task-pipeline-skill 1.84.1 → 1.85.0

package/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -1,3 +1,80 @@
+## v1.85.0 — a release stamp names the tag, and the amend rule's sibling one level up
+
+`B-124`, filed by the umbrella's coordinator after watching the same class three times:
+`v1.79.1` twice and `v1.80.0`. It recurred again on 2026-09-05 in the umbrella
+repository and **burned two tags** in one afternoon, which is what turns it from a
+memory gap into a mechanism gap — this repository's retro had recorded the lesson twice
+already.
+
+**Each step is right on its own**, which is why the amend rule did not cover it: the
+stamp is written on the PR branch → it cites that branch's HEAD → `main` is
+**rebase-merge-only** by ruleset → the rebase mints new SHAs → the object the stamp names
+dies with the branch. Two correct refusals follow, and both cost a full CI round measured
+at 57–97 minutes here:
+
+1. the unstamped-release guard reads the tag's own commit range and finds no stamp that
+   resolves;
+2. the documentation gate resolves every backticked SHA against a **fresh clone**, where
+   the branch commit never existed.
+
+**A SHA the author can know before the merge is precisely the SHA the merge destroys**,
+so the rule cannot be *write a better SHA*. `references/retrospective.md` now carries the
+two shapes that survive — cite the release **tag**, or write the stamp **after** the
+merge naming the merge commit, which is the default because the amend rule already
+requires the SHA to exist before a file names it — and the step that ends the class: cut
+the tag locally, run `npm run test:all` against **its** tree, and push only if that is
+green. A tag cannot be repaired; deleting or re-pointing one is refused by repository
+rule, correctly, because a tag is a promise about a tree.
+
+`test/validate.py` asserts the section names all five load-bearing strings, so the rule
+cannot rot into an intention the next author reads past — which is how it recurred.
+
+Guards: 424 → **429** — one plant per named string, each removing **every** occurrence
+inside the section.
+
+### And adding those five plants broke CI silently
+
+Not a side note — the mechanism this repository's whole assurance story rests on has a
+budget, and this release spent the last of it.
+
+The five plants, written inline, took `.github/workflows/validate.yml` from **508 189 to
+518 928 bytes**, and GitHub **stopped creating runs entirely**. The workflow still
+reported `active` through the API, `head_sha` had zero runs, and `gh pr checks` printed
+*no checks reported* — which reads like a queue delay, not a refusal. The PR sat with no
+CI and nothing said why.
+
+**Bracketed by measurement rather than by the documentation alone:**
+
+| workflow size | runs created |
+|---|---|
+| 508 189 bytes | yes |
+| **518 928 bytes** | **none** |
+| 511 096 bytes, after the plants were factored into a script | yes |
+
+GitHub's documented ceiling is 512 KB and it falls inside that bracket, which is why the
+hard number in the guard is the documented one rather than a guess dressed as a
+measurement. The guard has **two bands**: it fails past 512 000, and it *prints* the
+remaining room past 505 000 — because a ceiling you only learn about by crossing it is
+the defect, not the ceiling.
+
+It prints **904 bytes remaining** today.
+
+**The rule that bought the room:** a plant's body belongs in `test/plant_*.py`, called
+with an argument. Five inline copies cost 10 739 bytes; one script and five four-line
+steps cost 2 907.
+
+**My own measurement was wrong first.** I sized the file with `len(s)` — characters — and
+read 509 350 for a file of 511 096 bytes, because the workflow carries Cyrillic. The
+guard uses `os.path.getsize`.
+
+**The check's first draft was itself the defect it guards against.** It searched the whole
+file, and `git merge-base --is-ancestor` already appears under *Every lesson carries its
+commit* — so the plant that removed the command from the new rule **passed**, and the
+check was resting on a different section's sentence. Scoped to the section now, with all
+five needles watched refusing their plant. Two of those plants had to be rewritten to
+remove **every** occurrence: a plant that leaves a second copy behind proves the check is
+inert when it is not.
+
 ## v1.84.1 — the conformance sentence is computed, and two of its five figures were wrong
 
 **A sentence of five measured figures, and nothing derived any of them.** The README's

package/SKILL-CARD.md

@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ harmless.
 |---|---|
 | **Purpose** | Runs a substantial task through ten gated delivery stages — intake grill, docs study, brainstorm, spec, plan, subagent build, tests, lint/deploy, post-deploy, docs+registers, acceptance — refusing to advance until each gate passes |
 | **Owner** | ssheleg ([github.com/ssheleg/task-pipeline](https://github.com/ssheleg/task-pipeline)) |
-| **Version** | 1.84.1 |
+| **Version** | 1.85.0 |
 | **Surface** | Claude Code (filesystem skill + plugin) and the vercel `skills` CLI. **Not** uploaded to the Skills API; custom Skills do not sync across surfaces |
 | **Dependencies** | None required. Optional: `context7` (MCP), `figma` (MCP), super-ux, agent-sync, graphify, obsidian-wiki, and **one of two browser channels** — `playwright` (CLI or MCP) or `chrome-devtools` (MCP); either satisfies the browser step and neither is required. Every stage's doctrine ships in-repo; the one conditional requirement is super-ux for the stage-3 UX track on a user-facing task |
 | **Evaluation status** | Suite authored, 5 categories. One recorded run, **self-observed by the author**; **zero blind runs on zero of three models** — the split, and the numbers, live in [`evals/RESULTS.md`](evals/RESULTS.md) and are computed by `evals/run.py` |

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "task-pipeline-skill",
-  "version": "1.84.1",
+  "version": "1.85.0",
   "description": "Full-cycle delivery pipeline for coding agents: a mandatory built-in intake grill, then 10 gated stages (docs, brainstorm+decompose, spec, plan, build, tests, lint/deploy, post-deploy, docs/wiki, acceptance). Every stage's doctrine ships inside the skill — no companion plugin required. This package is the installer CLI.",
   "bin": {
     "task-pipeline": "bin/task-pipeline.js"

package/plugins/task-pipeline/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
   "name": "task-pipeline",
   "displayName": "Task Pipeline",
   "description": "Runs a substantial task through a mandatory built-in intake grill, then 10 gated stages (docs, brainstorm+decompose, spec, plan, subagent build, tests, lint/deploy, post-deploy, docs/wiki, acceptance). Every stage's doctrine is built into the skill — no companion plugin required — with typed auto/judgment/manual gates, a frozen requirement spine that closes with evidence, a work board and a verification ledger that outlive a run, an exposure line naming what shipped unconfirmed, a progress rail computed from the project's own config, a loop guard whose review ceiling measures rather than stops, and stage-3 tracks for what a product does, how it sounds and how it looks. Two modes need no task: `checkup` (what is unverified) and `setup` (audit existing docs). Retro insights can publish upstream as issues, opt-in and redacted.",
-  "version": "1.84.1",
+  "version": "1.85.0",
   "author": {
     "name": "ssheleg",
     "url": "https://x.com/sshlg93"

package/plugins/task-pipeline/skills/task-pipeline/references/retrospective.md

@@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ file exists to stop.
 - Write the entry only for a divergence — and name the layer that owned it
 - Every lesson carries its commit
 - Never amend a commit a record already names
+- A release stamp names the TAG, and the merge commit — never the branch's own SHA
 - The stamp table is capped at ten, and *one line per run* was never a cap
 - `publish:` is a line in the verdict, not a silence
 - Rotation — the archive is how pruning stops losing things
@@ -113,6 +114,48 @@ The stamp costs one line and one commit. A run that folds it back into the work
 the history tidy is trading a reader's ability to find the incident for the appearance of
 tidiness — and the reader is the entire reason the stamp exists.
 
+## A release stamp names the TAG, and the merge commit — never the branch's own SHA
+
+The sibling of the amend rule, one level up, and it recurred three times after the amend
+rule was written because each step is right on its own: stamp the run on the PR branch →
+the stamp cites that branch's HEAD → `main` is **rebase-merge-only** by ruleset → the
+rebase mints new SHAs → the object the stamp names dies with the branch.
+
+Measured across `v1.79.1` (twice) and `v1.80.0`, and again on 2026-09-05 in the umbrella
+repository, where it burned **two tags** in one afternoon. Each recurrence costs the same
+two refusals, both of them correct:
+
+1. the **unstamped-release guard** reads the tag's own commit range, finds no stamp that
+   resolves, and refuses the release;
+2. the **documentation gate** resolves every backticked commit reference against a *fresh
+   clone*, where the branch SHA has never existed, and refuses again.
+
+Then it costs one extra PR and one full CI round — measured at 57–97 minutes here.
+
+**The shape that survives a rebase-merge is the tag.** A SHA the author can know before
+the merge is precisely the SHA the merge is about to destroy, so the rule cannot be
+"write a better SHA". Two spellings are allowed and nothing else:
+
+- **cite the release tag** — `v1.84.1` is immutable, it is the thing being released, and
+  it resolves in any clone;
+- **or write the stamp AFTER the merge**, in a second PR, naming the **merge commit**.
+  This is the default, because it is what the amend rule already forces one level down:
+  once a file names a SHA, that commit is frozen, so the SHA has to exist first.
+
+The order for a release run is therefore:
+
+1. merge the work; the merge commit is now a real object on `main`;
+2. **then** stamp, in a second PR, naming that merge commit;
+3. cut the tag **locally**, run `npm run test:all` against the tag's own tree, and push
+   the tag only if that run is green — `git merge-base --is-ancestor <stamp-sha> HEAD`
+   is what the release gate will ask, so ask it first.
+
+Step 3 is not optional and it is not the same as a green branch build: the branch tree
+and the tag's tree differ by whatever the merge did, and **a tag cannot be repaired** —
+deleting or re-pointing one is refused by repository rule, correctly, because a tag is a
+promise about a tree. A tag pushed on a green branch build is a promise about a tree
+nobody ran.
+
 ## The stamp table is capped at ten, and *one line per run* was never a cap
 
 Measured 2026-08-10: standing instructions **~1 234 tok** behind a cap of ten, run stamps