opencode-swarm 7.53.0 → 7.55.0

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

@@ -15,12 +15,12 @@
  * architect runs 1–3 web_search calls upfront, compiles a RESEARCH CONTEXT
  * block, and passes it to all three agents in their dispatch message. The
  * agents themselves have NO tools — they reason from the provided context
- * plus their training knowledge.
+ * plus stable background knowledge.
  *
  * The Round 1 / Round 2 deliberation protocol (independent analysis →
  * 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- 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  \"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- 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 your training knowledge.\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";
-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- 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  \"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- 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 your training knowledge.\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";
-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- 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  \"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- 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 your training knowledge.\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";
+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  \"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- 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- 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";
+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  \"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- 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- 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";
+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  \"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- 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- 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";

package/dist/background/completion-observer.d.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+/**
+ * Background subagent completion OBSERVER (issue #1151, PR 2 Stage A).
+ *
+ * Registers as a swarm `event` hook to watch for the upstream background-completion signal:
+ * a message part with `synthetic === true` whose text is a task envelope with
+ * `state="completed"` or `state="error"`. When such a part correlates to a durable pending
+ * background-delegation record, it is logged (debug-gated) as the empirical confirmation
+ * instrument operators use to verify the runtime signal in a real environment.
+ *
+ * Stage A is strictly READ-ONLY: this observer NEVER advances workflow gates, records gate
+ * evidence, or mutates the durable store. Gate-affecting completion ingestion is Stage B,
+ * gated on runtime confirmation produced by exactly this observer.
+ *
+ * The `synthetic` flag is the trust gate (set by OpenCode, not the model/user). Non-synthetic
+ * text that merely looks like an envelope is ignored. The observer is fail-open: any error is
+ * swallowed so it can never block event delivery or plugin load (Invariant 1/10).
+ */
+interface ObserverConfig {
+    enabled: boolean;
+}
+/**
+ * Build the Stage A completion observer. Returns an `event` handler suitable for the
+ * OpenCode plugin `event` hook. No-op (cheap early return) when the feature is disabled.
+ */
+export declare function createBackgroundCompletionObserver(opts: {
+    config: ObserverConfig;
+    directory: string;
+}): {
+    event: (input: {
+        event: unknown;
+    }) => Promise<void>;
+};
+export {};

package/dist/background/pending-delegations.d.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+/**
+ * Durable pending background-delegation store (issue #1151, PR 2 Stage A).
+ *
+ * Append-only JSONL event log under project-root `.swarm/background-delegations.jsonl`.
+ * Each line is a full record snapshot; readers fold to the latest snapshot per
+ * `correlationId`. This tracks background swarm `Task` dispatches so a later (Stage B)
+ * trusted completion can be correlated to a real dispatch. The stale sweep bounds the
+ * number of permanently-running (unresolved) entries by transitioning them to `stale`, so
+ * the folded in-memory view stays bounded by distinct correlationIds. Note: the on-disk
+ * log itself is append-only and is NOT compacted in Stage A — each dispatch leaves a small,
+ * fixed number of lines; on-disk compaction of dropped/stale records is a future stage.
+ *
+ * Stage A scope: dispatch records a `pending` snapshot and the stale sweep records
+ * `stale` snapshots. There is NO gate advancement and NO completion mutation here — the
+ * completion observer (Stage A) is read-only. Gate-affecting completion ingestion is
+ * Stage B, gated on runtime confirmation of the upstream completion signal.
+ *
+ * Concurrency: all writes (append, sweep) run under a single project-scoped lock via
+ * `withEvidenceLock`, so concurrent dispatches/sweeps cannot interleave appends. Reads are
+ * lock-free (line-oriented; partial trailing lines are skipped defensively).
+ *
+ * Containment: the path is validated with `validateSwarmPath`, so it can never escape
+ * `.swarm/` (Invariant 4).
+ */
+export declare const BACKGROUND_DELEGATIONS_FILE = "background-delegations.jsonl";
+export type BackgroundDelegationStatus = 'pending' | 'completed' | 'error' | 'stale';
+export interface BackgroundDelegationRecord {
+    schemaVersion: 1;
+    /** Subagent session id from the dispatch envelope — the correlation key. */
+    correlationId: string;
+    /** Structured jobId from dispatch metadata when available, else null. */
+    jobId: string | null;
+    /** Subagent session id (== correlationId; kept explicit for clarity/forward-compat). */
+    subagentSessionId: string;
+    /** Parent (dispatching) session id. */
+    parentSessionId: string;
+    /** Tool callID of the dispatching Task call. */
+    callID: string;
+    /** Canonical swarm role (e.g. "reviewer", "test_engineer"). */
+    normalizedAgent: string;
+    /** Raw, possibly swarm-prefixed agent name (e.g. "mega_reviewer"). */
+    swarmPrefixedAgent: string;
+    /** Plan/evidence task id resolved at dispatch, or null. */
+    planTaskId: string | null;
+    evidenceTaskId: string | null;
+    status: BackgroundDelegationStatus;
+    createdAt: number;
+    updatedAt: number;
+}
+/**
+ * Read and fold the store to the latest snapshot per correlationId. Lock-free and
+ * defensive: a missing file yields an empty list, and malformed/partial lines are skipped
+ * (never throws). Records are returned in first-seen correlationId order.
+ *
+ * Cost: O(lines on disk) per call — a full read + parse + fold with no in-memory cache.
+ * This is intentionally simple and acceptable at Stage A volumes (a swarm has few concurrent
+ * background delegations, and the on-disk log is small). If sustained high-throughput
+ * background load ever makes this hot, a future stage should add a stat-invalidated in-memory
+ * cache and/or JSONL compaction (the same future-compaction work noted in the module header).
+ */
+export declare function readDelegations(directory: string): BackgroundDelegationRecord[];
+/** Returns the folded record for a correlationId, or null. Lock-free read. */
+export declare function findByCorrelationId(directory: string, correlationId: string): BackgroundDelegationRecord | null;
+export interface RecordPendingInput {
+    correlationId: string;
+    jobId: string | null;
+    subagentSessionId: string;
+    parentSessionId: string;
+    callID: string;
+    normalizedAgent: string;
+    swarmPrefixedAgent: string;
+    planTaskId: string | null;
+    evidenceTaskId: string | null;
+}
+/**
+ * Record a `pending` background delegation. Runs the stale sweep first (lazy maintenance,
+ * no plugin-init cost), then appends the pending snapshot — all under one lock acquisition
+ * so concurrent dispatches cannot interleave. Best-effort: returns null on lock timeout or
+ * write failure (Stage A has no gate effects, so a missed record is non-fatal).
+ */
+export declare function recordPendingDelegation(directory: string, input: RecordPendingInput, options?: {
+    staleTimeoutMs?: number;
+}): Promise<BackgroundDelegationRecord | null>;
+/**
+ * Public stale sweep: acquires the store lock and marks overdue pendings as `stale`.
+ * Best-effort; returns the number swept (0 on lock timeout / error).
+ */
+export declare function sweepStaleDelegations(directory: string, timeoutMs: number): Promise<number>;

package/dist/background/task-envelope.d.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+/**
+ * Background subagent task-envelope parsing (issue #1151, PR 2 Stage A).
+ *
+ * OpenCode background subagents (v1.16.2) render task dispatch/completion as a stable
+ * XML-ish envelope via the upstream `renderOutput`:
+ *
+ *   <task id="<subagentSessionID>" state="running|completed|error">
+ *   <summary>...</summary>
+ *   <task_result>...</task_result>   (or <task_error> for state="error")
+ *   </task>
+ *
+ * - The dispatch tool result carries `state="running"` and the subagent session id.
+ * - The deferred completion arrives as a synthetic parent message part whose text is the
+ *   same envelope with `state="completed"` or `state="error"`.
+ *
+ * These parsers are intentionally pure and defensive — they never throw — so they can be
+ * used both at dispatch (tool.execute.after output) and at completion observation time.
+ */
+export type TaskEnvelopeState = 'running' | 'completed' | 'error';
+export interface TaskEnvelope {
+    /** The subagent session id from `<task id="...">` — the cross-event correlation key. */
+    sessionId: string;
+    state: TaskEnvelopeState;
+}
+/**
+ * Parse a task envelope from arbitrary text. Returns null when the text does not contain
+ * a well-formed opening `<task id="..." state="...">` tag. Never throws.
+ */
+export declare function parseTaskEnvelope(text: unknown): TaskEnvelope | null;
+/**
+ * Extract the subagent session id and (optional) jobId from a background `Task` dispatch
+ * result (the `tool.execute.after` output object `{ title, output, metadata }`).
+ *
+ * - `subagentSessionId` is parsed from the rendered `output` envelope `<task id="...">`.
+ * - `jobId` is read defensively from `metadata.jobId` (the installed plugin SDK types this
+ *   field as `any`; upstream sets `{ background: true, jobId }`). Absent → null.
+ *
+ * Both are best-effort; either may be null.
+ */
+export declare function extractDispatchIds(output: unknown): {
+    subagentSessionId: string | null;
+    jobId: string | null;
+};

package/dist/cli/index.js

@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ var package_default;
 var init_package = __esm(() => {
   package_default = {
     name: "opencode-swarm",
-    version: "7.53.0",
+    version: "7.55.0",
     description: "Architect-centric agentic swarm plugin for OpenCode - hub-and-spoke orchestration with SME consultation, code generation, and QA review",
     main: "dist/index.js",
     types: "dist/index.d.ts",
@@ -16874,11 +16874,11 @@ var init_tool_metadata = __esm(() => {
       agents: ["architect"]
     },
     web_search: {
-      description: "External web search (Tavily or Brave) for architect-driven council research. Returns titled results with snippets and URLs. Config-gated on council.general.enabled; requires a search API key. Used by the architect in MODE: COUNCIL to gather a RESEARCH CONTEXT before dispatching council agents.",
+      description: "External web search (Tavily or Brave) for architect-driven council research. Returns titled results with snippets, URLs, normalized query metadata, temporal intent, freshness, and removed stale years. Config-gated on council.general.enabled in the resolved config: global ~/.config/opencode/opencode-swarm.json, then project .opencode/opencode-swarm.json overrides. Requires a search API key. Used by the architect in MODE: COUNCIL to gather a RESEARCH CONTEXT before dispatching council agents.",
       agents: ["architect", "skill_improver"]
     },
     convene_general_council: {
-      description: "Synthesize responses from a multi-model General Council. Accepts parallel member responses (Round 1, optionally Round 2), detects disagreements, and returns consensus points, persisting disagreements, and a structured synthesis. Architect-only. Config-gated on council.general.enabled.",
+      description: "Synthesize responses from a multi-model General Council. Accepts parallel member responses (Round 1, optionally Round 2), detects disagreements, and returns consensus points, persisting disagreements, and a structured synthesis. Architect-only. Config-gated on council.general.enabled in the resolved config: global ~/.config/opencode/opencode-swarm.json, then project .opencode/opencode-swarm.json overrides.",
       agents: ["architect"]
     },
     write_final_council_evidence: {
@@ -17302,7 +17302,9 @@ var init_schema = __esm(() => {
     delegation_tracker: exports_external.boolean().default(false),
     agent_awareness_max_chars: exports_external.number().min(50).max(2000).default(300),
     delegation_gate: exports_external.boolean().default(true),
-    delegation_max_chars: exports_external.number().min(500).max(20000).default(4000)
+    delegation_max_chars: exports_external.number().min(500).max(20000).default(4000),
+    background_subagents: exports_external.boolean().default(false),
+    background_pending_timeout_minutes: exports_external.number().int().min(1).max(1440).default(30)
   });
   ScoringWeightsSchema = exports_external.object({
     phase: exports_external.number().min(0).max(5).default(1),
@@ -21331,6 +21333,8 @@ ROUND 1 \u2014 Independent Analysis and Answer
 - 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.
 - Cite EVERY factual claim that depends on external evidence with a source from the RESEARCH CONTEXT (use the title and URL exactly as given).
 - State your confidence (0.0\u20131.0) explicitly. Be honest \u2014 overconfident answers hurt the council.
+- 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.
+- 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.
 - Enumerate areas of uncertainty so the architect knows where you're guessing vs. where you're sure.
 - Do NOT coordinate with other members. You will not see their responses until Round 2.
 - Do NOT pad. Be concise. Substance over volume.
@@ -21373,7 +21377,8 @@ Notes:
 - For Round 1: leave \`disagreementTopics\` as []. For Round 2: list the specific disagreement topics this response addresses.`, HARD_RULES = `================================================================
 HARD RULES
 ================================================================
-- You have no tools. Reason from the provided RESEARCH CONTEXT and your training knowledge.
+- You have no tools. Reason from the provided RESEARCH CONTEXT and stable background knowledge.
+- 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.
 - Never invent sources. If the RESEARCH CONTEXT does not cover a needed claim, say so in \`areasOfUncertainty\`.
 - Never echo other members' responses verbatim. Paraphrase or quote with attribution.
 - Stay within your role and persona. The architect chose you for a specific perspective.`, GENERALIST_COUNCIL_PROMPT, SKEPTIC_COUNCIL_PROMPT, DOMAIN_EXPERT_COUNCIL_PROMPT;
@@ -21719,7 +21724,7 @@ var init_guardrails = __esm(() => {
 function clearPendingCoderScope() {
   pendingCoderScopeByTaskId.clear();
 }
-var EvidenceTaskIdPlanSchema, pendingCoderScopeByTaskId, ACTIVE_PARALLEL_TASK_STATES;
+var EvidenceTaskIdPlanSchema, pendingCoderScopeByTaskId, SWARM_BACKGROUND_TASK_BLOCKED_MESSAGE, ACTIVE_PARALLEL_TASK_STATES;
 var init_delegation_gate = __esm(() => {
   init_zod();
   init_schema();
@@ -21740,6 +21745,7 @@ var init_delegation_gate = __esm(() => {
     }).passthrough()).optional()
   }).passthrough();
   pendingCoderScopeByTaskId = new Map;
+  SWARM_BACKGROUND_TASK_BLOCKED_MESSAGE = "SWARM_BACKGROUND_TASK_BLOCKED: OpenCode background subagents (Task with background=true, " + "requires OPENCODE_EXPERIMENTAL_BACKGROUND_SUBAGENTS=true) are recognized upstream, but swarm " + "cannot yet safely consume their deferred completion events \u2014 the Task returns a running " + "placeholder now and completes later via synthetic injection, which would advance swarm gates " + "before any review/test output exists. Omit `background` (or set background=false) for swarm " + "delegations until the completion-ingestion PR lands.";
   ACTIVE_PARALLEL_TASK_STATES = new Set([
     "coder_delegated",
     "pre_check_passed",
@@ -39867,7 +39873,7 @@ var init_council = __esm(() => {
     "  --preset <name>  Use a named member preset from council.general.presets",
     "  --spec-review    Use spec_review mode (single advisory pass on a draft spec)",
     "",
-    "Requires council.general.enabled: true and a configured search API key in opencode-swarm.json."
+    "Requires council.general.enabled: true and a configured search API key in the resolved config: global ~/.config/opencode/opencode-swarm.json, then project .opencode/opencode-swarm.json overrides."
   ].join(`
 `);
 });
@@ -59004,7 +59010,7 @@ Subcommands:
       handler: (ctx) => handleCouncilCommand(ctx.directory, ctx.args),
       description: "Enter architect MODE: COUNCIL \u2014 multi-model deliberation [question] [--preset <name>] [--spec-review]",
       args: "<question> [--preset <name>] [--spec-review]",
-      details: "Triggers the architect to convene a three-agent General Council: Generalist (reviewer model), Skeptic (critic model), and Domain Expert (SME model). Use --preset <name> to choose a named member preset from council.general.presets. " + "The architect first runs 1\u20133 targeted web searches and passes a compiled RESEARCH CONTEXT " + "to all three agents before dispatching them in parallel. Agents deliberate using the NSED peer-review protocol (Round 1 independent analysis, Round 2 MAINTAIN/CONCEDE/NUANCE for disagreements). The architect synthesizes the final answer directly from convene_general_council output. --spec-review switches to single-pass advisory mode for spec review. Requires council.general.enabled: true and a search API key in opencode-swarm.json.",
+      details: "Triggers the architect to convene a three-agent General Council: Generalist (reviewer model), Skeptic (critic model), and Domain Expert (SME model). Use --preset <name> to choose a named member preset from council.general.presets. " + "The architect first runs 1\u20133 targeted web searches and passes a compiled RESEARCH CONTEXT " + "to all three agents before dispatching them in parallel. Agents deliberate using the NSED peer-review protocol (Round 1 independent analysis, Round 2 MAINTAIN/CONCEDE/NUANCE for disagreements). The architect synthesizes the final answer directly from convene_general_council output. --spec-review switches to single-pass advisory mode for spec review. Requires council.general.enabled: true and a search API key in the resolved config: global ~/.config/opencode/opencode-swarm.json, then project .opencode/opencode-swarm.json overrides.",
       category: "agent"
     },
     "pr-review": {

package/dist/config/schema.d.ts

@@ -93,6 +93,8 @@ export declare const HooksConfigSchema: z.ZodObject<{
     agent_awareness_max_chars: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodNumber>;
     delegation_gate: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodBoolean>;
     delegation_max_chars: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodNumber>;
+    background_subagents: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodBoolean>;
+    background_pending_timeout_minutes: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodNumber>;
 }, z.core.$strip>;
 export type HooksConfig = z.infer<typeof HooksConfigSchema>;
 export declare const ScoringWeightsSchema: z.ZodObject<{
@@ -958,6 +960,8 @@ export declare const PluginConfigSchema: z.ZodObject<{
         agent_awareness_max_chars: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodNumber>;
         delegation_gate: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodBoolean>;
         delegation_max_chars: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodNumber>;
+        background_subagents: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodBoolean>;
+        background_pending_timeout_minutes: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodNumber>;
     }, z.core.$strip>>;
     gates: z.ZodOptional<z.ZodObject<{
         syntax_check: z.ZodDefault<z.ZodObject<{

package/dist/council/search-query-policy.d.ts

@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+export type SearchFreshness = 'day' | 'week' | 'month' | 'year';
+export type SearchTemporalIntent = 'current' | 'historical' | 'unspecified';
+export interface SearchQueryPolicyResult {
+    originalQuery: string;
+    query: string;
+    temporalIntent: SearchTemporalIntent;
+    freshness?: SearchFreshness;
+    removedStaleYears: string[];
+}
+export declare function applySearchQueryPolicy(rawQuery: string, now?: Date): SearchQueryPolicyResult;
+export declare function collectQueryYears(query: string): string[];

package/dist/council/web-search-provider.d.ts

@@ -12,6 +12,7 @@
  * Malformed but successful responses produce an empty result array, never throw.
  */
 import type { GeneralCouncilConfig, WebSearchResult } from './general-council-types.js';
+import type { SearchFreshness } from './search-query-policy.js';
 export declare class WebSearchError extends Error {
     readonly cause?: unknown | undefined;
     constructor(message: string, cause?: unknown | undefined);
@@ -20,16 +21,19 @@ export declare class WebSearchConfigError extends Error {
     constructor(message: string);
 }
 export interface WebSearchProvider {
-    search(query: string, maxResults: number): Promise<WebSearchResult[]>;
+    search(query: string, maxResults: number, options?: WebSearchOptions): Promise<WebSearchResult[]>;
+}
+export interface WebSearchOptions {
+    freshness?: SearchFreshness;
 }
 export declare class TavilyProvider implements WebSearchProvider {
     private readonly apiKey;
     constructor(apiKey: string);
-    search(query: string, maxResults: number): Promise<WebSearchResult[]>;
+    search(query: string, maxResults: number, options?: WebSearchOptions): Promise<WebSearchResult[]>;
 }
 export declare class BraveProvider implements WebSearchProvider {
     private readonly apiKey;
     constructor(apiKey: string);
-    search(query: string, maxResults: number): Promise<WebSearchResult[]>;
+    search(query: string, maxResults: number, options?: WebSearchOptions): Promise<WebSearchResult[]>;
 }
 export declare function createWebSearchProvider(config: GeneralCouncilConfig): WebSearchProvider;

package/dist/hooks/delegation-gate.d.ts

@@ -25,6 +25,30 @@ export declare const pendingCoderScopeByTaskId: Map<string, string[]>;
  * circular import `state.ts ↔ delegation-gate.ts`. Called by `resetSwarmState`.
  */
 export declare function clearPendingCoderScope(): void;
+/**
+ * Issue #1151: OpenCode v1.16.2 background subagents.
+ *
+ * `Task` with `background=true` (gated upstream by
+ * `OPENCODE_EXPERIMENTAL_BACKGROUND_SUBAGENTS=true`) returns a "running" placeholder
+ * immediately and completes later via synthetic parent injection. The delegation gate
+ * treats a `Task` result as completion, so a background swarm delegation would advance
+ * Stage B / record gate evidence before any review/test output exists. Until swarm can
+ * correlate the deferred completion safely (a separate, spike-gated PR), background
+ * swarm delegations are fail-closed-blocked. We do NOT silently coerce `background` to
+ * false — the unsupported capability is surfaced explicitly.
+ */
+export declare const SWARM_BACKGROUND_TASK_BLOCKED_MESSAGE: string;
+/**
+ * Fail-closed background-flag detector. Treats both the boolean `true` and the
+ * stringified `'true'` as background so a stringified flag cannot bypass the guard.
+ */
+export declare function isBackgroundTrue(value: unknown): boolean;
+/**
+ * True when a `Task` tool RESULT looks like an OpenCode background "running"
+ * placeholder (`state: "running"` or `metadata.background === true`). Belt-and-
+ * suspenders for `toolAfter`; never throws.
+ */
+export declare function outputLooksLikeBackgroundRunning(output: unknown): boolean;
 /**
  * Parses a string to extract a DelegationEnvelope.
  * Returns null if no valid envelope is found.