okstra 0.209.0 → 0.209.1

package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/wizard/roles.py

@@ -278,7 +278,7 @@ def _single_model_options(
     """고정 단일 역할의 후보를 제공자별로 묶고 기존 추천을 유지한다."""
     pool = context.pool
     requirement = next(row for row in profile.roles if row.role == role)
-    defaults, everything = _available_role_models(
+    _defaults, everything = _available_role_models(
         state, profile, requirement, context, scopes,
     )
     prompt = _p(state.workspace_root, "role_model", role=role)
@@ -297,13 +297,7 @@ def _single_model_options(
         options.append(_opt(
             model_ref,
             prompt["options"]["model"].format(
-                model_ref=model_ref,
-                display=model.display_name,
-                default_suffix=(
-                    prompt["options"].get("default_suffix", "")
-                    if model_ref in defaults
-                    else ""
-                ),
+                model_ref=model_ref, display=model.display_name,
             ),
             recommended=not options,
         ))

package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/wizard/steps_identity.py

@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ from okstra_project.state import (
 )
 
 from .ids import (
+    BRIEF_CARRY_SWITCH_ENTRY,
     BASE_REF_FREE_INPUT_TOKEN,
     CANONICAL_BASE_REFS,
     PICK_TYPE_CUSTOM,
@@ -559,7 +560,7 @@ def _implementation_needs_approval(
 
 def _build_task_type(state: WizardState) -> Prompt:
     t = _p(state.workspace_root, "task_type")
-    recommended_suffix = t["options"].get("_RECOMMENDED_SUFFIX", "")
+    recommended_suffix = ""
     rerun_suffix = t["options"].get("_RERUN_SUFFIX", "")
     next_suffix = t["options"].get("_NEXT_SUFFIX", "")
     approve_suffix = t["options"].get("_APPROVE_SUFFIX", recommended_suffix)
@@ -826,7 +827,10 @@ def _build_brief_carry(state: WizardState) -> Prompt:
     return Prompt(
         step=S_BRIEF_CARRY, kind="pick",
         label=t["label"],
-        options=[_opt(k, v) for k, v in t["options"].items()],
+        options=[
+            _opt(k, v, recommended=k == BRIEF_CARRY_SWITCH_ENTRY)
+            for k, v in t["options"].items()
+        ],
         echo_template=t["echo_template"],
     )
 
@@ -851,11 +855,9 @@ def _checked_out_canonical_ref(project_root: Path) -> str:
 
 def _build_base_ref_pick(state: WizardState) -> Prompt:
     t = _p(state.workspace_root, "base_ref_pick")
-    recommended_suffix = t["options"].get("_RECOMMENDED_SUFFIX", "")
     recommended = _checked_out_canonical_ref(Path(state.project_root))
     refs = sorted(CANONICAL_BASE_REFS, key=lambda r: r != recommended)
-    options = [_opt(r, f"{r}{recommended_suffix}", recommended=True) if r == recommended
-               else _opt(r) for r in refs]
+    options = [_opt(r, recommended=r == recommended) for r in refs]
     for value, label in _static_options(t):
         options.append(_opt(value=value, label=label))
     return Prompt(

package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/wizard/steps_plan.py

@@ -689,7 +689,7 @@ def _build_fix_cycle_confirm(state: WizardState) -> Prompt:
     return Prompt(
         step=S_FIX_CYCLE_CONFIRM, kind="pick", label=t["label"],
         options=[
-            _opt("yes", opts["yes"]),
+            _opt("yes", opts["yes"], recommended=True),
             _opt("no", opts["no"]),
             _opt("abort", opts["abort"]),
         ],

package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/worker_prompt_body.py

@@ -23,6 +23,7 @@ def analysis_prompt_body(
     model: str,
     plan: PromptPlan,
     approved_plan_path: str = "",
+    selected_direction_path: str = "",
 ) -> list[str]:
     """Render the provider-neutral body for an initial analysis audience."""
     label = analysis_worker_label(worker_id)
@@ -41,7 +42,9 @@ def analysis_prompt_body(
         f"- Task type: `{_require_string(manifest, 'taskType')}`",
         "",
         "## Inputs",
-        *analysis_input_lines(manifest, active_context, plan, approved_plan_path),
+        *analysis_input_lines(
+            manifest, active_context, plan, approved_plan_path, selected_direction_path
+        ),
         "",
         mcp_pointer_line(),
         "",
@@ -56,6 +59,7 @@ def analysis_input_lines(
     active_context: Mapping[str, Any],
     plan: PromptPlan,
     approved_plan_path: str = "",
+    selected_direction_path: str = "",
 ) -> list[str]:
     if plan.packet_only:
         packet_path = instruction_path(manifest, active_context, "analysisPacketPath")
@@ -70,6 +74,7 @@ def analysis_input_lines(
         return existing_input_lines((
             ("Primary analysis packet", packet_path),
             ("Approved plan", approved_plan_path),
+            ("Selected direction snapshot", selected_direction_path),
         ))
     inputs = [
         ("Primary analysis packet", instruction_path(manifest, active_context, "analysisPacketPath")),

package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/worker_prompt_policy.py

@@ -170,6 +170,9 @@ class PromptPlan:
     # 기준으로 판정하라고 요구하는 phase 만 참이다 — 없는 phase 에 실으면
     # 열거만 되고 열 파일이 없는 줄이 된다.
     include_approved_plan: bool = False
+    # 계획 워커 직무는 `selected-direction.json` 을 먼저 읽으라고 하는데, 읽기
+    # 범위는 `## Inputs` 에 열거된 경로뿐이다. 그래서 계획 phase 는 스냅샷을 연다.
+    include_selected_direction: bool = False
 
 
 def resolve_prompt_plan(
@@ -261,6 +264,14 @@ def resolve_prompt_plan(
             packet_only=True,
             required_headers=(GRILLING_LOG_HEADER,),
         )
+    if task_type == "implementation-planning":
+        return _plan(
+            "analysis",
+            duty_audience=analysis_duty,
+            equality_group=analysis_equality_group,
+            packet_only=True,
+            include_selected_direction=True,
+        )
     return _plan(
         "analysis",
         duty_audience=analysis_duty,
@@ -328,6 +339,7 @@ def _plan(
     equality_group: str | None = None,
     packet_only: bool = False,
     include_approved_plan: bool = False,
+    include_selected_direction: bool = False,
     allow_coding_preflight: bool = False,
     required_headers: tuple[str, ...] = (),
     max_body_lines: int | None = None,
@@ -339,6 +351,7 @@ def _plan(
         equality_group=equality_group,
         packet_only=packet_only,
         include_approved_plan=include_approved_plan,
+        include_selected_direction=include_selected_direction,
         allow_coding_preflight=allow_coding_preflight,
         required_headers=_worker_facing_headers(audience, required_headers),
         max_body_lines=max_body_lines,

package/runtime/python/okstra_ctl/write_policy.py

@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ from .final_report_paths import final_report_data_path
 from .json_boundary import JsonBoundaryError, load_owned_object
 from .path_hints import hydrate_active_run_context
 from .paths import task_conformance_manifest_file, task_qa_dir
+from okstra_project.dirs import OKSTRA_RELATIVE
 
 def build_write_policy(
     invocation: Mapping[str, Any],
@@ -130,6 +131,20 @@ def _role_qa_artifact_paths(role: str, task_root: Path | None) -> tuple[Path, ..
     return ()
 
 
+def _role_project_memory_paths(role: str, project_root: Path) -> tuple[Path, ...]:
+    """The project-memory files an approved plan step orders the executor to write.
+
+    The implementation-planning profile makes every decision draft a step that
+    creates `.okstra/decisions/<NNNN>-<slug>.md`, and a glossary proposal a step
+    that updates `.okstra/glossary.md`. Both sit outside the task root, so no
+    other grant reaches them and `_planned_source_paths` refused the dispatch.
+    """
+    if role != "implementer":
+        return ()
+    okstra = project_root / OKSTRA_RELATIVE
+    return (okstra / "decisions", okstra / "glossary.md")
+
+
 def _inherited_qa_evidence(
     role: str, task_type: str, task_root: Path | None,
 ) -> tuple[Path, ...]:
@@ -212,6 +227,7 @@ def build_invocation_write_contract(
                 *artifact_paths,
                 *_technical_experiment_paths(artifact_paths, task_root),
                 *_role_qa_artifact_paths(role, task_root),
+                *_role_project_memory_paths(role, root),
             )
         )
     )

package/runtime/skills/okstra-run/SKILL.md

@@ -59,9 +59,9 @@ Submit the answer shape required by `interaction.answerProtocol`; do not add nor
 
 The final `confirm` step is a normal `pick` step with three options — `Proceed` / `Edit` / `Abort`(abort) — and is rendered the same way (no special handling). `Edit` rewinds to any earlier step (including `base-ref`); `Abort` terminally cancels the wizard. The branch/worktree decision the run will actually use (for `implementation`, the **stage worktree** — not the task-key directory) is folded into the Step 4 confirmation summary block as a `worktree` line, so there is no separate branch-confirm prompt.
 
-Never invent additional questions. **Never drop, hide, merge, reorder, or truncate** a `pick` / `pick_group` option — relay every `options[]` entry, including entries that carry a `(default)` / `(recommended)` suffix. Do not collapse a multi-option pick into a "recommended + Enter directly / Other" shortlist. The wizard's arrays are the complete authoritative choice sets, regardless of the current host UI's usual option limit. The run-prompt recommendation rule (1–2 recommendations + Enter directly) shapes the **option set** only for prompts this skill authors itself, never for wizard-provided options — you may not add, drop, or reorder a wizard option to produce a shortlist. It does not excuse you from recommending: before relaying a wizard step whose answer turns on something readable (the carried report, the sidecar the user already wrote, the prior Stage Map), read it, put what you found in the question body, and name which of the wizard's own options you recommend and why. Relaying a step with no context and no recommendation hands the whole question back to the user — see the lifecycle core contract "Asking the user (BLOCKING)".
+Never invent additional questions. **Never drop, hide, merge, reorder, or truncate** a `pick` / `pick_group` option — relay every `options[]` entry, including the flagged recommendation. Do not collapse a multi-option pick into a "recommended + Enter directly / Other" shortlist. The wizard's arrays are the complete authoritative choice sets, regardless of the current host UI's usual option limit. The run-prompt recommendation rule (1–2 recommendations + Enter directly) shapes the **option set** only for prompts this skill authors itself, never for wizard-provided options — you may not add, drop, or reorder a wizard option to produce a shortlist. It does not excuse you from recommending: before relaying a wizard step whose answer turns on something readable (the carried report, the sidecar the user already wrote, the prior Stage Map), read it, put what you found in the question body, and name which of the wizard's own options you recommend and why. Relaying a step with no context and no recommendation hands the whole question back to the user — see the lifecycle core contract "Asking the user (BLOCKING)".
 
-**One recommendation, shown in one place, and it is option 1.** The option carrying `recommended: true` is what this run computed, and the wizard already placed it first — except on model-selection steps (`role-models:*`, `role-model:*`), which keep provider display order, so the flagged model may sit anywhere in the list. Append ` (추천)` to that option's label when you render it, and to no other. A checkbox step (`multi: true`) may flag several leading options: they are the recommended set, rendered the same way. Your prose recommendation names one of the flagged options. If you believe a different option is right, do not quietly recommend it in prose while the flagged one still reads as recommended on screen: say you disagree, name both, and let the user pick. When no option carries the flag, the run computed nothing for this step — recommend one from what you read and mark that one, and do not present the first option as a default just because it is first. **Enforced:** `scripts/okstra_ctl/wizard/state.py` `Prompt.__post_init__` refuses a step whose free-input option is not last, whose single-select recommendation is not exactly one option, whose recommendation is not placed first on a single-select step or is not the leading run on a checkbox step (both position checks are skipped on `role-models:*` / `role-model:*` steps), or that marks the free-input / abort escape as a recommendation.
+**One recommendation, shown in one place, and it is option 1.** Wizard labels carry no recommendation marker of their own. The option carrying `recommended: true` is what this run computed, and the wizard already placed it first — except on model-selection steps (`role-models:*`, `role-model:*`), which keep provider display order, so the flagged model may sit anywhere in the list. Append ` (추천)` to that option's label when you render it, and to no other. A checkbox step (`multi: true`) may flag several leading options: they are the recommended set, rendered the same way. Your prose recommendation names one of the flagged options. If you believe a different option is right, do not quietly recommend it in prose while the flagged one still reads as recommended on screen: say you disagree, name both, and let the user pick. When no option carries the flag, the run computed nothing for this step — recommend one from what you read and mark that one, and do not present the first option as a default just because it is first. **Enforced:** `scripts/okstra_ctl/wizard/state.py` `Prompt.__post_init__` refuses a step whose free-input option is not last, whose single-select recommendation is not exactly one option, whose recommendation is not placed first on a single-select step or is not the leading run on a checkbox step (both position checks are skipped on `role-models:*` / `role-model:*` steps), or that marks the free-input / abort escape as a recommendation.
 
 ## Step 1: Preflight
 
@@ -470,7 +470,7 @@ When the user has to choose an implementation direction — a finished `implemen
 ~/.okstra/bin/okstra option-comparison --report <final-report-implementation-option-selection-NNN.data.json>
 ```
 
-At `selected_direction_pick` the report path is the option value. The command prints JSON; every number in the reply comes from it. Use the recorded `weightedScore` as printed; do not recompute it. Write the reply in the user's language, in this order:
+At `selected_direction_pick` the option value is the report path, or `<report path>#<option id>` for a report still awaiting a direction — pass the part before `#` to `--report`. Picking a `#` value records that direction in the report's `user-responses/` sidecar. The command prints JSON; every number in the reply comes from it. Use the recorded `weightedScore` as printed; do not recompute it. Write the reply in the user's language, in this order:
 
 1. **Lead-in** — one or two sentences on what the directions share and the axes they split on, drawn from `narrative.comparisonOverview` and each option's `coreMechanism`.
 2. **Score table** — a Markdown table: one row per `criteria[]` entry in order, a weight column, one column per option (`<id> <short name>`), and a last row with each option's `weightedScore`. Write each criterion as its identifier with a translation in the user's language, e.g. `requirement-fit(요구사항 부합)`.

package/runtime/validators/validate-run.py

@@ -5660,14 +5660,21 @@ def run_plan_body_inputs(narrative_path: Path, state_path: Path) -> int:
         print("validate-run: narrative has no implementationPlanning", file=sys.stderr)
         return 2
     data = {**narrative, "schemaVersion": "3.0"}
-    data["implementationPlanning"] = {**planning, "planBodyVerification": verification}
+    data["implementationPlanning"] = {**planning, "planBodyVerification": dict(verification)}
+    gate = plan_body_gate_summary(data)
+    if gate is not None:
+        # 상태의 gate 값은 complete-round 가 같은 재계산으로 쓴다. 그 전에 도는
+        # plan-verify 에서 선언값을 대조하면 seed 값과의 시차만 잡힌다.
+        data["implementationPlanning"]["planBodyVerification"].update(
+            gateResult=gate["recomputed"], gateBlockedBy=gate["blockedBy"]
+        )
     failures: list[str] = []
     warnings = validate_plan_body_section(data, _report_path_for_state(state_path), failures)
     failures, advisories = _partition_round_failures(failures)
     payload = {
         "ok": not failures,
         "section": SECTION_PLAN_BODY,
-        "gate": plan_body_gate_summary(data),
+        "gate": gate,
         "failures": failures,
         "advisories": advisories,
         "warnings": warnings,