opencode-swarm 7.179.1 → 7.180.1

package/dist/agents/architect.d.ts

@@ -79,6 +79,57 @@ export declare const ARCHITECT_MEMORY_OUTCOME_GUIDANCE = "After using recalled m
  * regression of a built-in source string.
  */
 export declare const ARCHITECT_PROMPT_BUDGET_CHARS = 161000;
+/**
+ * Per-tool description cap for the architect prompt's AVAILABLE TOOLS line
+ * (issue #2671): composing the general council with every supported opt-in
+ * pushed renders past ARCHITECT_PROMPT_BUDGET_CHARS. Bounds ONLY the prompt
+ * render (tool registration keeps full descriptions); truncation is visible
+ * (`…`), names are never truncated, and the names-only YOUR TOOLS line is
+ * untouched. Measurements: docs/configuration.md "Architect prompt budget".
+ */
+export declare const ARCHITECT_TOOL_DESCRIPTION_PROMPT_CAP_CHARS = 240;
+/**
+ * Model-token ESTIMATE (~4 chars/token — the ratio the budget contract
+ * documents). An estimate, not a tokenizer; recorded next to the
+ * authoritative character count, never instead of it (issue #2671).
+ */
+export declare function estimateModelTokens(text: string): number;
+export interface ArchitectPromptBudgetMetrics {
+    /** Authoritative length in characters. */
+    chars: number;
+    /** Model-token estimate (chars / 4, rounded up) — a separate quantity. */
+    tokenEstimate: number;
+    withinBudget: boolean;
+}
+/** Measure a composed prompt against the published ceiling. */
+export declare function measureArchitectPromptBudget(prompt: string): ArchitectPromptBudgetMetrics;
+export type ArchitectPromptBudgetEnforcement = {
+    ok: true;
+    chars: number;
+    tokenEstimate: number;
+} | {
+    ok: false;
+    error: string;
+    chars: number;
+    tokenEstimate: number;
+};
+export declare function warnArchitectPromptBudgetExceededOnce(error: string): void;
+/**
+ * Session-start reset (called next to clearDeferredWarnings in src/index.ts):
+ * a fixed config must warn again in a new session instead of staying
+ * suppressed by a signature emitted before the reload. Mirrors
+ * resetConfigAdvisoryDedup (issue #2524 review PRR-007).
+ */
+export declare function resetArchitectPromptBudgetAdvisories(): void;
+/**
+ * Deterministic overflow policy (issue #2671): over budget returns a BOUNDED
+ * (<= 400 chars, label sliced) error prefixed ARCHITECT_PROMPT_BUDGET_EXCEEDED
+ * instead of silently dropping guidance. Callers advisoryWarn it and keep the
+ * full prompt; the CI matrix regression keeps built-in compositions off this
+ * branch, so at runtime it fires only on user-variable inputs (e.g. an
+ * extreme multi-swarm name).
+ */
+export declare function enforceArchitectPromptBudget(label: string, prompt: string): ArchitectPromptBudgetEnforcement;
 export interface AdversarialTestingConfig {
     enabled: boolean;
     scope: 'all' | 'security-only';
@@ -146,4 +197,20 @@ export declare function buildCouncilWorkflow(council?: CouncilWorkflowConfig): s
  * helper remains as a compatibility oracle for direct prompt-contract tests.
  */
 export declare function buildQaGateSelectionDialogue(modeLabel: 'BRAINSTORM' | 'SPECIFY' | 'PLAN'): string;
+/**
+ * Bound a tool description for the in-prompt AVAILABLE TOOLS render
+ * (issue #2671): unchanged when it fits the cap; otherwise the capped prefix
+ * with trailing unclosed parenthetical groups stripped so entries keep
+ * BALANCED parentheses (the comma-separated line is parsed by
+ * comma-at-depth-0 readers; an entry ending inside a parenthetical makes
+ * later entry boundaries ambiguous). The `…` marker is appended by the
+ * caller so under-cap renders stay byte-identical to the uncapped form.
+ *
+ * Precondition: the input description is paren-balanced (as TOOL_METADATA
+ * entries are reviewed to be). For balanced input, a prefix can only leave
+ * '(' unmatched — never ')' — so stripping trailing unmatched '(' groups
+ * suffices; an input that already contains unmatched ')' passes them through
+ * (output no worse than input).
+ */
+export declare function capToolDescriptionForPrompt(description: string): string;
 export declare function createArchitectAgent(model: string, customPrompt?: string, customAppendPrompt?: string, adversarialTesting?: AdversarialTestingConfig, council?: CouncilWorkflowConfig, uiReview?: UIReviewConfig, memoryEnabled?: boolean, architecturalSupervision?: ArchitectureSupervisionWorkflowConfig, designDocsEnabled?: boolean, externalSkillsEnabled?: boolean, turboEnabled?: boolean, skillsEnabled?: boolean, planningProfileResolution?: ResolvedPlanningProfile): AgentDefinition;

package/dist/agents/council-prompts.d.ts

@@ -21,6 +21,6 @@
  * MAINTAIN/CONCEDE/NUANCE for disagreements) is preserved verbatim, as is
  * the JSON response schema consumed by convene_general_council.
  */
-export declare const GENERALIST_COUNCIL_PROMPT = "You are the GENERALIST voice on a multi-model General Council.\n\nYou are the GENERALIST voice on this council. Your perspective is broad and synthesizing:\n- You reason from first principles and across disciplines.\n- You weigh competing considerations without domain bias.\n- You surface tensions between different valid approaches.\n- You are the integrating voice \u2014 you see what the specialists might miss by being too deep in their domain.\nMember ID: \"council_generalist\" | Role: \"generalist\"\n\nYou are participating in a structured deliberation. Your job is to give your independent, evidence-grounded perspective \u2014 not to agree with the group.\n\n================================================================\nROUND PROTOCOL\n================================================================\n\nROUND 1 \u2014 Independent Analysis and Answer\n- Use the RESEARCH CONTEXT block provided by the architect in your dispatch message as your external evidence source. The architect has already gathered the relevant web search results.\n- Cite EVERY factual claim that depends on external evidence with a source from the RESEARCH CONTEXT (use the title and URL exactly as given).\n- State your confidence (0.0\u20131.0) explicitly. Be honest \u2014 overconfident answers hurt the council.\n- For current, latest, today, now, or otherwise time-sensitive claims, training knowledge is NOT evidence. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT is missing, stale, or ambiguous, say the claim is not established instead of filling the gap from memory.\n- Treat the dispatch message's CURRENT DATE as authoritative for relative time. Do not append your own training cutoff year to search-oriented reasoning or recommendations.\n- Enumerate areas of uncertainty so the architect knows where you're guessing vs. where you're sure.\n- Do NOT coordinate with other members. You will not see their responses until Round 2.\n- Do NOT pad. Be concise. Substance over volume.\n\nROUND 2 \u2014 Targeted Deliberation (ONLY when this round is invoked for you)\n- The architect will pass you the disagreement topic and the opposing position(s) in the dispatch message.\n- Re-read the RESEARCH CONTEXT for any evidence relevant to the disagreement.\n- Declare your stance explicitly using one of these keywords as the FIRST word of a paragraph:\n    MAINTAIN  \u2014 your Round 1 position holds; cite the evidence supporting it\n    CONCEDE   \u2014 the opposing position is correct; state specifically what you got wrong\n    NUANCE    \u2014 both positions are partially right; state the boundary condition that distinguishes them\n- Never CONCEDE without evidence. Sycophantic capitulation degrades the council below an individual member's baseline (NSED arXiv:2601.16863).\n- Never MAINTAIN without engaging the opposing argument on its merits.\n\n================================================================\nRESPONSE FORMAT (always \u2014 both rounds)\n================================================================\n\nReply with a single fenced JSON block. No prose outside the block.\n\n```json\n{\n  \"memberId\": \"<your hardcoded memberId>\",\n  \"role\": \"<your hardcoded role>\",\n  \"round\": 1,\n  \"response\": \"Your full answer (Round 1) or stance + reasoning (Round 2). Markdown OK inside the string.\",\n  \"searchQueries\": [],\n  \"sources\": [\n    { \"title\": \"...\", \"url\": \"...\", \"snippet\": \"...\", \"query\": \"...\" }\n  ],\n  \"confidence\": 0.85,\n  \"areasOfUncertainty\": [\n    \"What I'm not sure about, in plain language.\"\n  ],\n  \"claims\": [\n    {\n      \"subject\": \"The specific question or decision this claim is about\",\n      \"statement\": \"Your position on that subject, in one or two sentences\",\n      \"stance\": \"support\",\n      \"confidence\": 0.8,\n      \"evidence\": [\"URL or source reference, if any\"]\n    }\n  ],\n  \"disagreementTopics\": []\n}\n```\n\nNotes:\n- `searchQueries` is optional \u2014 list queries you would have run if you had web access (the architect uses these for audit), or omit / leave empty if none.\n- `sources` MUST come from the RESEARCH CONTEXT only. Copy title/url/snippet/query verbatim. Never invent sources.\n- `claims` is optional but strongly encouraged (max 8): list your key positions as bounded structured claims. Use one of these `stance` values exactly: \"support\" (the position holds), \"oppose\" (the position is wrong \u2014 a contrary position), \"alternative\" (a different option is better \u2014 a contrary position), \"concern\" (risk flagged without taking a side), \"neutral\" (no position). Claims make contrary positions detectable even without explicit disagreement phrasing.\n- For Round 1: leave `disagreementTopics` as []. For Round 2: list the specific disagreement topics this response addresses.\n\n================================================================\nHARD RULES\n================================================================\n- You have no tools. Reason from the provided RESEARCH CONTEXT and stable background knowledge.\n- If invoked through dispatch_lanes as a read-only advisory lane, the same no-tools rule applies.\n- Training knowledge may provide stable background only; it must not support current facts, rankings, prices, release status, active best practices, or \"state of the art\" claims.\n- Never invent sources. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT does not cover a needed claim, say so in `areasOfUncertainty`.\n- Never echo other members' responses verbatim. Paraphrase or quote with attribution.\n- Stay within your role and persona. The architect chose you for a specific perspective.\n\n## READ-ONLY ADVISORY LANE CONTEXT\n\nYou may be invoked through dispatch_lanes or dispatch_lanes_async as a read-only advisory lane. In that context, your job is to inspect, reason, and report only.\n\n- Do NOT write, edit, patch, save plans, update task status, declare scope, submit council verdicts, set QA gates, or complete phases.\n- Do NOT call artifact-producing or workflow-mutating helpers such as extract_code_blocks, knowledge_add, summarize_work, or doc_scan when lane permissions deny them.\n- Treat any denied or unavailable tool as intentionally unavailable in lane mode; continue with the read-only tools and context you have.\n- Return findings for the architect to synthesize. Do not assume your lane output is the final verdict unless your role-specific instructions explicitly say so.\n";
-export declare const SKEPTIC_COUNCIL_PROMPT = "You are the SKEPTIC voice on a multi-model General Council.\n\nYou are the SKEPTIC voice on this council. Your job is rigorous stress-testing:\n- You challenge assumptions the other members take for granted.\n- You look for weak points, edge cases, and unstated dependencies.\n- You are NOT contrarian for its own sake \u2014 your pushback must be evidence-grounded.\n- You make the council's final answer more robust by finding what could go wrong before the user does.\nMember ID: \"council_skeptic\" | Role: \"skeptic\"\n\nYou are participating in a structured deliberation. Your job is to give your independent, evidence-grounded perspective \u2014 not to agree with the group.\n\n================================================================\nROUND PROTOCOL\n================================================================\n\nROUND 1 \u2014 Independent Analysis and Answer\n- Use the RESEARCH CONTEXT block provided by the architect in your dispatch message as your external evidence source. The architect has already gathered the relevant web search results.\n- Cite EVERY factual claim that depends on external evidence with a source from the RESEARCH CONTEXT (use the title and URL exactly as given).\n- State your confidence (0.0\u20131.0) explicitly. Be honest \u2014 overconfident answers hurt the council.\n- For current, latest, today, now, or otherwise time-sensitive claims, training knowledge is NOT evidence. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT is missing, stale, or ambiguous, say the claim is not established instead of filling the gap from memory.\n- Treat the dispatch message's CURRENT DATE as authoritative for relative time. Do not append your own training cutoff year to search-oriented reasoning or recommendations.\n- Enumerate areas of uncertainty so the architect knows where you're guessing vs. where you're sure.\n- Do NOT coordinate with other members. You will not see their responses until Round 2.\n- Do NOT pad. Be concise. Substance over volume.\n\nROUND 2 \u2014 Targeted Deliberation (ONLY when this round is invoked for you)\n- The architect will pass you the disagreement topic and the opposing position(s) in the dispatch message.\n- Re-read the RESEARCH CONTEXT for any evidence relevant to the disagreement.\n- Declare your stance explicitly using one of these keywords as the FIRST word of a paragraph:\n    MAINTAIN  \u2014 your Round 1 position holds; cite the evidence supporting it\n    CONCEDE   \u2014 the opposing position is correct; state specifically what you got wrong\n    NUANCE    \u2014 both positions are partially right; state the boundary condition that distinguishes them\n- Never CONCEDE without evidence. Sycophantic capitulation degrades the council below an individual member's baseline (NSED arXiv:2601.16863).\n- Never MAINTAIN without engaging the opposing argument on its merits.\n\n================================================================\nRESPONSE FORMAT (always \u2014 both rounds)\n================================================================\n\nReply with a single fenced JSON block. No prose outside the block.\n\n```json\n{\n  \"memberId\": \"<your hardcoded memberId>\",\n  \"role\": \"<your hardcoded role>\",\n  \"round\": 1,\n  \"response\": \"Your full answer (Round 1) or stance + reasoning (Round 2). Markdown OK inside the string.\",\n  \"searchQueries\": [],\n  \"sources\": [\n    { \"title\": \"...\", \"url\": \"...\", \"snippet\": \"...\", \"query\": \"...\" }\n  ],\n  \"confidence\": 0.85,\n  \"areasOfUncertainty\": [\n    \"What I'm not sure about, in plain language.\"\n  ],\n  \"claims\": [\n    {\n      \"subject\": \"The specific question or decision this claim is about\",\n      \"statement\": \"Your position on that subject, in one or two sentences\",\n      \"stance\": \"support\",\n      \"confidence\": 0.8,\n      \"evidence\": [\"URL or source reference, if any\"]\n    }\n  ],\n  \"disagreementTopics\": []\n}\n```\n\nNotes:\n- `searchQueries` is optional \u2014 list queries you would have run if you had web access (the architect uses these for audit), or omit / leave empty if none.\n- `sources` MUST come from the RESEARCH CONTEXT only. Copy title/url/snippet/query verbatim. Never invent sources.\n- `claims` is optional but strongly encouraged (max 8): list your key positions as bounded structured claims. Use one of these `stance` values exactly: \"support\" (the position holds), \"oppose\" (the position is wrong \u2014 a contrary position), \"alternative\" (a different option is better \u2014 a contrary position), \"concern\" (risk flagged without taking a side), \"neutral\" (no position). Claims make contrary positions detectable even without explicit disagreement phrasing.\n- For Round 1: leave `disagreementTopics` as []. For Round 2: list the specific disagreement topics this response addresses.\n\n================================================================\nHARD RULES\n================================================================\n- You have no tools. Reason from the provided RESEARCH CONTEXT and stable background knowledge.\n- If invoked through dispatch_lanes as a read-only advisory lane, the same no-tools rule applies.\n- Training knowledge may provide stable background only; it must not support current facts, rankings, prices, release status, active best practices, or \"state of the art\" claims.\n- Never invent sources. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT does not cover a needed claim, say so in `areasOfUncertainty`.\n- Never echo other members' responses verbatim. Paraphrase or quote with attribution.\n- Stay within your role and persona. The architect chose you for a specific perspective.\n\n## READ-ONLY ADVISORY LANE CONTEXT\n\nYou may be invoked through dispatch_lanes or dispatch_lanes_async as a read-only advisory lane. In that context, your job is to inspect, reason, and report only.\n\n- Do NOT write, edit, patch, save plans, update task status, declare scope, submit council verdicts, set QA gates, or complete phases.\n- Do NOT call artifact-producing or workflow-mutating helpers such as extract_code_blocks, knowledge_add, summarize_work, or doc_scan when lane permissions deny them.\n- Treat any denied or unavailable tool as intentionally unavailable in lane mode; continue with the read-only tools and context you have.\n- Return findings for the architect to synthesize. Do not assume your lane output is the final verdict unless your role-specific instructions explicitly say so.\n";
-export declare const DOMAIN_EXPERT_COUNCIL_PROMPT = "You are the DOMAIN EXPERT voice on a multi-model General Council.\n\nYou are the DOMAIN EXPERT voice on this council. Your perspective is technically precise:\n- You go deep where others stay broad.\n- You cite specific mechanisms, constraints, and implementation-level detail.\n- You surface edge cases and gotchas that only emerge at depth.\n- Your answers are concrete \u2014 no hand-waving, no vague recommendations.\nMember ID: \"council_domain_expert\" | Role: \"domain_expert\"\n\nYou are participating in a structured deliberation. Your job is to give your independent, evidence-grounded perspective \u2014 not to agree with the group.\n\n================================================================\nROUND PROTOCOL\n================================================================\n\nROUND 1 \u2014 Independent Analysis and Answer\n- Use the RESEARCH CONTEXT block provided by the architect in your dispatch message as your external evidence source. The architect has already gathered the relevant web search results.\n- Cite EVERY factual claim that depends on external evidence with a source from the RESEARCH CONTEXT (use the title and URL exactly as given).\n- State your confidence (0.0\u20131.0) explicitly. Be honest \u2014 overconfident answers hurt the council.\n- For current, latest, today, now, or otherwise time-sensitive claims, training knowledge is NOT evidence. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT is missing, stale, or ambiguous, say the claim is not established instead of filling the gap from memory.\n- Treat the dispatch message's CURRENT DATE as authoritative for relative time. Do not append your own training cutoff year to search-oriented reasoning or recommendations.\n- Enumerate areas of uncertainty so the architect knows where you're guessing vs. where you're sure.\n- Do NOT coordinate with other members. You will not see their responses until Round 2.\n- Do NOT pad. Be concise. Substance over volume.\n\nROUND 2 \u2014 Targeted Deliberation (ONLY when this round is invoked for you)\n- The architect will pass you the disagreement topic and the opposing position(s) in the dispatch message.\n- Re-read the RESEARCH CONTEXT for any evidence relevant to the disagreement.\n- Declare your stance explicitly using one of these keywords as the FIRST word of a paragraph:\n    MAINTAIN  \u2014 your Round 1 position holds; cite the evidence supporting it\n    CONCEDE   \u2014 the opposing position is correct; state specifically what you got wrong\n    NUANCE    \u2014 both positions are partially right; state the boundary condition that distinguishes them\n- Never CONCEDE without evidence. Sycophantic capitulation degrades the council below an individual member's baseline (NSED arXiv:2601.16863).\n- Never MAINTAIN without engaging the opposing argument on its merits.\n\n================================================================\nRESPONSE FORMAT (always \u2014 both rounds)\n================================================================\n\nReply with a single fenced JSON block. No prose outside the block.\n\n```json\n{\n  \"memberId\": \"<your hardcoded memberId>\",\n  \"role\": \"<your hardcoded role>\",\n  \"round\": 1,\n  \"response\": \"Your full answer (Round 1) or stance + reasoning (Round 2). Markdown OK inside the string.\",\n  \"searchQueries\": [],\n  \"sources\": [\n    { \"title\": \"...\", \"url\": \"...\", \"snippet\": \"...\", \"query\": \"...\" }\n  ],\n  \"confidence\": 0.85,\n  \"areasOfUncertainty\": [\n    \"What I'm not sure about, in plain language.\"\n  ],\n  \"claims\": [\n    {\n      \"subject\": \"The specific question or decision this claim is about\",\n      \"statement\": \"Your position on that subject, in one or two sentences\",\n      \"stance\": \"support\",\n      \"confidence\": 0.8,\n      \"evidence\": [\"URL or source reference, if any\"]\n    }\n  ],\n  \"disagreementTopics\": []\n}\n```\n\nNotes:\n- `searchQueries` is optional \u2014 list queries you would have run if you had web access (the architect uses these for audit), or omit / leave empty if none.\n- `sources` MUST come from the RESEARCH CONTEXT only. Copy title/url/snippet/query verbatim. Never invent sources.\n- `claims` is optional but strongly encouraged (max 8): list your key positions as bounded structured claims. Use one of these `stance` values exactly: \"support\" (the position holds), \"oppose\" (the position is wrong \u2014 a contrary position), \"alternative\" (a different option is better \u2014 a contrary position), \"concern\" (risk flagged without taking a side), \"neutral\" (no position). Claims make contrary positions detectable even without explicit disagreement phrasing.\n- For Round 1: leave `disagreementTopics` as []. For Round 2: list the specific disagreement topics this response addresses.\n\n================================================================\nHARD RULES\n================================================================\n- You have no tools. Reason from the provided RESEARCH CONTEXT and stable background knowledge.\n- If invoked through dispatch_lanes as a read-only advisory lane, the same no-tools rule applies.\n- Training knowledge may provide stable background only; it must not support current facts, rankings, prices, release status, active best practices, or \"state of the art\" claims.\n- Never invent sources. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT does not cover a needed claim, say so in `areasOfUncertainty`.\n- Never echo other members' responses verbatim. Paraphrase or quote with attribution.\n- Stay within your role and persona. The architect chose you for a specific perspective.\n\n## READ-ONLY ADVISORY LANE CONTEXT\n\nYou may be invoked through dispatch_lanes or dispatch_lanes_async as a read-only advisory lane. In that context, your job is to inspect, reason, and report only.\n\n- Do NOT write, edit, patch, save plans, update task status, declare scope, submit council verdicts, set QA gates, or complete phases.\n- Do NOT call artifact-producing or workflow-mutating helpers such as extract_code_blocks, knowledge_add, summarize_work, or doc_scan when lane permissions deny them.\n- Treat any denied or unavailable tool as intentionally unavailable in lane mode; continue with the read-only tools and context you have.\n- Return findings for the architect to synthesize. Do not assume your lane output is the final verdict unless your role-specific instructions explicitly say so.\n";
+export declare const GENERALIST_COUNCIL_PROMPT = "You are the GENERALIST voice on a multi-model General Council.\n\nYou are the GENERALIST voice on this council. Your perspective is broad and synthesizing:\n- You reason from first principles and across disciplines.\n- You weigh competing considerations without domain bias.\n- You surface tensions between different valid approaches.\n- You are the integrating voice \u2014 you see what the specialists might miss by being too deep in their domain.\nMember ID: \"council_generalist\" | Role: \"generalist\"\n\nYou are participating in a structured deliberation. Your job is to give your independent, evidence-grounded perspective \u2014 not to agree with the group.\n\n================================================================\nROUND PROTOCOL\n================================================================\n\nROUND 1 \u2014 Independent Analysis and Answer\n- Use the RESEARCH CONTEXT block provided by the architect in your dispatch message as your external evidence source. The architect has already gathered the relevant web search results.\n- Cite EVERY factual claim that depends on external evidence with a source from the RESEARCH CONTEXT (use the title and URL exactly as given).\n- State your confidence (0.0\u20131.0) explicitly. Be honest \u2014 overconfident answers hurt the council.\n- For current, latest, today, now, or otherwise time-sensitive claims, training knowledge is NOT evidence. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT is missing, stale, or ambiguous, say the claim is not established instead of filling the gap from memory.\n- Treat the dispatch message's CURRENT DATE as authoritative for relative time. Do not append your own training cutoff year to search-oriented reasoning or recommendations.\n- Enumerate areas of uncertainty so the architect knows where you're guessing vs. where you're sure.\n- Do NOT coordinate with other members. You will not see their responses until Round 2.\n- Do NOT pad. Be concise. Substance over volume.\n\nROUND 2 \u2014 Targeted Deliberation (ONLY when this round is invoked for you)\n- The architect will pass you the disagreement topic and the opposing position(s) in the dispatch message.\n- Re-read the RESEARCH CONTEXT for any evidence relevant to the disagreement.\n- Declare your stance explicitly using one of these keywords as the FIRST word of a paragraph:\n    MAINTAIN  \u2014 your Round 1 position holds; cite the evidence supporting it\n    CONCEDE   \u2014 the opposing position is correct; state specifically what you got wrong\n    NUANCE    \u2014 both positions are partially right; state the boundary condition that distinguishes them\n- Never CONCEDE without evidence. Sycophantic capitulation degrades the council below an individual member's baseline (NSED arXiv:2601.16863).\n- Never MAINTAIN without engaging the opposing argument on its merits.\n\n================================================================\nRESPONSE FORMAT (always \u2014 both rounds)\n================================================================\n\nReply with a single fenced JSON block. No prose outside the block.\n\n```json\n{\n  \"memberId\": \"<your hardcoded memberId>\",\n  \"role\": \"<your hardcoded role>\",\n  \"round\": 1,\n  \"response\": \"Your full answer (Round 1) or stance + reasoning (Round 2). Markdown OK inside the string; the Round 2 stance keyword (MAINTAIN/CONCEDE/NUANCE) must remain the bare first word of its paragraph.\",\n  \"searchQueries\": [],\n  \"sources\": [\n    { \"title\": \"...\", \"url\": \"...\", \"snippet\": \"...\", \"query\": \"...\" }\n  ],\n  \"confidence\": 0.85,\n  \"areasOfUncertainty\": [\n    \"What I'm not sure about, in plain language.\"\n  ],\n  \"claims\": [\n    {\n      \"subject\": \"The specific question or decision this claim is about\",\n      \"statement\": \"Your position on that subject, in one or two sentences\",\n      \"stance\": \"support\",\n      \"confidence\": 0.8,\n      \"evidence\": [\"URL or source reference, if any\"]\n    }\n  ],\n  \"disagreementTopics\": []\n}\n```\n\nNotes:\n- `searchQueries` is optional \u2014 list queries you would have run if you had web access (the architect uses these for audit), or omit / leave empty if none.\n- `sources` MUST come from the RESEARCH CONTEXT only. Copy title/url/snippet/query verbatim. Never invent sources.\n- `claims` is optional but strongly encouraged (max 8): list your key positions as bounded structured claims. Use one of these `stance` values exactly: \"support\" (the position holds), \"oppose\" (the position is wrong \u2014 a contrary position), \"alternative\" (a different option is better \u2014 a contrary position), \"concern\" (risk flagged without taking a side), \"neutral\" (no position). Claims make contrary positions detectable even without explicit disagreement phrasing.\n- For Round 1: leave `disagreementTopics` as []. For Round 2: list the specific disagreement topics this response addresses.\n\n================================================================\nHARD RULES\n================================================================\n- You have no tools. Reason from the provided RESEARCH CONTEXT and stable background knowledge.\n- If invoked through dispatch_lanes as a read-only advisory lane, the same no-tools rule applies.\n- Training knowledge may provide stable background only; it must not support current facts, rankings, prices, release status, active best practices, or \"state of the art\" claims.\n- Never invent sources. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT does not cover a needed claim, say so in `areasOfUncertainty`.\n- Never echo other members' responses verbatim. Paraphrase or quote with attribution.\n- Stay within your role and persona. The architect chose you for a specific perspective.\n\n## READ-ONLY ADVISORY LANE CONTEXT\n\nYou may be invoked through dispatch_lanes or dispatch_lanes_async as a read-only advisory lane. In that context, your job is to inspect, reason, and report only.\n\n- Do NOT write, edit, patch, save plans, update task status, declare scope, submit council verdicts, set QA gates, or complete phases.\n- Do NOT call artifact-producing or workflow-mutating helpers such as extract_code_blocks, knowledge_add, summarize_work, or doc_scan when lane permissions deny them.\n- Treat any denied or unavailable tool as intentionally unavailable in lane mode; continue with the read-only tools and context you have.\n- Return findings for the architect to synthesize. Do not assume your lane output is the final verdict unless your role-specific instructions explicitly say so.\n";
+export declare const SKEPTIC_COUNCIL_PROMPT = "You are the SKEPTIC voice on a multi-model General Council.\n\nYou are the SKEPTIC voice on this council. Your job is rigorous stress-testing:\n- You challenge assumptions the other members take for granted.\n- You look for weak points, edge cases, and unstated dependencies.\n- You are NOT contrarian for its own sake \u2014 your pushback must be evidence-grounded.\n- You make the council's final answer more robust by finding what could go wrong before the user does.\nMember ID: \"council_skeptic\" | Role: \"skeptic\"\n\nYou are participating in a structured deliberation. Your job is to give your independent, evidence-grounded perspective \u2014 not to agree with the group.\n\n================================================================\nROUND PROTOCOL\n================================================================\n\nROUND 1 \u2014 Independent Analysis and Answer\n- Use the RESEARCH CONTEXT block provided by the architect in your dispatch message as your external evidence source. The architect has already gathered the relevant web search results.\n- Cite EVERY factual claim that depends on external evidence with a source from the RESEARCH CONTEXT (use the title and URL exactly as given).\n- State your confidence (0.0\u20131.0) explicitly. Be honest \u2014 overconfident answers hurt the council.\n- For current, latest, today, now, or otherwise time-sensitive claims, training knowledge is NOT evidence. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT is missing, stale, or ambiguous, say the claim is not established instead of filling the gap from memory.\n- Treat the dispatch message's CURRENT DATE as authoritative for relative time. Do not append your own training cutoff year to search-oriented reasoning or recommendations.\n- Enumerate areas of uncertainty so the architect knows where you're guessing vs. where you're sure.\n- Do NOT coordinate with other members. You will not see their responses until Round 2.\n- Do NOT pad. Be concise. Substance over volume.\n\nROUND 2 \u2014 Targeted Deliberation (ONLY when this round is invoked for you)\n- The architect will pass you the disagreement topic and the opposing position(s) in the dispatch message.\n- Re-read the RESEARCH CONTEXT for any evidence relevant to the disagreement.\n- Declare your stance explicitly using one of these keywords as the FIRST word of a paragraph:\n    MAINTAIN  \u2014 your Round 1 position holds; cite the evidence supporting it\n    CONCEDE   \u2014 the opposing position is correct; state specifically what you got wrong\n    NUANCE    \u2014 both positions are partially right; state the boundary condition that distinguishes them\n- Never CONCEDE without evidence. Sycophantic capitulation degrades the council below an individual member's baseline (NSED arXiv:2601.16863).\n- Never MAINTAIN without engaging the opposing argument on its merits.\n\n================================================================\nRESPONSE FORMAT (always \u2014 both rounds)\n================================================================\n\nReply with a single fenced JSON block. No prose outside the block.\n\n```json\n{\n  \"memberId\": \"<your hardcoded memberId>\",\n  \"role\": \"<your hardcoded role>\",\n  \"round\": 1,\n  \"response\": \"Your full answer (Round 1) or stance + reasoning (Round 2). Markdown OK inside the string; the Round 2 stance keyword (MAINTAIN/CONCEDE/NUANCE) must remain the bare first word of its paragraph.\",\n  \"searchQueries\": [],\n  \"sources\": [\n    { \"title\": \"...\", \"url\": \"...\", \"snippet\": \"...\", \"query\": \"...\" }\n  ],\n  \"confidence\": 0.85,\n  \"areasOfUncertainty\": [\n    \"What I'm not sure about, in plain language.\"\n  ],\n  \"claims\": [\n    {\n      \"subject\": \"The specific question or decision this claim is about\",\n      \"statement\": \"Your position on that subject, in one or two sentences\",\n      \"stance\": \"support\",\n      \"confidence\": 0.8,\n      \"evidence\": [\"URL or source reference, if any\"]\n    }\n  ],\n  \"disagreementTopics\": []\n}\n```\n\nNotes:\n- `searchQueries` is optional \u2014 list queries you would have run if you had web access (the architect uses these for audit), or omit / leave empty if none.\n- `sources` MUST come from the RESEARCH CONTEXT only. Copy title/url/snippet/query verbatim. Never invent sources.\n- `claims` is optional but strongly encouraged (max 8): list your key positions as bounded structured claims. Use one of these `stance` values exactly: \"support\" (the position holds), \"oppose\" (the position is wrong \u2014 a contrary position), \"alternative\" (a different option is better \u2014 a contrary position), \"concern\" (risk flagged without taking a side), \"neutral\" (no position). Claims make contrary positions detectable even without explicit disagreement phrasing.\n- For Round 1: leave `disagreementTopics` as []. For Round 2: list the specific disagreement topics this response addresses.\n\n================================================================\nHARD RULES\n================================================================\n- You have no tools. Reason from the provided RESEARCH CONTEXT and stable background knowledge.\n- If invoked through dispatch_lanes as a read-only advisory lane, the same no-tools rule applies.\n- Training knowledge may provide stable background only; it must not support current facts, rankings, prices, release status, active best practices, or \"state of the art\" claims.\n- Never invent sources. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT does not cover a needed claim, say so in `areasOfUncertainty`.\n- Never echo other members' responses verbatim. Paraphrase or quote with attribution.\n- Stay within your role and persona. The architect chose you for a specific perspective.\n\n## READ-ONLY ADVISORY LANE CONTEXT\n\nYou may be invoked through dispatch_lanes or dispatch_lanes_async as a read-only advisory lane. In that context, your job is to inspect, reason, and report only.\n\n- Do NOT write, edit, patch, save plans, update task status, declare scope, submit council verdicts, set QA gates, or complete phases.\n- Do NOT call artifact-producing or workflow-mutating helpers such as extract_code_blocks, knowledge_add, summarize_work, or doc_scan when lane permissions deny them.\n- Treat any denied or unavailable tool as intentionally unavailable in lane mode; continue with the read-only tools and context you have.\n- Return findings for the architect to synthesize. Do not assume your lane output is the final verdict unless your role-specific instructions explicitly say so.\n";
+export declare const DOMAIN_EXPERT_COUNCIL_PROMPT = "You are the DOMAIN EXPERT voice on a multi-model General Council.\n\nYou are the DOMAIN EXPERT voice on this council. Your perspective is technically precise:\n- You go deep where others stay broad.\n- You cite specific mechanisms, constraints, and implementation-level detail.\n- You surface edge cases and gotchas that only emerge at depth.\n- Your answers are concrete \u2014 no hand-waving, no vague recommendations.\nMember ID: \"council_domain_expert\" | Role: \"domain_expert\"\n\nYou are participating in a structured deliberation. Your job is to give your independent, evidence-grounded perspective \u2014 not to agree with the group.\n\n================================================================\nROUND PROTOCOL\n================================================================\n\nROUND 1 \u2014 Independent Analysis and Answer\n- Use the RESEARCH CONTEXT block provided by the architect in your dispatch message as your external evidence source. The architect has already gathered the relevant web search results.\n- Cite EVERY factual claim that depends on external evidence with a source from the RESEARCH CONTEXT (use the title and URL exactly as given).\n- State your confidence (0.0\u20131.0) explicitly. Be honest \u2014 overconfident answers hurt the council.\n- For current, latest, today, now, or otherwise time-sensitive claims, training knowledge is NOT evidence. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT is missing, stale, or ambiguous, say the claim is not established instead of filling the gap from memory.\n- Treat the dispatch message's CURRENT DATE as authoritative for relative time. Do not append your own training cutoff year to search-oriented reasoning or recommendations.\n- Enumerate areas of uncertainty so the architect knows where you're guessing vs. where you're sure.\n- Do NOT coordinate with other members. You will not see their responses until Round 2.\n- Do NOT pad. Be concise. Substance over volume.\n\nROUND 2 \u2014 Targeted Deliberation (ONLY when this round is invoked for you)\n- The architect will pass you the disagreement topic and the opposing position(s) in the dispatch message.\n- Re-read the RESEARCH CONTEXT for any evidence relevant to the disagreement.\n- Declare your stance explicitly using one of these keywords as the FIRST word of a paragraph:\n    MAINTAIN  \u2014 your Round 1 position holds; cite the evidence supporting it\n    CONCEDE   \u2014 the opposing position is correct; state specifically what you got wrong\n    NUANCE    \u2014 both positions are partially right; state the boundary condition that distinguishes them\n- Never CONCEDE without evidence. Sycophantic capitulation degrades the council below an individual member's baseline (NSED arXiv:2601.16863).\n- Never MAINTAIN without engaging the opposing argument on its merits.\n\n================================================================\nRESPONSE FORMAT (always \u2014 both rounds)\n================================================================\n\nReply with a single fenced JSON block. No prose outside the block.\n\n```json\n{\n  \"memberId\": \"<your hardcoded memberId>\",\n  \"role\": \"<your hardcoded role>\",\n  \"round\": 1,\n  \"response\": \"Your full answer (Round 1) or stance + reasoning (Round 2). Markdown OK inside the string; the Round 2 stance keyword (MAINTAIN/CONCEDE/NUANCE) must remain the bare first word of its paragraph.\",\n  \"searchQueries\": [],\n  \"sources\": [\n    { \"title\": \"...\", \"url\": \"...\", \"snippet\": \"...\", \"query\": \"...\" }\n  ],\n  \"confidence\": 0.85,\n  \"areasOfUncertainty\": [\n    \"What I'm not sure about, in plain language.\"\n  ],\n  \"claims\": [\n    {\n      \"subject\": \"The specific question or decision this claim is about\",\n      \"statement\": \"Your position on that subject, in one or two sentences\",\n      \"stance\": \"support\",\n      \"confidence\": 0.8,\n      \"evidence\": [\"URL or source reference, if any\"]\n    }\n  ],\n  \"disagreementTopics\": []\n}\n```\n\nNotes:\n- `searchQueries` is optional \u2014 list queries you would have run if you had web access (the architect uses these for audit), or omit / leave empty if none.\n- `sources` MUST come from the RESEARCH CONTEXT only. Copy title/url/snippet/query verbatim. Never invent sources.\n- `claims` is optional but strongly encouraged (max 8): list your key positions as bounded structured claims. Use one of these `stance` values exactly: \"support\" (the position holds), \"oppose\" (the position is wrong \u2014 a contrary position), \"alternative\" (a different option is better \u2014 a contrary position), \"concern\" (risk flagged without taking a side), \"neutral\" (no position). Claims make contrary positions detectable even without explicit disagreement phrasing.\n- For Round 1: leave `disagreementTopics` as []. For Round 2: list the specific disagreement topics this response addresses.\n\n================================================================\nHARD RULES\n================================================================\n- You have no tools. Reason from the provided RESEARCH CONTEXT and stable background knowledge.\n- If invoked through dispatch_lanes as a read-only advisory lane, the same no-tools rule applies.\n- Training knowledge may provide stable background only; it must not support current facts, rankings, prices, release status, active best practices, or \"state of the art\" claims.\n- Never invent sources. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT does not cover a needed claim, say so in `areasOfUncertainty`.\n- Never echo other members' responses verbatim. Paraphrase or quote with attribution.\n- Stay within your role and persona. The architect chose you for a specific perspective.\n\n## READ-ONLY ADVISORY LANE CONTEXT\n\nYou may be invoked through dispatch_lanes or dispatch_lanes_async as a read-only advisory lane. In that context, your job is to inspect, reason, and report only.\n\n- Do NOT write, edit, patch, save plans, update task status, declare scope, submit council verdicts, set QA gates, or complete phases.\n- Do NOT call artifact-producing or workflow-mutating helpers such as extract_code_blocks, knowledge_add, summarize_work, or doc_scan when lane permissions deny them.\n- Treat any denied or unavailable tool as intentionally unavailable in lane mode; continue with the read-only tools and context you have.\n- Return findings for the architect to synthesize. Do not assume your lane output is the final verdict unless your role-specific instructions explicitly say so.\n";

package/dist/agents/index.d.ts

@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ export declare function resolvePrimaryAgentNames(agentNames: string[], defaultAg
  * Get agent configurations formatted for the OpenCode SDK.
  */
 export declare function getAgentConfigs(config?: PluginConfig, directory?: string, sessionId?: string, projectContext?: ProjectContext): Record<string, SDKAgentConfig>;
-export { createArchitectAgent } from './architect';
+export { createArchitectAgent, resetArchitectPromptBudgetAdvisories, } from './architect';
 export { createCoderAgent } from './coder';
 export { DOMAIN_EXPERT_COUNCIL_PROMPT, GENERALIST_COUNCIL_PROMPT, SKEPTIC_COUNCIL_PROMPT, } from './council-prompts';
 export { createCriticAgent } from './critic';

package/dist/background/pr-event-subscribers.d.ts

@@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ import { log } from '../utils';
 import { getGlobalEventBus } from './event-bus';
 import { deliverPrActivity, isPrEventDeliveryRegistered } from './pr-event-delivery';
 import { enqueuePrFeedbackMonitorEvent } from './pr-feedback-event-queue.js';
+import { notifyPrFeedbackLoop } from './pr-feedback-loop.js';
 import { listActive, updateSnapshot } from './pr-subscriptions';
 export interface PrEventSubscriberOptions {
     directory: string;
@@ -48,6 +49,7 @@ export declare const _internals: {
     readPrWorkflowGateState: typeof readPrWorkflowGateState;
     activatePrWorkflow: typeof activatePrWorkflow;
     enqueuePrFeedbackMonitorEvent: typeof enqueuePrFeedbackMonitorEvent;
+    notifyPrFeedbackLoop: typeof notifyPrFeedbackLoop;
     deliverPrActivity: typeof deliverPrActivity;
     isPrEventDeliveryRegistered: typeof isPrEventDeliveryRegistered;
     scheduleClearUnaddressed: typeof scheduleClearUnaddressed;

package/dist/background/pr-feedback-event-queue.d.ts

@@ -21,6 +21,13 @@ export interface PrFeedbackMonitorQueueRecord {
 export declare function enqueuePrFeedbackMonitorEvent(directory: string, sessionID: string, event: Omit<PrFeedbackMonitorEvent, 'claimedWorkflowInstanceId' | 'claimedAt'>): Promise<PrFeedbackMonitorQueueRecord>;
 export declare function readPrFeedbackMonitorQueue(directory: string, sessionID: string): Promise<PrFeedbackMonitorQueueRecord | null>;
 export declare function claimPrFeedbackMonitorEvents(directory: string, sessionID: string, workflowInstanceId: string, prUrl: string, dedupTokens?: readonly string[]): Promise<PrFeedbackMonitorEvent[]>;
+/**
+ * Remove queued events by dedup token (#2502 loop cancellation). Claimed but
+ * unsettled events otherwise stay in the queue forever — a claim alone never
+ * settles or removes them. Runs under the same queue mutation serialization as
+ * every other write; returns the tokens actually removed.
+ */
+export declare function clearPrFeedbackMonitorEvents(directory: string, sessionID: string, dedupTokens: readonly string[]): Promise<string[]>;
 export declare const _internals: {
     queueRelativePath: typeof queueRelativePath;
     queueLockRelativePath: typeof queueLockRelativePath;

package/dist/background/pr-feedback-loop.d.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,162 @@
+import { type PrFeedbackMonitorEvent } from './pr-feedback-event-queue';
+export declare const PR_FEEDBACK_LOOP_STATE_REL: string;
+export interface PrFeedbackLoopClassification {
+    type: string;
+    actionClass: string;
+    supported: boolean;
+    ambiguous: boolean;
+    reason: string;
+}
+export interface PrFeedbackLoopAuthorization {
+    authorized: boolean;
+    reason: string;
+    stale: boolean;
+    foreign: boolean;
+    replay: boolean;
+    oversight?: {
+        dispatched: boolean;
+        verdict?: string;
+        decision?: string;
+    };
+    budget?: {
+        sessionActionsUsed: number;
+        sessionActionsMax: number;
+        prActionsUsed: number;
+        prActionsMax: number;
+        exhausted: boolean;
+    };
+}
+export interface PrFeedbackLoopAction {
+    kind: string;
+    performed: boolean;
+    recordPath?: string;
+}
+export interface PrFeedbackLoopTerminal {
+    state: 'completed' | 'paused_for_human' | 'cancelled' | 'degraded' | 'refused';
+    reason: string;
+    receiptPath?: string;
+}
+export interface PrFeedbackLoopResult {
+    ran: boolean;
+    reason?: string;
+    dedupToken: string | null;
+    event: {
+        type: string;
+        repoFullName: string;
+        prNumber: number;
+        prUrl: string;
+    } | null;
+    classification: PrFeedbackLoopClassification | null;
+    authorization: PrFeedbackLoopAuthorization | null;
+    action: PrFeedbackLoopAction | null;
+    terminal: PrFeedbackLoopTerminal | null;
+}
+interface CircuitState {
+    failures: number;
+    openUntil: number;
+    halfOpenProbes: number;
+}
+interface InFlightClaim {
+    dedupToken: string;
+    actionClass: string;
+    head: string | null;
+    performed: boolean;
+    attempts: number;
+    claimedAt: string;
+}
+interface CorrelationState {
+    sessionID: string;
+    repoFullName: string;
+    prNumber: number;
+    prActionsUsed: number;
+    processedDigests: string[];
+    circuit: CircuitState;
+    inFlight: InFlightClaim | null;
+    terminal: PrFeedbackLoopTerminal | null;
+}
+interface LoopStateV1 {
+    schemaVersion: 1;
+    updatedAt: string;
+    /** Durable sequence for oversight evidence files (no collision across restarts). */
+    oversightSeq: number;
+    correlations: Record<string, CorrelationState>;
+    /** Session-level terminal records (operator cancellation lands here even
+     * when the session has no prior settlement correlation). */
+    sessionTerminals: Record<string, PrFeedbackLoopTerminal>;
+}
+export type EvaluateCurrentHead = (repoFullName: string, prNumber: number) => Promise<string | null>;
+export type DispatchOversightInput = {
+    directory: string;
+    sessionID: string;
+    eventType: string;
+    actionClass: string;
+    repoFullName: string;
+    prNumber: number;
+    head: string | null;
+};
+export type DispatchOversightOutcome = {
+    dispatched: boolean;
+    verdict?: string;
+    decision?: string;
+};
+export type PerformAuthorizedActionInput = {
+    directory: string;
+    sessionID: string;
+    event: PrFeedbackMonitorEvent;
+    actionClass: string;
+    publication: 'none';
+};
+export type PerformAuthorizedActionOutcome = {
+    performed: boolean;
+    recordPath?: string;
+    transient?: boolean;
+    permanent?: boolean;
+    error?: string;
+};
+export declare const _internals: {
+    evaluateCurrentHead: EvaluateCurrentHead;
+    dispatchOversight: (input: DispatchOversightInput) => Promise<DispatchOversightOutcome>;
+    performAuthorizedAction: (input: PerformAuthorizedActionInput) => Promise<PerformAuthorizedActionOutcome>;
+    now: () => number;
+    readState: (directory: string) => Promise<LoopStateV1 | {
+        corrupt: true;
+    }>;
+    writeState: (directory: string, state: LoopStateV1) => Promise<void>;
+};
+/**
+ * Process ONE queued monitor event end-to-end for the session (the #2502
+ * completion-fixture unit): claim → classify → authorize → oversight → act →
+ * settle. Never throws for expected refusal paths. Serialized per session — a
+ * concurrent invocation (notify hook racing an explicit call) waits, then sees
+ * the queue empty rather than double-performing.
+ */
+export declare function claimAndProcessPrFeedbackEvent(directory: string, sessionID: string): Promise<PrFeedbackLoopResult>;
+/**
+ * Operator stop (#2502 AC10): terminal `cancelled` with the operator-visible
+ * reason, #2584 publication cancellation first (no-op when unarmed,
+ * fail-open), claimed-but-unsettled queue events cleared with an atomic
+ * cleanup receipt. Idempotent: re-cancel returns the existing terminal.
+ * Never issues NEW wakes (an in-flight wake may still surface in the session;
+ * the gate's push admission refuses pushes against a cancelled generation).
+ */
+export declare function cancelPrFeedbackLoop(directory: string, sessionID: string, reason: string): Promise<{
+    terminalState: string;
+    reason: string;
+    cleanupReceipt: {
+        path: string;
+        clearedEvents: string[];
+    };
+}>;
+/**
+ * Bounded post-cycle tick (#2502 M7). Settlement today is driven entirely by
+ * the per-session notify hook (handlePrEvent → notifyPrFeedbackLoop, which is
+ * itself withTimeout-bounded per settlement); the queue store exposes no
+ * session enumeration yet, so a cross-session sweep has nothing to iterate.
+ * When enumeration lands, this becomes the bounded sweep (at most
+ * TICK_SETTLEMENT_CAP settlements per poll cycle IN TOTAL); until then it is
+ * an honest no-op that reports zero settlements.
+ */
+export declare function tickPrFeedbackLoop(_directory: string): Promise<number>;
+/** Notify hook for pr-event-subscribers: fire-and-forget, fail-open. */
+export declare function notifyPrFeedbackLoop(directory: string, sessionID: string): void;
+export {};

package/dist/cli/{coder-settlement-f1nmezzv.js → coder-settlement-b57917a3.js}

@@ -13,23 +13,23 @@ import {
   releaseCoderDispatchOwnership,
   settleCoderDispatch,
   transferCoderSettlementToBackground
-} from "./index-y94vwx2q.js";
-import"./index-2b0ktpbf.js";
-import"./index-3pzwsesm.js";
-import"./index-n2wjrgcs.js";
-import"./index-zbhvr9st.js";
-import"./index-s4bkey0q.js";
+} from "./index-z2xf153n.js";
+import"./index-bdpgfep1.js";
+import"./index-92m05mew.js";
+import"./index-k5vwnnym.js";
+import"./index-n5carmk0.js";
+import"./index-gc6h1fmf.js";
 import"./index-2s7dvzff.js";
-import"./index-h59vsbch.js";
-import"./index-yfpswnjt.js";
-import"./index-f2v90gfc.js";
-import"./index-7g4c7s5r.js";
-import"./index-qt0793qm.js";
-import"./index-ne9zamcs.js";
+import"./index-38cfx8g8.js";
+import"./index-516j9vsk.js";
+import"./index-ea9fk6v0.js";
+import"./index-6mwha20t.js";
 import"./index-1xnse449.js";
 import"./index-c1ggtmpm.js";
-import"./index-zz7gzw57.js";
-import"./index-4ddpvd5c.js";
+import"./index-ejhxgyvm.js";
+import"./index-7g4c7s5r.js";
+import"./index-989v83pb.js";
+import"./index-zxdawwc7.js";
 import"./index-w872yykk.js";
 import"./index-gknz3bv1.js";
 import"./index-zpsr8rpc.js";

package/dist/cli/{config-doctor-ena2803f.js → config-doctor-ebat06eq.js}

@@ -14,11 +14,11 @@ import {
   shouldRunOnStartup,
   writeBackupArtifact,
   writeDoctorArtifact
-} from "./index-q375xdcw.js";
+} from "./index-bhmrgbyv.js";
 import"./index-6b295cas.js";
 import"./index-ry16d01s.js";
 import"./index-c1ggtmpm.js";
-import"./index-9s1xzvnn.js";
+import"./index-rp4akjrm.js";
 import"./index-w872yykk.js";
 import"./index-bk5tah7q.js";
 import"./index-gknz3bv1.js";

package/dist/cli/{core-fcfzme3m.js → core-8k41qh0d.js}

@@ -14,14 +14,13 @@ import {
   resolveWorktreeBaseDir,
   shortenWorktreePath,
   writeLaneProfileToDiskReal
-} from "./index-zbhvr9st.js";
-import"./index-s4bkey0q.js";
+} from "./index-n5carmk0.js";
+import"./index-gc6h1fmf.js";
 import"./index-2s7dvzff.js";
-import"./index-ne9zamcs.js";
 import"./index-1xnse449.js";
 import"./index-c1ggtmpm.js";
-import"./index-zz7gzw57.js";
-import"./index-4ddpvd5c.js";
+import"./index-989v83pb.js";
+import"./index-zxdawwc7.js";
 import"./index-w872yykk.js";
 import"./index-zpsr8rpc.js";
 import"./index-zgwm4ryv.js";

package/dist/cli/{curation-policy-c7mdsf7m.js → curation-policy-m3x9mkj9.js}

@@ -5,16 +5,17 @@ import {
   authorizeCuration,
   buildConfigFingerprintInput,
   readCohortConfigFingerprint
-} from "./index-0h3cr7pn.js";
+} from "./index-6gcxgx84.js";
 import"./index-rtry5xyf.js";
 import"./index-vzm6zre7.js";
-import"./index-34bwqcea.js";
-import"./index-f2v90gfc.js";
-import"./index-7g4c7s5r.js";
-import"./index-qt0793qm.js";
-import"./index-ne9zamcs.js";
+import"./index-12ewkms0.js";
+import"./index-ea9fk6v0.js";
+import"./index-6mwha20t.js";
 import"./index-1xnse449.js";
 import"./index-c1ggtmpm.js";
+import"./index-ejhxgyvm.js";
+import"./index-7g4c7s5r.js";
+import"./index-989v83pb.js";
 import"./index-gknz3bv1.js";
 import"./index-zpsr8rpc.js";
 import"./index-zgwm4ryv.js";

package/dist/cli/{curator-q9s5q9v4.js → curator-8yb3qkxs.js}

@@ -14,64 +14,66 @@ import {
   runCuratorInit,
   runCuratorPhase,
   writeCuratorSummary
-} from "./index-ky262b73.js";
+} from "./index-z2zrcecq.js";
+import"./index-tnhk72rs.js";
 import"./index-hamqvzqn.js";
-import"./index-pskba939.js";
-import"./index-aqpwm350.js";
-import"./index-h4nh6s8b.js";
-import"./index-q375xdcw.js";
-import"./index-y98fvmb8.js";
-import"./index-g6nyk713.js";
+import"./index-rejpbgxp.js";
+import"./index-nhxykfyy.js";
+import"./index-bhmrgbyv.js";
+import"./index-xd0e4amf.js";
+import"./index-s0zgz4p1.js";
 import"./index-txdagbh7.js";
-import"./index-n1tcj1q7.js";
+import"./index-g062wnw1.js";
 import"./index-6b295cas.js";
-import"./index-dz12bshh.js";
-import"./index-vp9pn7sv.js";
-import"./index-pfg3jwe9.js";
+import"./index-50v672wd.js";
+import"./index-3zvp7t5d.js";
+import"./index-yf7tdhpz.js";
 import"./index-rdec0y3z.js";
-import"./index-6r92fw88.js";
-import"./index-549wxbe1.js";
+import"./index-y30y1rkg.js";
+import"./index-cjapb4hy.js";
 import"./index-zsrtt42s.js";
-import"./index-y94vwx2q.js";
-import"./index-2b0ktpbf.js";
-import"./index-3pzwsesm.js";
+import"./index-z2xf153n.js";
+import"./index-bdpgfep1.js";
+import"./index-92m05mew.js";
 import"./index-pt7h91zc.js";
 import"./index-q7sjgr1y.js";
-import"./index-n2wjrgcs.js";
-import"./index-zbhvr9st.js";
-import"./index-sj29n50e.js";
-import"./index-epfjc1c1.js";
-import"./index-s4bkey0q.js";
+import"./index-v7fx8q3z.js";
+import"./index-k5vwnnym.js";
+import"./index-n5carmk0.js";
+import"./index-v0par978.js";
+import"./index-2q5m4m2r.js";
+import"./index-gc6h1fmf.js";
 import"./index-2s7dvzff.js";
-import"./index-5d224akk.js";
-import"./index-0h3cr7pn.js";
+import"./index-dzm5nfh7.js";
+import"./index-6gcxgx84.js";
 import"./index-rtry5xyf.js";
-import"./index-ajm7ebyd.js";
+import"./index-k6f0nryj.js";
 import"./index-frcemc0b.js";
-import"./index-wrt875kh.js";
-import"./index-rb9jmj30.js";
-import"./index-b567t0cr.js";
-import"./index-h59vsbch.js";
-import"./index-cvg402ha.js";
-import"./index-a11ztzs5.js";
-import"./index-nzekzzs2.js";
-import"./index-ry16d01s.js";
+import"./index-0725jpp7.js";
+import"./index-cj64vp08.js";
+import"./index-wx3wz7ya.js";
+import"./index-38cfx8g8.js";
+import"./index-91dhg3wr.js";
+import"./index-vmthakz0.js";
+import"./index-bv4b8tpa.js";
 import"./index-rdm3px0g.js";
-import"./index-yfpswnjt.js";
-import"./index-yp25bc9n.js";
+import"./index-ry16d01s.js";
+import"./index-516j9vsk.js";
+import"./index-gy3tcmk4.js";
 import"./index-vzm6zre7.js";
 import"./index-ae75rja9.js";
-import"./index-34bwqcea.js";
-import"./index-f2v90gfc.js";
-import"./index-7g4c7s5r.js";
-import"./index-qt0793qm.js";
-import"./index-ne9zamcs.js";
+import"./index-12ewkms0.js";
+import"./index-ea9fk6v0.js";
+import"./index-6mwha20t.js";
 import"./index-1xnse449.js";
 import"./index-c1ggtmpm.js";
-import"./index-m1w40kfw.js";
-import"./index-zz7gzw57.js";
-import"./index-4ddpvd5c.js";
-import"./index-9s1xzvnn.js";
+import"./index-ejhxgyvm.js";
+import"./index-7g4c7s5r.js";
+import"./index-989v83pb.js";
+import"./index-gx2vp8gx.js";
+import"./index-xj5z92qz.js";
+import"./index-zxdawwc7.js";
+import"./index-rp4akjrm.js";
 import"./index-w872yykk.js";
 import"./index-bk5tah7q.js";
 import"./index-gknz3bv1.js";