nexus-agents 6.1.0 → 6.1.2

package/dist/{chunk-W4RTV2QJ.js → chunk-3B7TLK37.js}

@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ import {
   toolSuccessStructured,
   withProgressHeartbeat,
   wrapToolWithTimeout
-} from "./chunk-MKMVUV3M.js";
+} from "./chunk-GKDWG45N.js";
 import {
   assessPanelIndependence,
   countDistinctModels,
@@ -80,6 +80,18 @@ import {
 // src/mcp/tools/consensus-vote.ts
 import { z as z10 } from "zod";
 
+// src/utils/bounded-artifact.ts
+function boundArtifactForReview(text, budget, label) {
+  if (text.length <= budget) {
+    return { text, note: "", bound: void 0 };
+  }
+  return {
+    text: text.slice(0, budget),
+    note: `> NOTE: partial view \u2014 you are seeing the first ${String(budget)} of ${String(text.length)} characters of the ${label}. Judge only what is shown, and treat insufficient visibility as itself a reason to raise a concern.`,
+    bound: { reviewedChars: budget, totalChars: text.length, partial: true }
+  };
+}
+
 // src/cli/voter-model-overrides.ts
 function voterModelOverrideEnvKey(role) {
   return `NEXUS_VOTER_MODEL_${role.toUpperCase()}`;
@@ -6259,21 +6271,34 @@ async function processVotesWithCascade(engineVotes, opts) {
   return { engineResult, voteMap, higherOrderResult, outcome, cascaded: cascadeInfo.decided };
 }
 var CONTRARIAN_ESCALATION_THRESHOLD = 0.8;
+var CONTRARIAN_PROPOSAL_BUDGET = 2e3;
+function buildContrarianPrompt(bounded) {
+  return [
+    "You are a contrarian analyst. Your job is to find reasons this proposal should be REJECTED.",
+    "Look for: YAGNI (not needed), MISALIGNED (wrong tech/architecture), SECURITY_RISK, SCOPE_CREEP.",
+    "",
+    ...bounded.note === "" ? [] : [bounded.note, ""],
+    `Proposal: ${bounded.text}`,
+    "",
+    "If you find a strong reason to reject, respond with JSON:",
+    '{"decision":"reject","confidence":0.0-1.0,"reasoning":"your concern"}',
+    "If the proposal is sound, respond with:",
+    '{"decision":"approve","confidence":0.0-1.0,"reasoning":"why it is acceptable"}'
+  ].join("\n");
+}
+function logPartialProposal(bounded, log) {
+  if (bounded.bound === void 0) return;
+  log.info("Contrarian sees a partial proposal", {
+    reviewedChars: bounded.bound.reviewedChars,
+    totalChars: bounded.bound.totalChars
+  });
+}
 async function runContrarianCheck(proposal, log) {
   try {
     const { executeExpert } = await import("./expert-bridge-3EHBG44P.js");
-    const prompt = [
-      "You are a contrarian analyst. Your job is to find reasons this proposal should be REJECTED.",
-      "Look for: YAGNI (not needed), MISALIGNED (wrong tech/architecture), SECURITY_RISK, SCOPE_CREEP.",
-      "",
-      `Proposal: ${proposal.slice(0, 2e3)}`,
-      "",
-      "If you find a strong reason to reject, respond with JSON:",
-      '{"decision":"reject","confidence":0.0-1.0,"reasoning":"your concern"}',
-      "If the proposal is sound, respond with:",
-      '{"decision":"approve","confidence":0.0-1.0,"reasoning":"why it is acceptable"}'
-    ].join("\n");
-    const result = await executeExpert("architecture", prompt);
+    const bounded = boundArtifactForReview(proposal, CONTRARIAN_PROPOSAL_BUDGET, "proposal");
+    logPartialProposal(bounded, log);
+    const result = await executeExpert("architecture", buildContrarianPrompt(bounded));
     if (!result.success) return { shouldEscalate: false, reason: "", confidence: 0, errored: true };
     const jsonMatch = result.text.match(/\{[\s\S]*\}/);
     if (jsonMatch === null)
@@ -6848,4 +6873,4 @@ export {
   CONSENSUS_VOTE_TOOL_SCHEMA,
   registerConsensusVoteTool
 };
-//# sourceMappingURL=chunk-W4RTV2QJ.js.map
+//# sourceMappingURL=chunk-3B7TLK37.js.map