents were dispatched to resolve a CONTESTED subtopic:
+- If wave 2 finds evidence strongly supporting one side, the contest is resolved
+- If wave 2 finds evidence supporting both sides, the contest remains but with richer context
+- The pairwise ranking (Phase 3) benefits from the additional evidence
+
+---
+
+## Orchestrator Analysis Template
+
+After wave 1 normalization, the orchestrator produces this analysis:
+
+```
+COVERAGE ANALYSIS:
+1. [subtopic]: SATURATED | THIN | GAP — [N findings, M source types]
+2. [subtopic]: SATURATED | THIN | GAP — [N findings, M source types]
+...
+
+CONTRADICTIONS DETECTED:
+- [Agent A] claims [X] vs [Agent B] claims [Y] — on subtopic [Z]
+
+DEPTH OPPORTUNITIES:
+- Finding [N] mentions [specific tool/approach] worth investigating
+- Finding [M] suggests [unexpected constraint] that needs validation
+
+SURPRISES:
+- [Agent] found [unexpected finding] not covered by any original subtopic
+
+WAVE 2 PLAN:
+- [Agent]: [mission] — [refined query]
+- [Agent]: [mission] — [refined query]
+...
+```