pi-eda 0.2.1 → 0.2.3

package/LICENSE

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+MIT License
+
+Copyright (c) 2024 Shivam V Verma
+
+Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
+of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
+in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
+to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
+copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
+furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
+
+The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all
+copies or substantial portions of the Software.
+
+THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR
+IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY,
+FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE
+AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER
+LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM,
+OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE
+SOFTWARE.

package/agents/naive-reader.md

@@ -15,8 +15,10 @@ cold, as if returning in 6 months having forgotten everything.
 - Comprehension only -- you never judge whether a choice was right, only
   whether it's explained.
 - Confirm every figure file passed to you is actually embedded in the
-  report -- an unreferenced figure is material-tier, since there isn't an
-  interpretation for it.
+  report. An unreferenced figure is material-tier, since there isn't an
+  interpretation for it. Intentional or deliberate omission is not an
+  exception. This holds unless the report itself documents that the
+  user explicitly said to exclude that figure.
 
 ## Severity rubric
 
@@ -25,7 +27,7 @@ cold, as if returning in 6 months having forgotten everything.
 | cosmetic | wording/labeling nit, doesn't change interpretation |
 | confusing | correct and complete, but too dense/jargon-heavy to parse easily |
 | clarifying | you can't tell why/what/how from the report alone. If you had to open the script to answer your own question, that's automatic clarifying-tier |
-| material | your conclusion contradicts what the report claims, or the claim isn't backed by anything shown |
+| material | your conclusion contradicts what the report claims, the claim isn't backed by anything shown, or a figure is omitted |
 
 Report every finding with its tier. Do not silently decide a fix for
 anything -- that's the calling agent's call, not yours.

package/extensions/eda-workflow-tracker.ts

@@ -197,6 +197,10 @@ export default function (pi: ExtensionAPI) {
         }
         case "status": {
           result = handleStatus(graph, current, graphPath);
+          if (!graph && current) {
+            result.error =
+              "graph not loaded -- current state was reconstructed but the graph file is unavailable; call init to reload";
+          }
           break;
         }
         case "clear": {

package/extensions/show.ts

@@ -93,9 +93,9 @@ export default function (pi: ExtensionAPI) {
 				const text = result.content[0];
 				return new Text(text?.type === "text" ? text.text : "", 0, 0);
 			}
-			return new Image(details.base64, details.mediaType, theme, {
+			return new Image(details.base64, details.mediaType, { fallbackColor: (text: string) => theme.fg("muted", text) }, {
 				maxWidthCells: 80,
-				maxHeightCells: 24,
+				maxHeightCells: 36,
 			});
 		},
 	});

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "pi-eda",
-  "version": "0.2.1",
+  "version": "0.2.3",
   "description": "Pi tooling for interactive exploratory data analysis.",
   "license": "MIT",
   "author": "Shivam V Verma",
@@ -16,6 +16,7 @@
   ],
   "files": [
     "README.md",
+    "LICENSE",
     "agents",
     "eda.mplstyle.example",
     "extensions",

package/skills/exploring-data/workflow.graph.json

@@ -9,8 +9,7 @@
     "Reread and run script": ["Build script/plot", "Summarize the answer"],
     "Dispatch script-checker": ["Build script/plot", "Dispatch job-runner"],
     "Dispatch job-runner": ["Summarize the answer"],
-    "Summarize the answer": ["Continue analysis or lock in?"],
-    "Continue analysis or lock in?": [
+    "Summarize the answer": [
       "Propose/ask a question",
       "/skill:finishing-exploratory-data-analysis"
     ]

package/skills/exploring-data/workflow.md

@@ -146,14 +146,10 @@ Heavy path continuation: launch the `job-runner` only once the
 - `show` the figure(s) to the user, then summarize briefly with bullets.
 - Core principle: the user decides the interpretation. Continue interrogating
   the user until it makes sense to you and is consistent with the dataset.
-- `advance` condition: you understand the user's interpretation of the figure.
-
-### `Continue analysis or lock in?`
-
-- Ask the user whether to continue with another question or lock in the
-  analysis; keep interrogating until they pick one. "Next question" loops back
-  to `Propose/ask a question`, "finish analysis" exits to the finishing skill.
-- `advance` condition: the user has decided to continue the session or finish it.
+- Once the user makes a clear interpretation, ask whether to continue with another
+  question or lock in the analysis. Keep interrogating until they pick one.
+- `advance` condition: you understand the user's interpretation of the
+  figure, and the user has decided to continue the session or finish it.
 
 ### `/skill:finishing-exploratory-data-analysis`
 

package/skills/finishing-exploratory-data-analysis/SKILL.md

@@ -45,7 +45,9 @@ review doesn't count (see Common Mistakes).
        - *Data source(s) used*
        - *Questions*, grouped when closely related:
          - *Approach* in prose, with key equations if nontrivial
-         - *Results*, with the embedded figure(s)
+         - *Results*, with the embedded figure(s): all figures produced
+           during the EDA must be embedded; omitting one requires the
+           user's explicit consent.
        - *Conclusion*
 4. **Reread, then dispatch verification.** See `verification-dispatch.md`
    for the reread pass, the `naive-reader`/`critical-auditor` dispatch, and
@@ -68,3 +70,4 @@ review doesn't count (see Common Mistakes).
 | Silently patching a material-tier or `critical-auditor` finding before telling the user | Always surface these verbatim in the summary, even unresolved -- only cosmetic/confusing/non-fabricated-clarifying fixes get silently applied |
 | Treating a completed script/code review as satisfying this checkpoint's dispatch | Different gate, different artifact -- a code review checks the script, this checkpoint checks the written report. See `verification-dispatch.md` |
 | Saying an analysis is "done and reviewed" once code review passes, before the lock-in checkpoint has run | Say so explicitly ("script validated; report still needs the lock-in checkpoint") rather than a blanket "done" that could be read as covering sign-off too |
+| Omitting a figure without the user's explicit consent | Embed every figure; only skip one if the user explicitly says to |