okstra 0.169.0 → 0.170.0

This diff represents the content of publicly available package versions that have been released to one of the supported registries. The information contained in this diff is provided for informational purposes only and reflects changes between package versions as they appear in their respective public registries.
Files changed (52) hide show
  1. package/docs/architecture.md +17 -1
  2. package/docs/cli.md +11 -1
  3. package/docs/for-ai/skills/okstra-setup.md +8 -0
  4. package/docs/project-structure-overview.md +3 -1
  5. package/package.json +1 -1
  6. package/runtime/BUILD.json +2 -2
  7. package/runtime/bin/okstra-error-log.py +38 -282
  8. package/runtime/prompts/duties/acceptance-critic.md +25 -5
  9. package/runtime/prompts/duties/acceptance-verifier.md +25 -5
  10. package/runtime/prompts/duties/analysis-worker.md +25 -5
  11. package/runtime/prompts/duties/code-reviewer.md +25 -5
  12. package/runtime/prompts/duties/common.md +15 -11
  13. package/runtime/prompts/duties/diagnosis-worker.md +44 -0
  14. package/runtime/prompts/duties/discovery-worker.md +44 -0
  15. package/runtime/prompts/duties/implementation-executor.md +25 -5
  16. package/runtime/prompts/duties/implementation-verifier.md +25 -5
  17. package/runtime/prompts/duties/lead.md +25 -5
  18. package/runtime/prompts/duties/planning-worker.md +44 -0
  19. package/runtime/prompts/duties/report-writer.md +25 -5
  20. package/runtime/prompts/duties/reverification-worker.md +25 -5
  21. package/runtime/prompts/duties/schedule-verifier.md +25 -5
  22. package/runtime/prompts/duties/scope-critic.md +25 -5
  23. package/runtime/prompts/duties/translator.md +25 -5
  24. package/runtime/prompts/lead/convergence.md +53 -7
  25. package/runtime/prompts/lead/okstra-lead-contract.md +1 -1
  26. package/runtime/prompts/lead/plan-body-verification.md +5 -1
  27. package/runtime/prompts/lead/report-writer.md +1 -1
  28. package/runtime/prompts/profiles/_coding-conventions-preflight.md +1 -1
  29. package/runtime/prompts/profiles/_implementation-verifier.md +1 -1
  30. package/runtime/prompts/profiles/final-verification.md +1 -1
  31. package/runtime/prompts/profiles/implementation-planning.md +2 -2
  32. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/agent_invocation.py +146 -6
  33. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/agent_prompt_cli.py +38 -0
  34. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/cmux.py +36 -19
  35. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/dispatch_core.py +317 -27
  36. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/dispatch_state.py +143 -9
  37. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/doctor.py +31 -0
  38. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/error_log_write.py +308 -0
  39. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/plan_derivations.py +94 -0
  40. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/plan_items_cli.py +114 -3
  41. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/run.py +7 -1
  42. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/schema_excerpt.py +34 -0
  43. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/verdict_blocks.py +17 -0
  44. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/worker_audit_check.py +26 -4
  45. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/worker_audit_ledger.py +59 -9
  46. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/worker_prompt_contract.py +24 -1
  47. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/worker_prompt_headers.py +2 -2
  48. package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/worker_prompt_policy.py +12 -1
  49. package/runtime/python/okstra_project/resolver.py +34 -0
  50. package/runtime/skills/okstra-setup/references/project-config.md +38 -0
  51. package/runtime/validators/lib/fixtures.sh +9 -1
  52. package/runtime/validators/validate-run.py +37 -2
@@ -14,8 +14,15 @@ import sys
14
14
  from typing import Any
15
15
 
16
16
  from .convergence_store import write_json_atomic
17
+ from .plan_derivations import extract_tokens, find_derivations
17
18
  from .plan_items import PlanItemContractError, extract_plan_items
18
- from .verdict_blocks import VerdictBlock, VerdictBlockError, parse_verdict_blocks
19
+ from .user_response import parse_user_response_entries
20
+ from .verdict_blocks import (
21
+ PLAN_ITEM_VERDICTS,
22
+ VerdictBlock,
23
+ VerdictBlockError,
24
+ parse_verdict_blocks,
25
+ )
19
26
 
20
27
 
21
28
  def _load_json_object(path: Path) -> dict[str, Any]:
@@ -64,6 +71,20 @@ def _parser() -> argparse.ArgumentParser:
64
71
  help="one worker's plan-verify result file (repeatable)")
65
72
  collect.add_argument("--items", type=Path, required=True)
66
73
  collect.add_argument("--output", type=Path, required=True)
74
+ derivations = commands.add_parser(
75
+ "derivations",
76
+ help="list plan statements an answered clarification may have falsified",
77
+ )
78
+ derivations.add_argument("--data", type=Path, required=True)
79
+ derivations.add_argument("--response", type=Path, required=True,
80
+ help="the user-responses sidecar for this run")
81
+ derivations.add_argument("--clarification", default=None,
82
+ help="only this C-id (default: every answered one)")
83
+ seed = commands.add_parser(
84
+ "seed",
85
+ help="create the planBodyVerification.planItems[] rows a round lands in",
86
+ )
87
+ seed.add_argument("--data", type=Path, required=True)
67
88
  apply_verdicts = commands.add_parser(
68
89
  "apply-verdicts",
69
90
  help="overwrite planBodyVerification.planItems[].verdicts in data.json",
@@ -112,8 +133,18 @@ def _assigned_item_ids(items_path: Path) -> list[str]:
112
133
 
113
134
  def _verdict_row(worker: str, block: VerdictBlock) -> dict[str, Any]:
114
135
  """One `planItems[].verdicts[]` row. Optional fields stay absent when empty
115
- so the recorded table shows what the worker actually said."""
116
- row: dict[str, Any] = {"worker": worker, "verdict": block.verdict}
136
+ so the recorded table shows what the worker actually said.
137
+
138
+ The verdict crosses a vocabulary boundary here: a worker answers
139
+ `UNVERIFIABLE`, and the schema persists that as `verification-error`
140
+ (`PLAN_ITEM_VERDICTS`). Writing the worker's token straight through produced
141
+ a data.json its own schema rejects, and the mapping the contract prescribes
142
+ had to be applied by hand every round.
143
+ """
144
+ row: dict[str, Any] = {
145
+ "worker": worker,
146
+ "verdict": PLAN_ITEM_VERDICTS[block.verdict],
147
+ }
117
148
  for key, value in (
118
149
  ("breakageKind", block.breakage_kind),
119
150
  ("fixability", block.fixability),
@@ -194,6 +225,84 @@ def _plan_body_items(data: dict[str, Any], data_path: Path) -> list[dict[str, An
194
225
  return items
195
226
 
196
227
 
228
+ def _derivations(args: argparse.Namespace) -> dict[str, Any]:
229
+ """Candidate statements each answered clarification may have falsified.
230
+
231
+ Advisory by construction: it reports where a decision's subject is mentioned
232
+ and never which mentions are now wrong. Both contracts require the author to
233
+ enumerate before editing; this supplies the enumeration, which is the half
234
+ that was being skipped, and leaves the judgement where it belongs.
235
+ """
236
+ try:
237
+ sidecar = args.response.read_text(encoding="utf-8")
238
+ except (OSError, UnicodeError) as exc:
239
+ raise PlanItemContractError(
240
+ f"cannot read user-response sidecar {args.response}: {exc}"
241
+ ) from exc
242
+ planning = _planning(_load_json_object(args.data))
243
+ entries = [
244
+ entry for entry in parse_user_response_entries(sidecar)
245
+ if args.clarification is None or entry.response_id == args.clarification
246
+ ]
247
+ if args.clarification is not None and not entries:
248
+ raise PlanItemContractError(
249
+ f"{args.response} has no response block for {args.clarification}"
250
+ )
251
+ clarifications = []
252
+ for entry in entries:
253
+ tokens = extract_tokens(f"{entry.value}\n{entry.rationale or ''}")
254
+ clarifications.append({
255
+ "id": entry.response_id,
256
+ "disposition": entry.disposition,
257
+ "tokens": tokens,
258
+ "candidates": find_derivations(planning, tokens),
259
+ })
260
+ return {
261
+ "ok": True,
262
+ "operation": "derivations",
263
+ "advisory": True,
264
+ "clarifications": clarifications,
265
+ }
266
+
267
+
268
+ def _seed(args: argparse.Namespace) -> dict[str, Any]:
269
+ """Create the `planBodyVerification.planItems[]` rows a round lands in.
270
+
271
+ `apply-verdicts` refuses a verdict whose item has no row — correctly, since
272
+ the gate is re-derived from that table and a verdict with nowhere to land
273
+ would score as never cast. But nothing created the rows: the report writer
274
+ leaves `planItems: []` (§5.5.9 is a lead substep that runs after it), and
275
+ there was no step, in code or in the contract, that filled them. Every round
276
+ had to be hand-seeded before the CLI would accept its own output.
277
+
278
+ Idempotent by id. An existing row keeps everything it carries — verdicts
279
+ already applied, `carriedForwardFromSeq`, `selfFixNote` — because a re-seed
280
+ between rounds must not erase the round before it.
281
+ """
282
+ extracted = _envelope(_load_json_object(args.data))["items"]
283
+ data = _load_json_object(args.data)
284
+ recorded = _plan_body_items(data, args.data)
285
+ known = {
286
+ item.get("id")
287
+ for item in recorded
288
+ if isinstance(item, Mapping)
289
+ }
290
+ added = [
291
+ {**item, "verdicts": []}
292
+ for item in extracted
293
+ if item["id"] not in known
294
+ ]
295
+ recorded.extend(added)
296
+ write_json_atomic(args.data, data)
297
+ return {
298
+ "ok": True,
299
+ "operation": "seed",
300
+ "path": str(args.data),
301
+ "seeded": len(added),
302
+ "existing": len(known),
303
+ }
304
+
305
+
197
306
  def _apply_verdicts(args: argparse.Namespace) -> dict[str, Any]:
198
307
  data = _load_json_object(args.data)
199
308
  incoming = _load_json_object(args.verdicts).get("planItems")
@@ -226,6 +335,8 @@ _HANDLERS = {
226
335
  "extract": _extract,
227
336
  "validate": _validate,
228
337
  "collect-verdicts": _collect_verdicts,
338
+ "derivations": _derivations,
339
+ "seed": _seed,
229
340
  "apply-verdicts": _apply_verdicts,
230
341
  }
231
342
 
@@ -68,6 +68,7 @@ from .domain.host import (
68
68
  ProviderUnavailable,
69
69
  )
70
70
  from .model_discovery import normalize_execution_for_dispatch
71
+ from .worker_prompt_policy import ANALYSIS_DUTY_BY_TASK_TYPE
71
72
  from .models import (
72
73
  ModelAssignment,
73
74
  UnknownProviderError,
@@ -2523,7 +2524,12 @@ def _allowed_agent_audiences(
2523
2524
  elif inp.task_type == "final-verification":
2524
2525
  audiences.add("acceptance-verifier")
2525
2526
  else:
2526
- audiences.add("analysis-worker")
2527
+ # Same map the prompt policy resolves the duty from. Allowing a
2528
+ # different audience here than the one the policy will ask for makes
2529
+ # every worker prompt in the phase fail materialization.
2530
+ audiences.add(
2531
+ ANALYSIS_DUTY_BY_TASK_TYPE.get(inp.task_type, "analysis-worker")
2532
+ )
2527
2533
  if models.critic_choice not in {"", "off"}:
2528
2534
  audiences.update({"scope-critic", "acceptance-critic"})
2529
2535
  return sorted(audiences)
@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ from __future__ import annotations
23
23
 
24
24
  import json
25
25
  import re
26
+ from pathlib import Path
26
27
 
27
28
  from .report_contract import TASK_TYPE_DATA_PROPERTY
28
29
 
@@ -78,6 +79,39 @@ def excerpt_cut_from_version(excerpt: dict) -> str:
78
79
  return value if isinstance(value, str) else ""
79
80
 
80
81
 
82
+ def excerpt_version_skew(excerpt_path: Path, installed: str) -> str:
83
+ """The version the bundle excerpt was cut from, when it is not *installed*.
84
+
85
+ Empty means no actionable skew: the file is absent or unreadable, carries no
86
+ stamp, or matches. A non-empty return is the older version, which the caller
87
+ turns into its own message.
88
+
89
+ The comparison used to live only in the renderer's error decorator, so it ran
90
+ in Phase 6 — after a worker had already authored a whole report against a
91
+ stale excerpt. The same two values are available much earlier, and the fix
92
+ (re-prepare the bundle) is the same either way.
93
+ """
94
+ if not installed:
95
+ return ""
96
+ try:
97
+ excerpt = json.loads(excerpt_path.read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
98
+ except (OSError, json.JSONDecodeError):
99
+ return ""
100
+ if not isinstance(excerpt, dict):
101
+ return ""
102
+ cut_from = excerpt_cut_from_version(excerpt)
103
+ return cut_from if cut_from and cut_from != installed else ""
104
+
105
+
106
+ def bundle_excerpt_path(start: Path) -> Path | None:
107
+ """The task bundle's schema excerpt, found by walking up from *start*."""
108
+ for ancestor in Path(start).resolve().parents:
109
+ candidate = ancestor / "instruction-set" / "final-report-schema.json"
110
+ if candidate.is_file():
111
+ return candidate
112
+ return None
113
+
114
+
81
115
  def build_schema_excerpt(schema: dict, task_type: str, cut_from_version: str = "") -> dict:
82
116
  """Return a task-type-scoped copy of *schema*.
83
117
 
@@ -38,6 +38,23 @@ ADVERSARIAL_VERDICTS = {
38
38
  "UNVERIFIABLE": "unverifiable",
39
39
  "VERIFICATION-ERROR": "verification-error",
40
40
  }
41
+ # Plan-body verdicts persist in their own vocabulary, which is NOT the
42
+ # convergence one above: the schema keeps the first three tokens uppercase
43
+ # (`$defs/PlanBodyVerification/properties/planItems/items/properties/verdicts/
44
+ # items/properties/verdict`) and has no `UNVERIFIABLE` member at all.
45
+ # `plan-body-verification.md` §"Planning-time environment gap" states the
46
+ # mapping — "Recording `UNVERIFIABLE` is the honest outcome — it is persisted as
47
+ # `verification-error`" — and it lives here rather than inside the transcription
48
+ # CLI so the worker-facing token and the persisted token are decided in one
49
+ # place. Writing the raw token through put a value in data.json that its own
50
+ # schema rejects.
51
+ PLAN_ITEM_VERDICTS = {
52
+ "AGREE": "AGREE",
53
+ "DISAGREE": "DISAGREE",
54
+ "SUPPLEMENT": "SUPPLEMENT",
55
+ "UNVERIFIABLE": "verification-error",
56
+ "VERIFICATION-ERROR": "verification-error",
57
+ }
41
58
  DISAGREE_BASES = frozenset({"counter-evidence", "burden-not-met"})
42
59
 
43
60
  _ITEM_RE = re.compile(r"^###[ \t]+(?P<id>[^\s:]+)[ \t]*:?.*$", re.MULTILINE)
@@ -12,7 +12,10 @@ import json
12
12
  import sys
13
13
  from pathlib import Path
14
14
 
15
- from okstra_ctl.worker_audit_ledger import check_worker_results_audit
15
+ from okstra_ctl.worker_audit_ledger import (
16
+ check_worker_results_audit,
17
+ worker_result_files,
18
+ )
16
19
 
17
20
 
18
21
  def _parser() -> argparse.ArgumentParser:
@@ -26,7 +29,8 @@ def _parser() -> argparse.ArgumentParser:
26
29
  parser.add_argument("--seq", required=True,
27
30
  help="this run's 3-digit seq")
28
31
  parser.add_argument("--worker", default=None,
29
- help="check only this worker id (default: every worker)")
32
+ help="check only this worker id, with or without the "
33
+ "`-worker` suffix (default: every worker)")
30
34
  return parser
31
35
 
32
36
 
@@ -35,8 +39,26 @@ def main(argv: list[str] | None = None) -> int:
35
39
  failures = check_worker_results_audit(
36
40
  args.run_dir, args.task_type, args.seq, worker=args.worker
37
41
  )
38
- print(json.dumps({"ok": not failures, "failures": failures},
39
- ensure_ascii=False, indent=2))
42
+ # A selector that narrows to nothing also produces no failures, so `ok`
43
+ # alone cannot tell a real pass from a check that judged zero files —
44
+ # a mistyped `--worker` used to read as a clean bill of health. The count
45
+ # is what makes the two distinguishable at a glance.
46
+ inspected = [
47
+ path.name
48
+ for path, _role, _seq in worker_result_files(
49
+ args.run_dir, args.task_type, args.seq, args.worker
50
+ )
51
+ ]
52
+ print(json.dumps(
53
+ {
54
+ "ok": not failures,
55
+ "inspected": len(inspected),
56
+ "inspectedFiles": inspected,
57
+ "failures": failures,
58
+ },
59
+ ensure_ascii=False,
60
+ indent=2,
61
+ ))
40
62
  return 2 if failures else 0
41
63
 
42
64
 
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@ so the rules live here rather than inside either one — the same split
11
11
  from __future__ import annotations
12
12
 
13
13
  import re
14
+ from dataclasses import dataclass
14
15
  from pathlib import Path
15
16
 
16
17
  from okstra_ctl.worker_prompt_headers import EVIDENCE_LEDGER_HEADER
@@ -148,26 +149,75 @@ def _ledger_path_hint(cited_path: str, read_paths: set[str]) -> str:
148
149
  )
149
150
 
150
151
 
151
- def _result_files(run_dir: Path, task_type: str, seq: str | None, worker: str | None):
152
+ @dataclass(frozen=True)
153
+ class WorkerResultName:
154
+ """The three fields a canonical worker-result basename carries."""
155
+
156
+ worker_role: str
157
+ task_type: str
158
+ seq: str
159
+
160
+
161
+ def parse_worker_result_name(basename: str) -> WorkerResultName | None:
162
+ """Split `<role>-worker-<task-type>-<seq>.md`, or None when non-canonical.
163
+
164
+ Callers that already hold one worker's result path — the dispatcher settling
165
+ that worker — read the audit check's arguments from here instead of
166
+ re-deriving them from the manifest. The `worker_role` this returns carries
167
+ the `-worker` suffix, which is what `check_worker_results_audit(worker=...)`
168
+ matches on; a bare provider id like `claude` matches nothing.
169
+ """
170
+ if "-audit-" in basename:
171
+ return None
172
+ match = _WORKER_RESULT_BASENAME_RE.match(basename)
173
+ if match is None:
174
+ return None
175
+ return WorkerResultName(
176
+ worker_role=match.group("worker"),
177
+ task_type=match.group("task_type"),
178
+ seq=match.group("seq"),
179
+ )
180
+
181
+
182
+ def normalize_worker_filter(worker: str | None) -> str | None:
183
+ """Accept a worker id the way every other okstra surface spells it.
184
+
185
+ Result files are named `<role>-worker-...`, so the filter matches
186
+ `claude-worker`. But `claude` is what a worker is called everywhere a lead
187
+ reads or types one — `--workers claude,codex`, `workerId`, the roster in the
188
+ profile — so `--worker claude` was the natural thing to pass, and it matched
189
+ nothing. A zero-match filter produces no failures, which the CLI reports as
190
+ `{"ok": true}` with exit 0: indistinguishable from a real pass, at exactly
191
+ the point `team-contract` tells the lead to run this check before deciding
192
+ whether to re-dispatch. Accepting both spellings removes the trap rather
193
+ than documenting it.
194
+ """
195
+ if worker is None or worker.endswith("-worker"):
196
+ return worker
197
+ return f"{worker}-worker"
198
+
199
+
200
+ def worker_result_files(
201
+ run_dir: Path, task_type: str, seq: str | None, worker: str | None
202
+ ):
152
203
  """Every worker-results file in *run_dir* this check owns, in name order."""
204
+ worker = normalize_worker_filter(worker)
153
205
  for path in sorted((run_dir / "worker-results").glob("*.md")):
154
- if "-audit-" in path.name:
155
- continue
156
- match = _WORKER_RESULT_BASENAME_RE.match(path.name)
206
+ match = parse_worker_result_name(path.name)
157
207
  if match is None:
158
208
  # Files that don't match the canonical pattern (e.g. ad-hoc notes
159
209
  # left by the operator) are out of contract scope.
160
210
  continue
161
- if match.group("task_type") != task_type:
211
+ if match.task_type != task_type:
162
212
  # Cross-phase artifacts shouldn't appear here; skip rather than
163
213
  # fail to keep the check focused on the current phase.
164
214
  continue
165
- if seq is not None and match.group("seq") != seq:
215
+ if seq is not None and match.seq != seq:
166
216
  # A prior run's artifact. Its contract was judged when it ran.
167
217
  continue
168
- if worker is not None and match.group("worker") != worker:
218
+ if worker is not None and match.worker_role != worker:
169
219
  continue
170
- yield path, match.group("worker"), match.group("seq")
220
+ yield path, match.worker_role, match.seq
171
221
 
172
222
 
173
223
  def check_worker_results_audit(
@@ -196,7 +246,7 @@ def check_worker_results_audit(
196
246
  # `release-handoff`, which is single-lead). Nothing to enforce.
197
247
  return failures
198
248
 
199
- for path, worker_role, result_seq in _result_files(run_dir, task_type, seq, worker):
249
+ for path, worker_role, result_seq in worker_result_files(run_dir, task_type, seq, worker):
200
250
  rel = path.name
201
251
  try:
202
252
  content = path.read_text()
@@ -230,7 +230,9 @@ def validate_reverify_prompt(
230
230
  read_scope_position < 0 or read_scope_position > boundary_position
231
231
  ):
232
232
  errors.append("phase boundary block must follow the reverify anchor headers")
233
- first_heading = re.search(r"(?m)^##\s+", normalized)
233
+ first_heading = re.compile(r"(?m)^##\s+").search(
234
+ normalized, _task_instructions_offset(normalized)
235
+ )
234
236
  if (
235
237
  boundary_position >= 0
236
238
  and first_heading is not None
@@ -240,6 +242,27 @@ def validate_reverify_prompt(
240
242
  return errors
241
243
 
242
244
 
245
+ def _task_instructions_offset(text: str) -> int:
246
+ """Where the lead's own instruction body starts.
247
+
248
+ The `agent-prompt` materializer composes every prompt as anchors →
249
+ `## Duty Contract` → `## Task Instructions`, and convergence's
250
+ materialization gate makes that the only body a reverify dispatch may send.
251
+ The duty section's heading is therefore always the document's first `##`,
252
+ which left the check below with no satisfiable input: the composer writes a
253
+ heading above anything the lead can author, so a whole-document "first
254
+ heading" test failed every materialized prompt regardless of where the lead
255
+ put the phase boundary.
256
+
257
+ These rules judge what the lead wrote, so they start where the lead's text
258
+ starts — the same region `_validate_model_header` already reads. A prompt
259
+ without the marker is judged whole.
260
+ """
261
+ marker = "\n\n## Task Instructions\n\n"
262
+ index = text.find(marker)
263
+ return 0 if index < 0 else index + len(marker)
264
+
265
+
243
266
  def _section_values(text: str, header: str) -> list[str]:
244
267
  lines = text.splitlines()
245
268
  values: list[str] = []
@@ -91,7 +91,7 @@ def worker_prompt_headers(
91
91
  project_root,
92
92
  audit_source_rel or result_rel,
93
93
  )
94
- errors_log_path = _errors_log_path(project_root, manifest, active_context)
94
+ errors_log_path = resolve_errors_log_path(project_root, manifest, active_context)
95
95
  errors_sidecar_path = _worker_errors_sidecar_path(
96
96
  project_root,
97
97
  manifest,
@@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ def _improvement_grilling_log_path(
224
224
  return path
225
225
 
226
226
 
227
- def _errors_log_path(
227
+ def resolve_errors_log_path(
228
228
  project_root: Path,
229
229
  manifest: Mapping[str, Any],
230
230
  active_context: Mapping[str, Any],
@@ -58,6 +58,17 @@ SUPPORTED_TASK_TYPES = frozenset({
58
58
  "release-handoff",
59
59
  *ANALYSIS_TASK_TYPES,
60
60
  })
61
+ # One duty per analysis ROLE, not per phase. Phases that ask their worker for the
62
+ # same kind of judgement share a contract — requirements- and improvement-discovery
63
+ # both hand over candidates they do not start — and a phase whose worker decides
64
+ # something else gets its own. A task type absent from this map takes the
65
+ # observational default below: describe the area, do not design for it.
66
+ ANALYSIS_DUTY_BY_TASK_TYPE: dict[str, AgentAudience] = {
67
+ "requirements-discovery": "discovery-worker",
68
+ "improvement-discovery": "discovery-worker",
69
+ "error-analysis": "diagnosis-worker",
70
+ "implementation-planning": "planning-worker",
71
+ }
61
72
  WORKER_PREAMBLE_FILENAME_BY_AUDIENCE = {
62
73
  "analysis": "worker-prompt-preamble.md",
63
74
  "implementation-executor": "implementation-worker-preamble.md",
@@ -113,7 +124,7 @@ def resolve_prompt_plan(
113
124
  if dispatch_kind == "critic"
114
125
  else "acceptance-verifier"
115
126
  if task_type == "final-verification"
116
- else "analysis-worker"
127
+ else ANALYSIS_DUTY_BY_TASK_TYPE.get(task_type, "analysis-worker")
117
128
  )
118
129
  if task_type == "implementation" and not executor_worker_id:
119
130
  raise ValueError("implementation executor worker ID is required")
@@ -108,6 +108,40 @@ def resolve_architecture(project_root: Path | str) -> str:
108
108
  return style if style in _ARCHITECTURE_STYLES else "none"
109
109
 
110
110
 
111
+ def resolve_review_rule_packs(project_root: Path | str) -> tuple[str, ...]:
112
+ """Return the project's declared review rule pack paths, else ``()``.
113
+
114
+ A review rule pack is a project's own review standard — the file a phase
115
+ reads before judging a diff. It used to reach a run only when the task
116
+ brief cited its exact path, so a team standard applied or not depending on
117
+ who wrote the brief. Declaring it here makes it apply to every run in the
118
+ project; the brief citation still works and the two are a union.
119
+
120
+ Mirrors resolve_architecture's failure posture: any read/parse problem or a
121
+ non-list value degrades to "none declared" rather than raising inside a run.
122
+ An entry that is not an absolute path is dropped, because workers run with
123
+ a worktree as cwd — a relative path would resolve against a tree that does
124
+ not contain the pack, and would mean a different file per worker.
125
+ """
126
+ try:
127
+ payload = json.loads(project_json_path(Path(project_root)).read_text(encoding="utf-8"))
128
+ except (OSError, ValueError):
129
+ return ()
130
+ if not isinstance(payload, dict):
131
+ return ()
132
+ declared = payload.get("reviewRulePacks")
133
+ if not isinstance(declared, list):
134
+ return ()
135
+ packs = []
136
+ for entry in declared:
137
+ if not isinstance(entry, str) or not entry.strip():
138
+ continue
139
+ candidate = Path(entry.strip()).expanduser()
140
+ if candidate.is_absolute():
141
+ packs.append(str(candidate))
142
+ return tuple(dict.fromkeys(packs))
143
+
144
+
111
145
  def upsert_project_json(project_root: Path, project_id: str, *,
112
146
  now: Optional[str] = None) -> dict:
113
147
  """project.json 을 읽거나 새로 만든다.
@@ -252,3 +252,41 @@ rules from advisory to a binding planning + verification constraint:
252
252
 
253
253
  The full two-layer model lives in `docs/architecture.md` § Project
254
254
  self-registration.
255
+
256
+ ## G. Project review rule packs (`reviewRulePacks`)
257
+
258
+ `reviewRulePacks` declares the review standards this project's phases read
259
+ before they judge a plan or a diff — a team PR-review skill's `SKILL.md`, for
260
+ example. Without it a pack reaches a run only when the task brief cites its
261
+ exact path, so whether the team standard applied came down to who wrote the
262
+ brief. A declared pack applies to every run in the project; the brief citation
263
+ keeps working, and the two channels are a union.
264
+
265
+ `okstra setup` never writes it. Hand-add it to `project.json` and the upsert
266
+ preserves it:
267
+
268
+ ```json
269
+ {
270
+ "reviewRulePacks": [
271
+ "/Users/me/.claude/skills/team-pr-reviewer/SKILL.md"
272
+ ]
273
+ }
274
+ ```
275
+
276
+ - **Absolute paths only.** A worker runs with a task worktree as its cwd, so a
277
+ relative path names a different file there — relative entries are dropped by
278
+ `scripts/okstra_project/resolver.py::resolve_review_rule_packs`, which also
279
+ falls back to "none declared" on an unreadable or malformed `project.json`.
280
+ A leading `~` is expanded.
281
+ - **Who reads it.** `implementation-planning` (to plan away the findings before
282
+ the code exists), the implementation executor's coding-conventions preflight,
283
+ and the static review passes of the implementation verifier and
284
+ `final-verification`. Each reads only the declared file and the
285
+ `references/*.md` files it directly names — never a parent directory or a
286
+ host skill catalog.
287
+ - **What is machine-checked.** `okstra doctor --phase <phase>` fails its
288
+ `review rule packs` check when a declared path is not a readable file,
289
+ because a stale path otherwise costs the whole pack in silence: the phase
290
+ records that it read no rules and the run still passes. Whether a pack that
291
+ does resolve was actually read and applied stays the phase's own
292
+ `project-review-rules:` record — no machine check reads a worker's reasoning.
@@ -544,6 +544,14 @@ if WORKSPACE_ROOT:
544
544
  link_agent_dispatch_result,
545
545
  record_verified_agent_dispatch,
546
546
  )
547
+ # The analysis duty depends on the task type, exactly as it does in a real
548
+ # run — a fixture that assumed one audience for every phase would be
549
+ # rejected by the manifest's own allowlist.
550
+ from okstra_ctl.worker_prompt_policy import ANALYSIS_DUTY_BY_TASK_TYPE
551
+
552
+ analysis_audience = ANALYSIS_DUTY_BY_TASK_TYPE.get(
553
+ str(run_manifest.get("taskType") or ""), "analysis-worker"
554
+ )
547
555
 
548
556
  lead_record = record_verified_agent_dispatch(
549
557
  project_root=project_root,
@@ -580,7 +588,7 @@ if WORKSPACE_ROOT:
580
588
  worker_id=worker_id,
581
589
  audience=(
582
590
  "report-writer" if worker_id == "report-writer"
583
- else "analysis-worker"
591
+ else analysis_audience
584
592
  ),
585
593
  assignment_ref=assignment_ref,
586
594
  purpose=None,
@@ -5470,6 +5470,27 @@ def _plan_verify_result_workers(report_path: Path, task_type: str) -> set[str] |
5470
5470
  return workers
5471
5471
 
5472
5472
 
5473
+ def _plan_verify_seq_near_misses(report_path: Path, task_type: str) -> list[str]:
5474
+ """Plan-verify results in the directory that this run's seq filter excluded.
5475
+
5476
+ The seq comes from the report filename, and a run whose `reports` and
5477
+ `workerResults` sequences differ makes the other one look equally plausible
5478
+ to a lead naming the file by hand. Naming a near miss is the difference
5479
+ between "the file is missing" and "the file is there under a different seq"
5480
+ — the first sends a lead to re-dispatch two workers that already ran.
5481
+ """
5482
+ seq = _report_run_seq(report_path)
5483
+ if not seq:
5484
+ return []
5485
+ directory = report_path.parent.parent / "worker-results"
5486
+ matched = set(directory.glob(f"*-plan-verify-r*-{task_type}-{seq}.md"))
5487
+ return sorted(
5488
+ path.name
5489
+ for path in directory.glob(f"*-plan-verify-r*-{task_type}-*.md")
5490
+ if path not in matched
5491
+ )
5492
+
5493
+
5473
5494
  def _validate_plan_body_verdict_provenance(
5474
5495
  data: dict,
5475
5496
  report_path: Path,
@@ -5514,14 +5535,28 @@ def _validate_plan_body_verdict_provenance(
5514
5535
  "final-report data.json: planBodyVerification records verdicts from "
5515
5536
  f"{unbacked} but no matching plan-body reverify result file exists "
5516
5537
  f"under `runs/{task_type}/worker-results/` "
5517
- f"(expected `<worker>-plan-verify-r<N>-{task_type}-<seq>.md`). "
5518
- "A vote the gate is computed from MUST trace back to a dispatch "
5538
+ f"(globbed `*-plan-verify-r*-{task_type}-"
5539
+ f"{_report_run_seq(report_path) or '*'}.md`, where the seq is the "
5540
+ f"report's own — `final-report-{task_type}-<seq>` — not this run's "
5541
+ f"`workerResults` sequence)"
5542
+ + _near_miss_clause(report_path, task_type)
5543
+ + ". A vote the gate is computed from MUST trace back to a dispatch "
5519
5544
  "that actually returned — otherwise the round can be skipped and "
5520
5545
  'the gate still read `passed` (plan-body-verification.md §"Round '
5521
5546
  'protocol" step 3).'
5522
5547
  )
5523
5548
 
5524
5549
 
5550
+ def _near_miss_clause(report_path: Path, task_type: str) -> str:
5551
+ near = _plan_verify_seq_near_misses(report_path, task_type)
5552
+ if not near:
5553
+ return ""
5554
+ return (
5555
+ f"; the directory does hold {near}, which the seq filter excluded — "
5556
+ f"rename to this run's report seq rather than re-dispatching"
5557
+ )
5558
+
5559
+
5525
5560
  _UNIFORM_VERIFIER_MIN_ITEMS = 5
5526
5561
 
5527
5562