ultimate-pi 0.1.0 → 0.1.3

package/vault/wiki/hot.md

@@ -0,0 +1,932 @@
+---
+type: meta
+title: "Hot Cache"
+updated: 2026-05-05T20:20:00
+created: 2026-04-30
+tags: []
+status: active
+---
+
+# Recent Context
+
+## Last Updated
+2026-05-05. Deep research: [[Research: pi-vcc]] (ecosystem expansion 4→7, Anthropic compaction API, Context Folding SOTA).
+
+## pi-vcc Research — Ecosystem Expansion (May 2026)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Pi compaction ecosystem grew from 4 to 7 extensions operating at three distinct layers: prevention (rtk-optimizer), mid-session pruning (context-prune), and boundary compaction (vcc + 4 others). Anthropic launched official server-side compaction API (beta Jan 2026). Context Folding (arXiv 2510.11967) achieves 10x context reduction via RL-trained branch/return. pi-vcc remains the only zero-LLM option across all 7 extensions and the official API. Tool-calling accuracy collapses ~40% past 80K tokens — a hard cliff, not gradual decline.**
+
+### Ten Key Findings
+1. **Ecosystem grew 4→7 extensions**: Three new extensions since April: pi-omni-compact (large-context model subprocess), pi-context-prune (tool-call batch summarization), pi-rtk-optimizer (upstream command rewriting + output compaction).
+2. **Three-layer token management emerged**: Prevention (rtk-optimizer) → mid-session pruning (context-prune) → boundary compaction (vcc/others). Maps directly to our harness's layered context engineering.
+3. **pi-vcc still uniquely deterministic**: Across all 7 extensions plus Anthropic's official API, pi-vcc is the only zero-LLM option. Every other approach uses LLM summarization.
+4. **Anthropic launched official compaction API**: Beta since January 2026. Server-side automatic summarization for Claude Opus 4.7/4.6, Sonnet 4.6. Validates compaction as first-class platform concern.
+5. **Context Folding achieves 10x reduction**: arXiv 2510.11967 (ByteDance Seed/CMU/Stanford). FoldGRPO RL framework learns branch/return sub-trajectories. 62% BrowseComp-Plus, 58% SWE-Bench Verified at only 32K tokens.
+6. **80K token accuracy cliff confirmed**: Past ~80K effective-context tokens, tool-calling accuracy collapses ~40%. Hard cliff. Context windows beyond 80K misleading for agentic workloads.
+7. **pi-omni-compact: opposing philosophy**: Spawns 1M+ context model for highest-fidelity summaries. Exactly opposite of pi-vcc: more compute for quality vs zero compute for determinism.
+8. **Recall still unique**: No new extension or API offers searchable pre-compaction history. `vcc_recall` over raw JSONL remains pi-vcc's killer differentiator.
+9. **Pi ecosystem reached 2,808+ resources**: 1,183+ extensions, 1,459 active projects. Compaction among highest-activity categories.
+10. **65% of enterprise AI failures from context drift**: Compaction quality directly determines agent reliability. Not optional.
+
+### Pages Created
+[[pi-rtk-optimizer-github-repo]], [[pi-omni-compact-github-repo]], [[pi-context-prune-github-repo]], [[anthropic-compaction-api]], [[context-folding-paper]] (sources), [[context-folding]] (concept)
+
+### Pages Updated
+[[pi-compaction-extensions-ecosystem]] (4→7 extensions), [[deterministic-session-compaction]] (context folding + 3-layer model), [[Research: pi-vcc]] (10 findings, expanded landscape)
+
+## VCC Extension Research (May 2026)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Topic has two valid meanings. For Pi, "VCC" can mean VS Code integration extensions OR literal VCC compaction (`pi-vcc`). VS Code side currently has three patterns: official bridge (`pi0.pi-vscode`), LM provider bridge (`tintinweb.vscode-pi-model-chat-provider`), and community full chat UX (`cdervis.vscode-pi`). Literal VCC side is `pi-vcc`, a deterministic compaction/recall Pi package, not a VS Code UI extension.**
+
+### Five Key Findings
+1. **Official extension exists and is active**: `pi0.pi-vscode` (1,348 installs, v0.0.9) keeps terminal-first flow, adds `@pi` chat participant, and ships rich VS Code bridge tools.
+2. **Model provider path exists**: `tintinweb.vscode-pi-model-chat-provider` (350 installs) exposes Pi via `vscode.lm.*` so Copilot Chat and LM API extensions can use Pi models.
+3. **Community full UX option exists**: `cdervis.vscode-pi` (352 installs, v0.13.0) is unofficial/prerelease but offers rich sidebar + RPC workflow and rapid iteration.
+4. **Literal VCC is compaction tech**: `sting8k/pi-vcc` uses deterministic no-LLM compaction, high token reduction, and recall over session lineage.
+5. **Naming collision causes confusion**: User phrase "vcc extension" is ambiguous unless clarified as IDE extension vs compaction extension.
+
+### Pages Created
+[[pi-vscode-marketplace]], [[pi-vscode-model-provider-marketplace]], [[vscode-pi-community-extension]], [[pi-vcc-github-repo]] (sources), [[pi-vscode-extension-landscape]], [[vcc-conversation-compaction-for-pi]] (concepts), [[Research: vcc extension for pi coding agent]] (synthesis)
+
+## GSD Integration Research (May 2026)
+
+### Key Finding
+**GSD (60K stars) is a downstream application-building pipeline (discuss→plan→execute→verify→ship). Our harness is an upstream behavior-control pipeline (spec→plan→drift→grounding→adversarial→observe→memory→orchestrate→query). They address fundamentally different layers. Complementary, not competitive.**
+
+### Six Key Findings
+1. **GSD is downstream; we are upstream.** GSD receives user ideas and produces apps. Our harness governs how agents reason, verify, and maintain state during any coding task.
+2. **GSD lacks adversarial verification — our L4 fills that gap.** GSD's quality gates are mechanical (lint, test, type-check). No agent reads another agent's code to assess spec-vs-intent alignment.
+3. **Both systems share skill-first architecture.** Since May 2026, our harness uses markdown skills. GSD has always been markdown-first. Both use progressive disclosure.
+4. **GSD's context engineering complements our L3 grounding.** Fresh subagent contexts, file-based state, XML plans — same techniques, different abstraction levels.
+5. **GSD's state files are a narrower version of our L6 memory.** `.planning/` is project memory. Our wiki is universal knowledge across all harness layers.
+6. **GSD's community limitations validate our harness design.** Token-heavy, degrades at scale, verification uses lexical tools — exactly the failure modes our L1-L4 pipeline prevents.
+
+### Patterns Worth Adopting
+- **Namespace routing**: 6 meta-skills reducing 86→6 skill listings (saves ~2K tokens/turn)
+- **Deterministic CLI helper**: `gsd-tools.cjs` — script for operations LLMs do unreliably
+- **Wave execution tracking**: Dependency-aware parallel execution with per-task summaries
+
+### Integration Opportunities
+- **Immediate**: Adopt namespace routing + deterministic helper pattern
+- **Medium-term**: Run GSD inside harness-controlled pi sessions with harness drift monitoring
+- **Long-term**: Unified skill marketplace if GSD-2 converges with pi
+
+### Pages Created
+[[gsd-github-repo]], [[gsd-codecentric-deep-dive]], [[gsd-hn-discussion]] (sources), [[gsd-get-shit-done]] (entity), [[Research: how GSD fits into our coding harness setup]] (synthesis)
+
+---
+
+## Key Recent Facts
+- Superpowers (`obra/superpowers`) by Jesse Vincent: 179K GitHub stars, 15.9K forks, MIT license, v5.1.0 (May 2026).
+- Complete software development methodology as composable SKILL.md skills with hard-gate enforcement.
+- Validates our skill-first architecture — both use progressive disclosure, markdown-based skills.
+- Can be directly integrated as `.pi/skills/superpowers/` skill set. Adds methodology layer.
+- Cannot replace our deterministic code-level enforcement (drift monitor). Best approach: Superpowers as methodology (probabilistic) + harness as enforcement (deterministic).
+- Cross-agent SKILL.md portability: works across Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini CLI, OpenCode, Copilot.
+- 490K+ skills ecosystem exists across Skills.sh (83K+), SkillsMP (400K+), ClawHub (~10K).
+
+## Active Threads
+- User evaluating Superpowers for harness integration.
+- Key decision: adopt Superpowers as skill set vs build custom methodology skills.
+- Security consideration: 13.4% of marketplace skills have critical issues (Snyk study).
+
+---
+
+Previous research still active. See below.
+
+---
+
+## pi-vs-claude-code — Agentic Orchestration Pipeline for Our Harness (May 2026)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Pi's TypeScript extension system can implement full multi-agent orchestration — subagent delegation, team dispatch, and sequential chaining — entirely in user-space without core agent changes.** disler/pi-vs-claude-code (928 stars) provides production-grade reference implementations of all three patterns. Combined with OpenDev's comprehensive architecture paper (arXiv:2603.05344v1) and Martin Fowler's harness engineering framework, clear implementation paths emerge for our harness.
+
+### 7 Key Findings
+1. **Three orchestration patterns cover the design space** (Source: [[sources/disler-pi-vs-claude-code]]): Subagent delegation (`/sub`), team dispatch (`/team` via `teams.yaml`), sequential chaining (`/chain` via `agent-chain.yaml`). All implementable as `.pi/skills/` extensions.
+2. **Schema-level isolation > runtime permission checks** (Source: [[sources/opendev-arxiv-2603.05344v1]]): Removing tools from subagent schemas makes dangerous operations structurally impossible. The model cannot argue for capabilities it doesn't know exist.
+3. **Context engineering is a first-class concern** (Source: [[sources/opendev-arxiv-2603.05344v1]]): Staged compaction (5 thresholds), event-driven reminders (24 templates, `role: user` injection), dual-memory architecture. Our harness lacks all three.
+4. **Harness = Guides + Sensors + Steering Loop** (Source: [[sources/martin-fowler-harness-engineering]]): Feedforward guides steer before action; feedback sensors observe after. Human iterates on both.
+5. **Multi-model pipelines beat single-model agents** (Source: [[sources/mindstudio-four-agent-types]]): Different pipeline stages benefit from different models (Opus for planning, Sonnet for building, Haiku for reviewing).
+6. **Safety requires defense-in-depth** (Source: [[sources/opendev-arxiv-2603.05344v1]]): Five independent layers — prompt → schema → approval → validation → hooks. Our harness has none in structured form.
+7. **Agent types must match task architecture** (Source: [[sources/mindstudio-four-agent-types]]): Coding Harness, Dark Factory, Auto Research, Orchestration — each optimized for different work. Mismatch = failure.
+
+### Concepts Created (5)
+[[concepts/agentic-orchestration-pipeline]], [[concepts/agent-harness-architecture]], [[concepts/multi-agent-specialization]], [[concepts/context-engineering]], [[concepts/safety-defense-in-depth]]
+
+### Entities Created (3)
+[[entities/pi-coding-agent]], [[entities/disler-indydevdan]], [[entities/opendev]]
+
+### Sources (5)
+[[sources/disler-pi-vs-claude-code]], [[sources/opendev-arxiv-2603.05344v1]], [[sources/martin-fowler-harness-engineering]], [[sources/mindstudio-four-agent-types]], [[sources/anthropic-effective-harnesses]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[questions/Research-pi-vs-claude-code-agentic-orchestration-pipeline]] — Full research: 7 findings, 1 contradiction, 6 open questions
+
+### Implementation Path
+1. Extend existing `Agent` tool with team dispatch via YAML config (`.pi/agents/teams.yaml`)
+2. Add chain orchestration with `$INPUT` variable injection (`.pi/agents/agent-chain.yaml`)
+3. Implement context isolation per subagent (fresh conversation per spawn)
+4. Add progress dashboards (grid for teams, step tracker for chains)
+5. Build safety defense-in-depth (schema gating → approval → validation → hooks)
+6. Implement staged compaction (5 thresholds) and event-driven reminders
+
+### Open Questions
+- Event-driven system reminders in Pi's extension API?
+- Right compaction strategy for our context window?
+- Persistent approval rules across sessions?
+- 9-pass fuzzy editing in Pi's `edit` tool?
+- Performance impact of context isolation per subagent?
+- Steering loop mechanism (human review → update guides/sensors)?
+
+---
+
+## sentrux.dev — Architectural Sensor for AI Coding Agents (May 2026)
+
+### Key Finding
+**sentrux closes the feedback loop for AI-agent-written code — a real-time architectural sensor that computes a single Quality Signal (0–10,000) from 5 independent graph-theoretic metrics, visualizes the codebase as an interactive treemap, and integrates with AI coding agents via MCP.** Built in Rust (MIT), 52 languages via tree-sitter. First released March 11, 2026 (v0.5.7 as of March 18). 1.9k GitHub stars, 168 forks. Pro tier ($15/month) via runtime dylib plugin with Ed25519 license keys.
+
+### 7 Key Findings
+1. **Unique positioning as the missing feedback loop**: sensor (sentrux) → signal → controller (AI agent) → actuator (code changes) → system (codebase) → loop. Classical cybernetics (Wiener 1948, Tsien 1954).
+2. **Mathematically grounded scoring**: Quality Signal = geometric mean of (modularity × acyclicity × depth × equality × redundancy)^(1/5) × 10000. Justified by Nash Social Welfare theorem (1950). Claims "ungameable by design."
+3. **5 metrics cover complete structural space**: 3 edge properties (modularity Newman 2004, acyclicity Martin 2003, depth Lakos 1996) + 2 node properties (equality Gini 1912, redundancy Kolmogorov 1963).
+4. **MCP-first AI agent integration**: 9 tools (scan, health, session_start, session_end, rescan, check_rules, evolution, dsm, test_gaps). Agent detects quality degradation per session.
+5. **Pro tier via runtime plugin**: Pro features ($15/mo) in separately downloaded dylib. Ed25519 license keys with offline validation. Per-user watermarking. Team tier at $40/month/seat.
+6. **Rapid development velocity**: Initial commit to v0.5.7 with Pro architecture in ~1 week. 318 commits, 37 releases.
+7. **52 languages via tree-sitter**: Zero language-specific Rust code. Adding language = plugin.toml + tags.scm only.
+
+### Contradictions
+- **Self-assessment gap**: sentrux gives own repo a "D" rating — problematic for credibility.
+- **Rapid release pace vs stability**: 17 releases in one day during launch. Reddit flagged as "vibe-coded."
+- **Conceptual strength vs practical utility**: Community split between praising feedback loop concept and questioning usefulness.
+
+### Sources (7)
+[[sentrux-github-repo]], [[sentrux-dev-landing]], [[sentrux-docs-quality-signal]], [[sentrux-docs-root-cause-metrics]], [[sentrux-docs-rules-engine]], [[sentrux-docs-pro-architecture]], Reddit r/rust launch post
+
+### Concepts Created (4)
+[[Quality Signal (sentrux)]], [[Five Root Cause Metrics (sentrux)]], [[sentrux Rules Engine]], [[sentrux MCP Integration]]
+
+### Entity Created
+[[sentrux (tool)]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: sentrux.dev]] — Full research: 7 findings, 4 contradictions, 6 open questions
+
+### Open Questions
+- Production adoption unknown (tool <2 months old)
+- No independent reviews beyond Reddit launch thread
+- Accuracy varies by tree-sitter grammar maturity
+- Scalability with large codebases unverified
+- Pro plugin security: runtime dylib loading risks
+- No benchmarking against SonarQube, CodeClimate, etc.
+
+---
+
+Previous (2026-05-03): **Automating Software Engineering**, **Legendary Engineering Patterns**, and **Skill-First Architecture** research also active. See below.
+
+---
+
+## Automating Software Engineering — Platform Patterns for Harness (May 2026)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Multi-agent architecture (Planner→Architect→Coder/Generator→Evaluator) is universal across all successful AI coding platforms.** Combined with deep engineering reports from OpenAI (Codex, 0 human-written lines) and Anthropic/OpenDev (context engineering, system reminders), clear first-principles patterns emerge for our harness.
+
+### 10 Key Findings
+1. **Multi-agent decomposition is universal**: Lovable (Planner→Architect→Coder), Anthropic (Planner→Generator→Evaluator), OpenAI (agent-to-agent review loops), OpenDev (dual-agent thinking/action separation).
+2. **Environment control is the moat**: Bolt's WebContainers ($4M ARR in 4 weeks), OpenAI's Chrome DevTools MCP, Anthropic's Playwright MCP. Agents must run and verify code, not just generate it.
+3. **Structured outputs prevent chaos**: Pydantic-typed handoffs between agents. "Structured data transforms AI from demo to production" (Lovable clone).
+4. **Context engineering is the central constraint**: Progressive disclosure (AGENTS.md as ToC, not encyclopedia), adaptive compaction (5 stages, 54% reduction), system reminders at decision points (OpenDev).
+5. **Repository as system of record**: "What Codex can't see doesn't exist." All knowledge in repo as versioned markdown. Doc-gardening agents scan for staleness (OpenAI).
+6. **Enforce architecture mechanically**: Custom linters + structural tests, not prompts. "Constraints become multipliers with agents" (OpenAI).
+7. **Generator-evaluator loop (GAN-inspired)**: Separate evaluator with hard-threshold criteria. Sprint contracts (agree on "done" before coding). Evaluator uses Playwright to actually click through apps.
+8. **"Code generation is a commodity"** (Rocket.new thesis): Pre-build strategy + competitive intelligence is the frontier. $15M seed, 1.5M users.
+9. **0 lines of human code**: OpenAI built production product (~1M lines, ~1.5K PRs) with Codex. Humans steer, agents execute. 3.5 PRs/engineer/day.
+10. **Garbage collection for AI slop**: Continuous background cleanup agents. "Golden principles" encoded mechanically. Technical debt = high-interest loan.
+
+### Sources (6 new)
+[[Source: Lovable Architecture & Clone Analysis]], [[Source: Bolt.new Architecture & Case Study]], [[Source: Rocket.new — Vibe Solutioning Platform]], [[Source: OpenAI Harness Engineering — 0 Lines of Human Code]], [[Source: OpenDev — Building AI Coding Agents for the Terminal]], [[anthropic2026-harness-design]]
+
+### Concepts Created (2 new)
+[[Context-Aware System Reminders]] — Event-driven behavioral guidance at decision points
+[[Multi-Agent AI Coding Architecture]] — Universal pattern with structured handoffs
+
+### Entities Created (4)
+[[Lovable (company)]], [[Bolt.new (StackBlitz)]], [[Rocket.new]], [[Emergent Labs]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Automating Software Engineering - Lovable, Bolt, Emergent, Rocket]] — Full research: 10 findings, 3 contradictions, 5 open questions
+
+### Page Updated
+[[context-engineering]] (stub → developing, enriched with 8 first principles from OpenDev/OpenAI/Anthropic)
+
+---
+
+## Legendary Engineering Patterns for AI Harness (May 2026)
+
+### Key Finding
+**10 cross-cutting engineering patterns from 6 legendary programmers — Torvalds, Thompson, Ritchie, Stroustrup, Hejlsberg, van Rossum — map directly to AI coding harness design.** The core insight: the same principles that produced the world's most durable software must constrain AI-generated code. Deterministic guardrails (type systems, linters, tests) become more important with AI, not less.
+
+### 10 Patterns → Harness Map
+| Pattern | Source | Harness Map |
+|---------|--------|-------------|
+| Fast feedback loops | Hejlsberg, Torvalds | Instant lint/build on AI output; pre-execution type checking |
+| Composability over monoliths | Thompson, Ritchie, McIlroy | Agent composition: specialized sub-agent pipeline stages |
+| Chain of trust | Torvalds | Tiered verification: lint → type-check → test → critic → human |
+| Subtractive design | Thompson, McIlroy | Harness "suggest deletion" mode — NOT YET IMPLEMENTED |
+| Behavioral compatibility | Hejlsberg, Stroustrup, Torvalds | Fidelity gates: preserve existing test behavior |
+| Pragmatism over perfection | van Rossum | "Correct enough" over "provably correct" |
+| Readability first | Torvalds, van Rossum, Kernighan | Post-generation lint/style enforcement |
+| Deep understanding → leverage | Thompson | Semantic codebase indexing prerequisite to generation |
+| Type systems as guardrails | Hejlsberg, Stroustrup | Mandatory deterministic checks before human review |
+| Shared context/community | Thompson, Ritchie, Kernighan | Wiki as digital Unix Room — all decisions visible, searchable |
+
+### Critical Consensus
+- **All six programmers oppose "vibe coding"** — human architectural control is non-negotiable
+- **Hejlsberg + Stroustrup converge**: type systems are THE AI guardrail
+- **Hejlsberg + van Rossum converge**: type hints above ~10K lines, dynamic below
+- **van Rossum**: "We stay in control where it comes to architecture and API design"
+- **Torvalds**: vibe coding "horrible for production, fine for learning" (2026)
+
+### Sources (5)
+[[linux-kernel-coding-workflow]], [[unix-philosophy]], [[birth-of-unix-kernighan-interview]], [[hejlsberg-7-learnings]], [[guido-python-design-philosophy]]
+
+### Concept Created
+[[legendary-engineering-patterns-harness]] — Full 10-pattern mapping with harness integration details
+
+### Entities Created (6)
+[[Linus Torvalds]], [[Ken Thompson]], [[Dennis Ritchie]], [[Anders Hejlsberg]], [[Guido van Rossum]], [[Bjarne Stroustrup]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Engineering Workflows of Legendary Programmers and AI Harness Mapping]] — Full research synthesis: 10 findings, 5 contradictions resolved, 5 open questions
+
+### Open Questions
+- Subtractive design in AI harness — not yet designed in any layer
+- Thompson-level codebase understanding for AI agents — benchmark needed
+- Balance fast feedback vs thorough verification per change type
+- Harness equivalent of "don't break userspace"
+- Van Rossum's 10K-line typing threshold — empirical validation needed
+
+---
+
+**Skill-First Architecture**: Harness layers as markdown skills (`.pi/skills/harness-*/SKILL.md`) — only drift monitor remains as TypeScript code. Event bus handled by pi's built-in system. 3 code files vs 15. Progressive disclosure keeps context lean. See below.
+
+## Skill-First Harness Architecture (May 2026)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Harness layers should be markdown-based skills, not TypeScript code modules.** The core insight: the harness is a skill coordination layer, not a code pipeline. Only deterministic infrastructure needs code — the drift monitor (real-time pattern matching on every `tool_result` event), shared types, and config. Event routing is handled by pi's built-in event bus. Everything else — spec hardening, planning, adversarial verification, observability, memory — is probabilistic LLM evaluation and should be a skill.
+
+### Architecture
+```
+CODE LAYER (3 TS files — deterministic, always-on):
+  drift-monitor.ts (pattern matching) | types.ts | config.ts
+  EVENT BUS: pi's built-in native event system
+
+SKILL LAYER (6 SKILL.md directories — probabilistic, on-demand):
+  harness-spec/ | harness-plan/ | harness-critic/ | harness-observe/ | harness-gate/ | harness-memory/
+
+WIKI LAYER (Obsidian — persistent, cross-session):
+  ADRs, specs, plans, consensus, hot cache, index
+```
+
+### Why Skills Over Code
+1. **Better at evaluation**: LLM is better at spec quality, plan correctness, code review than imperative code.
+2. **Progressive disclosure**: 6 harness skills cost ~480 tokens at discovery vs 15 code modules always loaded (~15K tokens).
+3. **Zero-compile iteration**: Edit markdown → agent picks up next activation. No TypeScript compilation for harness logic changes.
+4. **User-editable**: PMs/domain experts can edit SKILL.md without TypeScript knowledge.
+5. **Industry convergence**: Anthropic, OpenAI, Google, GitHub, Cursor all adopted SKILL.md open standard within weeks.
+
+### Why Some Things Stay Code
+**Drift monitor MUST be code**: Runs deterministically on every `tool_result` event with sub-millisecond rule-based pre-filter. Skills are probabilistic — the model decides when to activate them. Drift detection cannot be skipped.
+
+**Event bus is pi's built-in**: Pi's latest version ships a native event bus — no custom `events.ts` or `harness-event-bus.ts` needed. Skills register directly with pi's native events.
+
+### File Count
+| Old (v1 Code-First) | New (v2 Skill-First) |
+|---------------------|----------------------|
+| 15 TypeScript files (~2,500 lines) | 3 TypeScript files (~600 lines) |
+| 0 skill files | 12 skill files (6 SKILL.md + 6 reference.md) |
+| Compilation required for every logic change | Compilation only when types/drift change |
+| ~9 weeks to MVP | ~8 weeks to MVP |
+
+### Sources (3 new)
+[[Source: SwirlAI Agent Skills Progressive Disclosure]] — Three-tier architecture, ecosystem adoption speed (Mar 2026)
+[[Source: Claude API Agent Skills Overview]] — Filesystem-based skill architecture, loading levels, security
+[[Source: Blake Crosley Agent Architecture Guide]] — Complete harness pattern: hooks, skills, subagents, production results (Apr 2026)
+
+### Concept Created
+[[skill-first-architecture]] — Full architecture derivation, first principles, when skills vs when code
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Skill-First Harness Architecture]] — Full research synthesis: architecture comparison, contradictions, open questions
+
+### Plans Rewritten
+[[mvp-implementation-blueprint]] — Skill-First v2: 19 files, 3 code + 12 skill + 4 config. Event bus handled by pi built-in. All skill bodies documented.
+[[harness-implementation-plan]] — Skill-First v2: every phase now specifies implementation method (SKILL or CODE).
+
+---
+
+Previous (2026-05-02): **P30 browser engine replaced**: Vercel Labs agent-browser (31.4K stars, Apache 2.0, Rust-native) replaces browser-harness (9.4K stars, MIT, Python). **L2.5 drift detection rethought from first principles**: LLM-first (Haiku 4.5) with structured drift context replaces rule-based primary.
+
+## P30 Browser Engine: agent-browser (May 2026)
+
+### browser-harness → Vercel Labs agent-browser
+**Upgrade for maturity and AI agent integration.** agent-browser (31.4K GitHub stars, Apache 2.0, v0.26.0, 81 releases, 112 contributors) is 3.3× larger than browser-harness (9.4K stars, MIT, Python) and provides richer AI agent primitives:
+- Snapshot + refs workflow (snapshot -i → click @e2 → fill @e3)
+- Annotated screenshots with numbered labels matching @eN refs
+- Structured diff (snapshot diff + visual pixel diff)
+- React introspection (react tree, react renders, react suspense)
+- Web Vitals (LCP/CLS/TTFB/FCP/INP)
+- Batch mode (multi-command single invocation)
+- Built-in skills system (skills get core, npx skills add)
+- Rust-native single binary (no Python dependency)
+
+Install: `npm install -g agent-browser`. Config: `.pi/harness/browser.json`.
+
+See [[Source: Vercel Labs agent-browser]] and [[agent-browser-browser-automation]].
+
+### Files updated
+HARNESS-PRD.md (P30, L2.5, deps, references, token budget, resolved Q19), wiki/modules/harness-implementation-plan.md (P3-P7, P30, L2.5, token budget, tools table), wiki/concepts/drift-detection-unified.md (full LLM-first rewrite), wiki/concepts/browser-subagent-visual-verification.md (agent-browser), wiki/concepts/agent-browser-browser-automation.md (new), wiki/sources/Source: Vercel Labs agent-browser.md (new), wiki/index.md, wiki/hot.md.
+
+## L2.5 Drift Detection: LLM-First v2 (May 2026)
+
+### First-Principles Rethink
+
+**Problem**: Rule-based detection (6 patterns: repetition, failure spiral, etc.) catches ~80% of stuck sessions but MISSES semantic drift — agent making "progress" but heading in the wrong direction. FP #6 states drift is a positive feedback loop; the 20% that slip through are the most dangerous.
+
+**Solution**: LLM-based primary detection with structured context input + very cheap model.
+
+```
+Every 8 turns:
+  1. Rule-based pre-filter (0 tokens, <1ms): if CLEAR stuck → escalate immediately
+  2. Build structured drift context (~700 tokens):
+     { task, subtask, last_12_tool_calls_summary, files_modified, errors, turn }
+  3. Send to Haiku 4.5: "Is agent making progress? Reply JSON."
+  4. Act on verdict: continue | nudge | restart
+```
+
+**Why LLM-first**:
+- LLM has semantic understanding of task + plan — catches direction-drift that rule-based can't
+- Structured context (not full history) keeps cost negligible: ~700 tokens × $0.25/M = ~$0.0002/check
+- Classification task (not generation) is ideal for cheap models
+- Rule-based is now the cost-saving pre-filter, not the authority
+- Net positive: ~$0.001-0.005/session prevents 5,000-50,000 token stuck sessions
+
+Token budget impact: L2.5 goes from ~0-150 → ~1,500-2,200/session. Total per-subtask: ~17,500-19,000 (up from 16,000-17,500).
+
+See [[drift-detection-unified]] for full first-principles derivation.
+
+---
+
+## Tech Stack Corrections (2026-05-02)
+
+### PromptKit PackC → Real Tools
+**Fabrication detected & corrected.** "PromptKit PackC" (npm, v1.4.6, 48 versions) does NOT exist — it was an LLM hallucination. The build-time prompt compilation architecture IS valid. No mature off-the-shelf npm package exists.
+
+**Real alternatives**:
+- **Microsoft prompt-engine** (2.8K stars, MIT): YAML-based prompt management. Validates the pattern. Abandoned 2022.
+- **PromptWeaver** (`@iqai/prompt-weaver`, MIT, Dec 2025): Handlebars template compilation + Zod validation. Active. Production-ready.
+- **DIY pipeline**: `js-yaml` (parsing) + `@iqai/prompt-weaver` (templates) + custom per-model renderer plugins. See [[Source: Build-Time Prompt Compilation Architecture]].
+
+### Puppeteer → browser-harness → agent-browser (P30)
+**Evolution**: Puppeteer → browser-harness (May 1) → Vercel Labs agent-browser (May 2). agent-browser (31.4K stars, Apache 2.0, Rust-native) provides richer AI agent primitives: snapshot + refs, annotated screenshots, structured diff, React introspection, batch mode, skills system. Replaces browser-harness (9.4K stars, MIT, Python) for P30. See [[Source: Vercel Labs agent-browser]] and [[agent-browser-browser-automation]].
+
+---
+
+## TypeScript Best Practices and Codebase Structure (2026-05-02)
+
+## TypeScript Best Practices and Codebase Structure (2026-05-02)
+
+### Key Finding
+**TypeScript ecosystem has matured significantly.** Strict mode is consensus default. Barrel files are now discouraged for app code. Monorepo tooling (Turborepo, Nx) is production-ready. Vitest has replaced Jest for new projects. Bun is fastest runtime but Node.js remains safest for production. tRPC eliminates 89-98% of API bugs through compile-time type safety (separate research available).
+
+### Eight Key Findings
+1. **Enable `strict: true` by default.** `strictNullChecks` alone eliminates null-reference bugs. Migrate incrementally.
+2. **Avoid barrel files in app code.** Causes circular imports + 68% module bloat in real production measurements.
+3. **Node.js remains safest runtime.** Bun is 4× faster but Node.js features are backporting Bun/Deno innovations.
+4. **Built-package strategy preferred for TS monorepos.** Build with bundler, use Turborepo for orchestration, generate `.d.ts.map` for IDE support.
+5. **Vitest replaced Jest** as default test runner for Vite/TypeScript projects.
+6. **Name backend folders by technical capability** (controllers, services, repositories), not feature.
+7. **Result monad enables declarative error handling.** `Result<Ok, Err>` with map/flatMap/match. Errors are values, not exceptions.
+8. **ESLint + strict mode = defense-in-depth.** `@typescript-eslint/recommended-type-checked` catches what strict mode misses (floating promises).
+
+### Sources (8)
+[[ts-strict-mode-rishikc]], [[ts-runtimes-comparison-betterstack]], [[barrel-files-tkdodo]], [[ts-monorepo-koerselman]], [[vitest-official]], [[ts-folder-structure-mingyang]], [[ts-best-practices-2025-devto]], [[ts-result-error-handling-kkalamarski]]
+
+### Concepts Created
+[[typescript-strict-mode]], [[barrel-files]], [[monorepo-architecture]], [[result-monad-error-handling]]
+
+### Entities Created
+[[javascript-runtimes]], [[vitest]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: TypeScript Best Practices and Codebase Structure]] — Full synthesis with key findings, contradictions, open questions.
+
+### Contradictions Found
+- Barrel files: traditional wisdom vs TkDodo's performance data (resolution: libraries only)
+- Folder structure: technical-capability vs feature-based (resolution: technical for backend, feature for frontend)
+- Built vs source-only packages: depends on team/project size
+
+### Open Questions
+- tRPC adoption rate vs REST in non-TypeScript environments
+- Biome vs ESLint+Prettier adoption in 2026
+- `isolatedModules: true` performance in large monorepos
+- Oxc vs SWC vs ESBuild for type stripping benchmarks
+
+---
+
+## Prompt Renderer for Multi-Model Agent Harness (2026-05-02)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Build-time prompt compilation is a PROVEN PATTERN — but no mature off-the-shelf npm package exists.** The architecture: base prompt spec (YAML) → per-model renderer plugins (GPT/Claude/Gemini) → compiled JSON shipped in npm → runtime just does string substitution for variables. Implementation: DIY build pipeline using `js-yaml` (parsing) + `@iqai/prompt-weaver` (Handlebars templates + Zod validation) + custom per-model renderer plugins. Microsoft prompt-engine (2.8K stars, MIT) validates the YAML→prompt pattern but is abandoned (last update 2022). PromptWeaver (MIT, Dec 2025) provides the active template compilation layer. This eliminates runtime template engines, cache warmup latency, and parallel-execution traps entirely. See [[Source: Build-Time Prompt Compilation Architecture]] for full correction.
+
+### Architecture
+```
+BUILD TIME:  Base Spec (YAML) → Compiler → GPT.json + Claude.json + Gemini.json → npm package
+RUNTIME:     Load {spec, model}.json → substitute runtime vars → send to LLM
+```
+
+### Core Design Decisions
+1. **Build-time, not runtime**: Compiler runs during `npm run build`. Compiled prompts are static JSON assets in `dist/prompts/`. No template engine shipped.
+2. **Per-model renderers are plugins**: Each provider's official conventions applied at compile time. GPT (constraints-first, flat), Claude (XML tags, long-form), Gemini (constraints-last, plain text).
+3. **Two-phase variable system**: Compile-time vars produce multiple compiled variants. Runtime vars are `__VAR_name__` placeholders for simple string replace (no template engine needed).
+4. **Caching is built-in**: Compiled prompts ARE the cache. Incremental builds only recompile changed specs (hash-based). No runtime cache warming, no parallel-execution trap, no TTL concerns.
+5. **Deterministic builds**: Same spec + same compiler version → identical output. Hash-verified via build manifest.
+
+### Multi-Tier Caching Context
+- **Semantic cache** (100% savings): intercept near-duplicate queries before API call
+- **Prefix cache** (50-90% savings): static system prompts cached by provider API
+- **Build cache**: compiled prompts shipped in package — no runtime prefix caching needed
+- Arxiv-validated (500 agent sessions, 4 models): system prompt only caching = 41-80% cost reduction, 13-31% TTFT improvement
+
+### Per-Model Rendering Rules
+| Provider | Structure | Instruction Order | Cache | Best Practice Source |
+|----------|-----------|------------------|-------|---------------------|
+| OpenAI GPT | Flat, constraints-first | Outcome→Constraints→Context | Auto | platform.openai.com/docs/guides/prompt-engineering |
+| Anthropic Claude | XML tags, nesting OK | Role→Context→Task→XML | Explicit cache_control | docs.anthropic.com + interactive tutorial |
+| Google Gemini | Plain text, constraints-last | Context→Task→Constraints | Explicit context cache | cloud.google.com/vertex-ai/docs |
+
+### Integration with Harness
+Extends [[provider-native-prompting]] (Phase P22b from prior research). New compiler module: `scripts/compile-prompts.ts`. Compiled output: `dist/prompts/{gpt,claude,gemini}/*.json`. Runtime loader: `loadPrompt(specName, model, runtimeVars)` — zero-dependency, just `JSON.parse` + string replace.
+
+### Sources (4 new)
+[[Source: Build-Time Prompt Compilation Architecture]] — Real tools: DIY pipeline (js-yaml + PromptWeaver + per-model renderers)
+[[Source: AgentBus Jinja2 Prompt Pipelines]] — Jinja2 templating patterns adapted to build-time
+[[Source: TianPan Prompt Caching Architecture]] — Multi-tier caching, 60-90% savings, cache boundary control
+[[Source: Arxiv — Don't Break the Cache]] — Academic validation: 41-80% cost reduction across providers
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Prompt Renderer for Multi-Model Agent Harness]] — Full architecture, 5-phase implementation plan, 7 open questions
+
+### New Concept Pages
+[[Prompt Renderer]] — Build-time compilation: base spec → per-model prompts via pluggable renderers
+[[Build-Time Prompt Compilation]] — Compile at build time, ship as static JSON in npm, zero runtime cost
+
+---
+
+## executor.sh Harness Integration (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**executor.sh (RhysSullivan/executor) is an integration layer — a unified tool catalog + auth + policy + execution runtime — not just a TypeScript execution layer.** Our existing wiki classified it alongside CodeAct and Cloudflare Code Mode under P43 (TS Execution Layer). This research finds Executor belongs in a broader category: the agent integration/runtime layer.
+
+### Three Gaps Revealed
+1. **No tool catalog with intent-based discovery**: `tools.discover({ query, limit })` lets agents search tools by intent without loading all schemas → new **P43b**
+2. **No shared auth for external tools**: Executor centralizes OAuth/keychain across agents → gap for post-v1
+3. **No execution pause/resume**: Stateful execution lifecycle with `waiting_for_interaction` state → new **P43c**
+
+### Five Pillars (from executor.sh landing)
+1. Unified catalog with intent-based discovery
+2. Shared auth (sign in once, all agents share)
+3. Policy engine (auto-approve reads, pause on writes, wildcards)
+4. Any agent via MCP (single MCP endpoint)
+5. Local-first (secrets in keychain, nothing leaves machine)
+
+### Build vs Integrate Decision
+- **Harness-native L3 tools (P43)**: Build custom TS runtime with borrowed catalog/discovery/policy patterns
+- **External API integration (GitHub, Slack, Stripe)**: Use Executor as MCP dependency (post-v1)
+
+### Source Updated
+[[executor-rhyssullivan]] — major rewrite with product positioning, architecture, policy engine, execution lifecycle
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: executor.sh Harness Integration]]
+
+### Plan Updated
+[[harness-implementation-plan]] — P43b (Tool Catalog with Discovery), P43c (Policy-Aware Execution)
+
+---
+
+## Fallow Codebase Intelligence Harness Integration (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Fallow (fallow-rs/fallow, 1.7K stars, MIT, Rust-native) is the ONLY codebase intelligence tool across TS/JS, Python, Go, Rust, Elixir that provides dead code + duplication + complexity + boundaries in one sub-second package.** Purpose-built for AI agents: MCP server, JSON `actions` array, `auto_fixable` flags. Beats knip 2-13x, beats jscpd 8-26x.
+
+### Seven Integration Points (P44a-P44g)
+| Phase | Where | What |
+|-------|-------|------|
+| P44a | L3 tools | MCP tool registration. Agent calls fallow for real-time feedback |
+| P44b | P15b sandbox | `fallow audit --changed-since main` scoped pre-verify |
+| P44c | Phase 16 gate | `fallow audit --gate all` deterministic pass/warn/fail |
+| P44d | L5 observability | Health score snapshots as Keep Rate proxy |
+| P44e | P29 errors | Per-issue rule/severity/actions taxonomy mapping |
+| P44f | L6 memory | Git-committed baselines in `.fallow-baselines/` |
+| P44g | P42 automations | Cron-style weekly health sweeps + daily dead code |
+
+### Ecosystem Gap
+**No ecosystem has a fallow-equivalent single-tool.** Python needs Vulture + Skylos + Ruff + Radon. Go needs golangci-lint + deadcode + gocyclo. Rust needs clippy + cargo-udeps + rust-code-analysis. Elixir needs dialyxir + credo.
+
+### Sources
+[[fallow-rs-codebase-intelligence]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Fallow Codebase Intelligence Harness Integration]]
+
+### Plan Updated
+[[harness-implementation-plan]] — New P44 phases, Fallow Validation section, New Tools table.
+
+---
+
+## TypeScript Execution Layer Research (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Three independent systems converge on the same architecture: replace flat tool calling with a typed TypeScript API + sandboxed runtime.** Apple CodeAct (ICML 2024: +20% success rate, -30% interaction turns), Cloudflare Code Mode (production: 3-4x context reduction), Executor (open-source: 1.3K stars, local-first TS runtime). Core insight: LLMs have seen millions of lines of code in pretraining but only contrived tool-calling examples — code is a more natural interface.
+
+### Three Systems Converging
+| System | Type | Key Metric | Sandbox |
+|--------|------|-----------|---------|
+| **CodeAct** (Apple, ICML 2024) | Academic paper | +20% multi-tool success | Python interpreter |
+| **Cloudflare Code Mode** (2025) | Production SDK | 3-4x context reduction | V8 Worker isolates |
+| **Executor** (RhysSullivan, 2026) | Open-source | 1.3K stars | Local Node.js |
+
+### New Harness Phase: P43
+**TypeScript Execution Layer** — single `write_ts` tool replaces 8-15 individual L3 tools. All tools (read, bash, edit, grep, find, ck_search, ctx_execute) exposed as typed TS API via auto-generated type defs. Agent writes TypeScript code; runtime executes in sandboxed Node.js VM or Deno subprocess. Tool calls dispatch via typed RPC back to harness. Permission subsystem (P35) gates all tool calls. Extends P14 (Think-in-Code) from data analysis to full tool orchestration.
+
+### New First Principle
+**FP #19**: Code is a better tool-calling interface than JSON. LLMs have seen millions of lines of code in pretraining but only contrived tool-calling examples. A single "write TypeScript" tool + sandboxed runtime achieves 3-4x context reduction and ~20% higher success rate on multi-tool tasks.
+
+### What We Do NOT Adopt
+- Cloudflare Workers dependency (our sandbox: local Node.js VM or Deno)
+- Python interpreter / CodeAct (our stack is TypeScript)
+- Web UI for tool config / Executor (our harness is CLI-only)
+
+### Sources (4)
+[[codeact-apple-2024]], [[cloudflare-codemode]], [[executor-rhyssullivan]], [[colinmcnamara-context-optimization-codemode]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: TypeScript Execution Layer for Agent Tool Calling]]
+
+### Plan Updated
+[[harness-implementation-plan]] — New FP #19, P43 phase, TS Execution Layer Validation section, updated savings.
+
+---
+
+## Gemini CLI SOTA + Harness Integration (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Gemini CLI (103k GitHub stars, 6,005 commits, 40+ weekly releases) introduced 15 SOTA harness primitives — most already independently validated by other agents (Codex, Claude Code, Cursor, Antigravity), but Gemini CLI provides the most complete refactoring-oriented harness.** Seven integration priorities derived from first principles (not feature-copying).
+
+### 15 SOTA Innovations Cataloged
+1. **Agent Skills** (v0.23+): Progressive disclosure with activation mechanism
+2. **Plan Mode** (v0.29+): Structured decomposition with research subagents
+3. **Codebase Investigator** (v0.12+): JIT context discovery subagent
+4. **Context Compression** (v0.38+): Advanced conversation history distillation
+5. **Chapters Narrative** (v0.38+): Session grouping by intent (novel concept)
+6. **Policy Engine** (v0.18+): Pre-execution tool gates, persistent approvals
+7. **Subagents + Remote** (v0.32+): A2A protocol, generalist router
+8. **Event-Driven Hooks** (v0.27+): MessageBus architecture, queued confirmations
+9. **Four-Tier Memory** (v0.39+): Prompt-driven, /memory inbox
+10. **Multi-Registry** (v0.36+): Extensions, skills, MCP all registries
+11. **Browser Agent** (v0.31+): CDP access, persistent sessions
+12. **Model Routing** (v0.12+): Auto-select Flash vs Pro
+13. **Sandboxing Stack** (v0.34+): Docker, gVisor, LXC, Seatbelt
+14. **Git Worktrees** (v0.36+): Isolated parallel sessions
+15. **Extensions** (v0.8+): 20+ partners, A2A, SDK
+
+### Seven Integration Priorities (from First Principles)
+| P-F1 | Pre-Execution Policy Gates | Mechanical enforcement over documentation (FP #3) |
+| P-F2 | Skills Activation Mechanism | Progressive disclosure prevents context rot (FP #9) |
+| P-F3 | Research Subagents for L2 | Ask what capability is missing (FP #5) |
+| P-F4 | Event-Driven Hooks Middleware | Steering loop after every action (FP #10) |
+| P-F5 | Git Worktree Sessions | Give the agent isolated space (FP #6) |
+| P-F6 | Chapters Narrative for Sessions | A map not a manual (FP #7) |
+| P-F7 | Browser Agent for Visual Verif | Give the agent eyes (FP #6) |
+
+### First-Principles Synthesis
+**12 first principles synthesized** from Fowler (Feedforward+Feedback, Keep Quality Left), OpenAI (Visibility, Capability-Gap, Enforcement, Eyes, Map), LangChain (Progressive Disclosure, Model-Harness Independence, Filesystem as Universal Primitive), Augment (PEV Loop). See [[harness-engineering-first-principles]].
+
+### Benchmark Context
+Render benchmark (Aug 2025): Gemini CLI 6.8/10. **Context: 9/10 (best).** Excels at editing existing codebases, weak at greenfield. Validates our grounding-heavy approach.
+
+### Source Pages (8)
+[[Source: Google Gemini CLI Architecture Docs]], [[Source: Google Blog - Gemini CLI Announcement]], [[Source: Render AI Coding Agents Benchmark 2025]], [[Source: Martin Fowler - Harness Engineering]], [[Source: LangChain - Anatomy of Agent Harness]], [[Source: OpenAI Harness Engineering Five Principles]], [[Source: Augment - Harness Engineering for AI Coding Agents]], [[Source: Gemini CLI Changelogs]]
+
+### Concept Pages (4)
+[[harness-engineering-first-principles]], [[agent-skills-pattern]], [[policy-engine-pattern]], [[gemini-cli-architecture]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Gemini CLI SOTA Harness Integration]] — Full synthesis with 15 innovations, 7 integration priorities, gap analysis, contradictions, open questions.
+
+---
+
+## Codex Open-Source Architecture Research (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Codex (79.2K GitHub stars, open-source Apache 2.0, Rust 96.3%) independently validated 7 of our planned features and revealed 5 critical gaps.** Codex is uniquely valuable because its architecture is transparent (not reverse-engineered). Three novel architectural patterns challenge our first principles.
+
+### Seven Validations
+Model-adaptive (per-agent model selection), skills system (agentskills.io standard), lifecycle hooks (6 events, JSON I/O), subagent specialization (parallel dispatch + summary returns), pre-verification isolation (sandbox tiers), persistent memory (Memories + Chronicle), subagent worktree isolation (git worktrees).
+
+### Five Gaps → New Phases
+| P38 | OS-Level Sandbox Enforcement | bubblewrap/Seatbelt integration |
+| P39 | Harness as MCP Server | Expose pipeline stages as MCP tools |
+| P40 | Skills Ecosystem Tooling | `$skill-creator`, `$skill-installer`, agentskills.io |
+| P41 | Implicit Memory Capture | Chronicle-style screen-context capture |
+| P42 | Scheduled Agent Automations | cron-style recurring harness runs |
+
+### Three Novel Patterns
+1. **Multi-surface agent**: Single logic runs CLI+IDE+App+Web via App Server
+2. **Rust-native as first-principles**: Systems language for zero-dependency install + OS sandbox
+3. **Bidirectional MCP**: Codex IS an MCP server — agents can use Codex as a tool
+
+### New First Principles
+- FP #16: Sandbox = foundation, permissions = policy (not reverse). OS-level enforcement.
+- FP #17: Agent should be composable — consumer AND provider of tools (MCP server).
+- FP #18: Implicit memory complements explicit memory (Chronicle + wiki).
+
+### Source
+[[codex-open-source-agent-2026]] — GitHub repo + official docs
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Codex State-of-the-Art Harness Improvements]]
+
+---
+
+## Claude Code Architecture Research (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Claude Code (510K-line TypeScript, 82K+ GitHub stars) is the most sophisticated production agent harness analyzed.** Six gaps → phases P33-P37, four new first principles, three independent validations.
+
+### Six Gaps → New Phases
+| P33 | Lifecycle Hooks (30+ events, 100% compliance) | P34 | Structured Compaction (~85% reduction) | P35 | Permission Subsystem (7 modes) | P36 | Session Storage + Checkpoints | P37 | CLAUDE.md Entrypoint (96% compliance) |
+
+### Three Validations
+FP #1 (harness>model), model-adaptive harness, skills system.
+
+### Design Tensions
+Embeddings (P13) vs Agentic Search. Pipeline vs Loop.
+
+### Sources (4)
+[[claude-code-architecture-vila-lab-2026]], [[claude-code-architecture-qubytes-2026]], [[claude-code-architecture-karaxai-2026]], [[claude-code-security-architecture-penligent-2026]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Claude Code State-of-the-Art Harness Improvements]]
+
+---
+
+## Google Antigravity Harness Research (2026-05-01)
+
+## Google Antigravity Harness Research (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Google Antigravity's agent-first IDE independently validated 7 of our planned features and revealed 3 critical gaps.** Antigravity (launched Nov 2025, Windsurf $2.4B acq) is the first IDE built from ground up as a control plane for autonomous coding agents — not an AI plugin on an old editor.
+
+### SOTA Innovations Identified
+
+1. **Agent-First Dual-View Architecture**: Editor View + Manager View (mission control for multi-agent orchestration). Human shifts from coder to architect.
+2. **1M Token Context Window**: Ingests entire repos into active memory. No RAG needed. But expensive ($249.99/mo Ultra).
+3. **Browser Subagent**: Headless Chromium driver. Visual verification via screenshot pixel analysis. KILLER feature for UI work.
+4. **Artifact System**: Human-reviewable deliverables (screenshots, recordings, plans) replace raw tool logs. Google Docs-style async commenting.
+5. **Cross-Project Learning KB**: Agents save successful strategies across projects. Self-improvement as core primitive.
+6. **SKILL.md Progressive Disclosure**: Same pattern as our `.pi/skills/` system. Community ecosystem ported from Claude Code.
+7. **Four Design Tenets**: Trust (artifacts), Autonomy (multi-surface agent control), Feedback (async artifact comments), Self-Improvement (learning KB).
+
+### What Antigravity Validates from Our Plan
+- Model-adaptive harness (multi-model support matching task strengths)
+- Pre-verification isolation P15b (browser subagent visual verification)
+- Subagent specialization P25 (Manager View multi-agent orchestration)
+- Self-evolving harness F1 (cross-project learning KB)
+- Skills system F0 (identical progressive disclosure pattern)
+- Adversarial verification L4 (complementary: artifacts prove right, critic proves wrong)
+
+### New Phases Added
+| P30 | Browser Subagent | Headless browser for visual UI verification |
+| P31 | Artifact Generation Layer | Human-reviewable deliverables after L4 verification |
+| P32 | Cross-Project Learning KB | Multi-project knowledge transfer for agents |
+
+### Deliberate Non-Adoptions
+- 1M token context window (too expensive for CLI harness. Selective context is OUR advantage)
+- Full IDE integration (we are CLI-level harness)
+- Google Cloud lock-in (we stay platform-agnostic)
+- $249.99/mo pricing (our token budget optimization wins)
+
+### Sources
+[[google-antigravity-official-blog]], [[google-antigravity-wikipedia]], [[cursor-vs-antigravity-2026]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: Google Antigravity Harness Integration]] — Full synthesis with first-principles rethinking, gap analysis, contradictions.
+
+### Plan Updated
+[[harness-implementation-plan]] — New First Principle #11, Antigravity Validation section, P30-P32 phases, updated token budget.
+
+---
+
+## cursor.sh Harness Innovations (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Cursor's production harness ($1B ARR, 400M+ daily requests) independently validated 5 of our planned features** (model-adaptive, dynamic context, P27 context anxiety, F1 self-evolving, P10 fuzzy edits) and revealed **4 critical gaps** now incorporated: pre-verification isolation (P15b), positive loops (P28), error classification (P29), subagent specialization (P25 evolved).
+
+### Validations (Cursor confirmed our designs before we built them)
+- Model-adaptive harness: Cursor provisions different tool formats per model (patches vs string replace)
+- Dynamic context: Cursor removed static pre-loaded context in favor of agent-driven context discovery
+- Context anxiety: Cursor independently discovered models refusing work as context fills (validates our P27)
+- Self-evolving harness: Cursor's 90-min RL loop on user accept/reject data (validates our F1)
+- Edit quality bottleneck: Cursor's "Diff Problem" is their hardest engineering challenge (validates P10)
+
+### New Phases Added
+| P15b | Pre-Verification Isolation Sandbox | Shadow Workspace pattern: validate in isolated temp workspace before showing results |
+| P28 | Positive Agent Loop Hooks | Counterpart to drift monitor: keep agent running until DONE, not just stop when stuck |
+| P29 | Tool Error Classification | Per-tool per-model error types + anomaly detection baselines (enables self-healing) |
+| P25 | Subagent Specialization Router | Evolved from cost router: dispatch by task type (plan/edit/debug), fresh context per subagent |
+| P21 | Keep Rate + LLM-as-Judge | Extended L5 to track code persistence over time + semantic satisfaction signals |
+
+### First Principles from Cursor
+1. **Pre-verification > post-verification.** Validate before user sees failure. Shadow Workspace pattern.
+2. **Keep Rate > benchmark scores.** Fraction of agent code still in codebase after time intervals is ultimate metric.
+3. **Error classification enables self-healing.** Can't fix what you can't categorize. Cursor classifies every tool error.
+4. **Positive loops as important as negative loops.** Hooks that keep agent running are counterpart to drift detection.
+5. **Subagent specialization > cost routing.** Dispatch by capability, not just price.
+6. **Context anxiety is real and cross-model.** Prepare proactively.
+7. **Architectural control matters more than model access.** Our .pi/ tool interception is our "fork."
+
+### Sources (7)
+[[cursor-shadow-workspace-2024]], [[cursor-agent-best-practices-2026]], [[cursor-harness-april-2026]], [[cursor-shipped-coding-agent-2026]], [[cursor-instant-apply-2024]], [[cursor-fork-29b-2025]], [[cursor-harness-innovations]]
+
+### Synthesis
+[[Research: cursor.sh Harness Innovations]] — Full synthesis with gap analysis, contradictions, open questions.
+
+### Plan Updated
+[[harness-implementation-plan]] — New First Principles #8-10, Cursor Validation section, new/extended phases, updated token budget.
+
+---
+
+## Model-Specific Prompting Guides — Harness Redesign (2026-05-01)
+
+### Key Finding
+**Every major model provider publishes OFFICIAL prompting guidance.** The current harness design ("write once for strictest model, relax for forgiving") is WRONG. Each provider specifies fundamentally DIFFERENT prompting conventions — not different strictness levels.
+
+### Critical Contradictions Found
+- **Constraint ordering**: OpenAI says FIRST. Google says LAST. Can't reconcile in one format.
+- **Prompt density**: OpenAI (GPT-5.5+) says SHORTER, outcome-first. Harness generates verbose constraint-heavy prompts.
+- **Structure format**: Anthropic mandates XML tags. Google uses plain text. OpenAI uses XML-like sections.
+- **Temperature**: Google mandates 1.0. Others unspecified. Harness needs model-specific temp.
+- **Verification**: Google = split-step (verify→generate). Anthropic = self-check at end. OpenAI = verification loop.
+
+### Redesign: Provider-Native Prompting
+New module: **Prompt Renderer** (Phase P22b). Generates provider-native prompts from a semantic spec.
+
+```
+Semantic Spec → Prompt Renderer → Provider-Native Prompt
+                ├── openai-renderer (XML-like, constraints-first, preambles)
+                ├── anthropic-renderer (XML tags, long-content-top, role)
+                └── google-renderer (plain text, constraints-LAST, grounding)
+```
+
+### Pages Created/Updated
+- Created: [[openai-prompt-guidance]], [[anthropic-prompt-best-practices]], [[gemini-3-prompting-guide]] (sources)
+- Created: [[provider-native-prompting]] (concept)
+- Created: [[Research: Model-Specific Prompting Guides]] (synthesis)
+- Rewritten: [[model-adaptive-harness]] (v2 redesign — retired old principle)
+- Rewritten: [[harness-configuration-layers]] (added Gemini, provider-native dimensions)
+- Updated: [[index]], [[log]], [[hot]]
+
+### Provider Profiles (Summary)
+| Provider | Structure | Constraint Order | Verification | Thinking |
+|----------|-----------|-----------------|--------------|----------|
+| OpenAI | XML-like sections | FIRST | Pre-flight/post-flight loop | reasoning_effort |
+| Anthropic | XML tags | Flexible (top) | Self-check at end | effort + adaptive |
+| Google | Plain text | LAST | Split-step verify→generate | thinking level |
+
+## Augment Code Context Engine Research (2026-04-30)
+
+### Key Findings
+- Context Engine: semantic codebase indexing (1M+ files), real-time knowledge graph, not grep/ keyword.
+- #1 SWE-bench Pro (51.80%) — same model (Opus 4.5) beats Cursor by 1.59%, Claude Code by 2.05%.
+- #1 open-source SWE-bench Verified agent (65.4%) — dual-model: Claude Sonnet 3.7 + OpenAI o1 ensembler.
+- Prompt Enhancer: auto-enriches queries with codebase context before LLM sees them.
+- Context as MCP: launched Feb 2026 — 30-80% improvement when used as context provider for other agents.
+- "Contractor vs Employee" model: context is the bottleneck, not intelligence.
+
+### Integration Plan (6 Modules)
+1. **Semantic Codebase Indexer** — embeddings via sentence-transformers, LanceDB storage, tree-sitter chunking, watchdog sync.
+2. **Context Retrieval Engine** — hybrid BM25 + semantic search, multi-source (code + wiki + git + knowledge).
+3. **Prompt Enhancer** — pre-process queries, inject context, detect reuse opportunities.
+4. **MCP Context Server** — expose `query_codebase` tool, read-only.
+5. **Dual-Model Agent Loop** — primary model (Claude) for iteration + ensembler (GPT-5/o1) for selection.
+6. **Multi-Source Context Aggregator** — unify lean-ctx + semantic index + wiki + ctx_knowledge + git history.
+
+### Pages Created (15)
+Sources: [[Augment Context Engine Official]], [[Augment SWE-bench Agent GitHub]], [[Augment SWE-bench Pro Blog]], [[Augment Code WorkOS ERC 2025]], [[Augment Code Codacy AI Giants]], [[Augment Code MCP SiliconAngle]], [[Auggie Context MCP Server]]
+Concepts: [[Context Engine (AI Coding)]], [[Semantic Codebase Indexing]], [[Dual-Model Agent Architecture]], [[Prompt Enhancement]], [[Majority Vote Ensembling]], [[Contractor vs Employee AI Model]]
+Entity: [[Augment Code]]
+Synthesis: [[Research: Augment Code Context Engine]]
+
+### Open Questions → NOW RESOLVED (2026-04-30 follow-up research)
+- **Q1: Augment's embedding model & vector DB** — Still undisclosed. Inferred: likely custom variant of Voyage-code-3 / BGE-code-v1 / SFR-Embedding-Code fine-tuned on proprietary corpus. Vector DB candidates: Pinecone serverless, Weaviate, or custom sharded FAISS. See [[coir-code-retrieval-benchmark]] for top code embedding models.
+- **Q2: Chunking strategy & compression** — Resolved. State of the art is AST-aware chunking (cAST paper, June 2025) + contextualized text prepending. Chunking matters MORE than embedding model (Vectara NAACL 2025). Augment almost certainly uses this approach. See [[cast-code-chunking-paper]], [[AST-Aware Code Chunking]].
+- **Q3: MiniLM-L6-v2 vs larger models** — Resolved. MiniLM-L6-v2 is 5-8% less accurate than larger models (78.1% vs 86.2% top-5 on general text, gap wider for code). But gap can be partially closed by AST-aware chunking + contextualized text + hybrid search. Start with MiniLM + good chunking, upgrade to BGE-code-v1 if CoIR benchmark shows insufficient quality. See [[embedding-models-benchmark-supermemory-2025]], [[code-chunk-library-supermemory]].
+
+### New Sources (5)
+[[cast-code-chunking-paper]], [[vectara-chunking-vs-embedding-naacl2025]], [[coir-code-retrieval-benchmark]], [[code-chunk-library-supermemory]], [[embedding-models-benchmark-supermemory-2025]]
+
+### New Concepts (3)
+[[AST-Aware Code Chunking]], [[Contextualized Text Embedding]], [[Late Chunking vs Early Chunking]]
+
+### Remaining Open Questions
+- Real-time sync at scale (1M+ files) — implementation detail not available.
+- Context compression algorithm — black box.
+- Retrieval pipeline (candidate generation → re-ranking) — partial information only.
+- Empirical CoIR benchmark validation needed for our setup.
+
+---
+
+**46 open questions resolved across 6 themes — see [[resolved-context-pruning-inplace-vs-restart]] and 5 other resolution pages.**
+
+## Consensus-to-Wiki Filing Rule (2026-04-30)
+
+**Mandatory**: Winning consensus from any agent debate MUST be filed in `wiki/consensus/`. All 4 verdict types file (CONSENSUS_REACHED, DEADLOCK, BUDGET_EXHAUSTED, TIMEOUT). Purpose: permanent agent alignment — future agents query before forming positions, harness blocks contradictions.
+
+Updated: [[consensus-debate]], [[harness-implementation-plan]] (new First Principle #7, phase P19b, Consensus Filing Contract), [[adr-011]], [[selective-debate-routing]], [[harness]]. Created: [[consensus-records]] (directory + template).
+
+## Consolidation Summary (2026-04-30)
+
+**Completed**: Full first-principles consolidation of ALL April 2026 research into the harness pipeline.
+
+### New Pages Created
+
+- [[harness-control-frameworks]] — Unified view: H-Formalism + Feedforward-Feedback + Generator-Evaluator as orthogonal dimensions
+- [[drift-detection-unified]] — Three complementary drift paradigms (L2.5 tool-call, L3 spec, L4 implementation) with clear boundaries
+- [[think-in-code-enforcement]] — Formal L3 module for mandatory code-over-data paradigm with 3-layer enforcement architecture
+
+### Pages Significantly Updated
+
+- [[harness-implementation-plan]] — Complete rewrite: 27 properly-numbered build phases (P0-P27 + F1-F3 future), single authoritative token budget (~15K-16K/subtask), all tools/research integrated, proper phase-to-layer mapping
+- [[harness]] — Updated to reflect L2.5 drift monitor, cross-cutting tool enhancements, formal models, token budget
+- [[index]] — Full reorganization: harness pipeline section, formal models, concepts grouped by domain (execution/drift, context/search, agent architecture), all 30+ concepts listed
+- [[adr-011]] — Updated status to "accepted", integrated iMAD selective routing findings, revised token budget (always-debate ~13K → selective ~3K avg), pre-debate gating mechanism
+- [[model-adaptive-harness]] — Restructured as canonical entry point with pointer to [[harness-configuration-layers]] for detailed tables. Added Gemini column. Removed redundancy.
+
+### Duplication/Redundancy Resolved
+
+1. **Layer numbering**: Old Phase 1-19 numbering replaced with P0-P27 mapped to layers. L2.5 properly placed. Phase 12 no longer collides with layer L3.
+2. **Drift detection**: Three overlapping concepts (L3 grounding, L2.5 meta-agent, L4 adversarial) unified in [[drift-detection-unified]] with clear "why three" justification.
+3. **Token budget**: Scattered across 4+ pages → single table in [[harness-implementation-plan]].
+4. **Model profiles**: [[model-adaptive-harness]] and [[harness-configuration-layers]] de-duplicated — former is entry point, latter is detailed tables.
+5. **Control frameworks**: H-formalism, feedforward-feedback, generator-evaluator unified in [[harness-control-frameworks]] as orthogonal dimensions.
+6. **ADR-011 staleness**: Updated from always-debate to selective routing per iMAD findings.
+7. **Index freshness**: All ~30 concept pages now listed. Previously missing ~7.
+
+### New Tools in Pipeline
+
+| Tool | Phase | Status |
+|------|-------|--------|
+| ck (semantic code search) | P13 | Planned — MCP integration + 3-layer enforcement |
+| Gitingest (bulk ingestion) | P15 | Planned — `/gitingest` skill |
+| pi-messenger (stripped) | P17 | Planned — debate transport layer |
+| pi-lean-ctx (native) | F0 | Done — [[2026-04-30-pi-lean-ctx-native]] |
+
+### Key New Paradigms
+
+- **Think-in-Code enforcement** now has its own L3 module with 3-layer architecture (system prompt → interception → compression)
+- **Selective debate routing** (iMAD) reduces consensus debate cost by ~92% on high-confidence tasks
+- **Context drift as positive feedback loop** — each failed attempt accelerates failure. Meta-agent breaks the loop (detect → prune → restart).
+- **Three quality concerns, three timings**: Syntax (inline, blocks progress), Semantics (L4, needs LLM), Style (Phase 16 final gate, deterministic)
+
+### Token Budget (Unified, Per Subtask)
+
+- ~15,000-16,000 total pipeline overhead (down from ~17,500 baseline)
+- Savings: AST truncation (30-50%), fuzzy edits (5-15%), inline validation (10-20%), Haiku router (15-25%), selective debate (92% on ~80% tasks), Think-in-Code (30-200× on analysis)
+
+### Active Architecture
+
+```
+L1: Spec → L2: Plan → L2.5: Drift Monitor → L3: Execute (+TiC, +AST, +Fuzzy, +Inline, +ck, +Gitingest)
+  → L4: Adversarial (+selective debate) → Phase 16: Lint+Format → L5: Observe → L6: Memory → L7: Orch → L8: Query
+```
+
+Formal models: H=(E,T,C,S,L,V) + Feedforward-Feedback + Generator-Evaluator. All mapped to our pipeline in [[harness-control-frameworks]].
+
+### GitHub Issues as Harness Spec Storage (2026-04-30)
+
+Research: [[Research: GitHub Issues as Harness Spec Storage]] — GitHub Issues can serve as cloud-persistent spec storage with native sub-issues (parent-child hierarchies, April 2025) and issue dependencies (blocked-by/blocking).
+
+Key architecture: Dual-tier — local `.pi/harness/specs/<id>.json` for speed + GitHub Issue for cross-session ledger. Not every micro-step creates an issue; only major state transitions (spec creation, plan creation, phase completion).
+
+Toolchain: `gh issue create/edit/comment/list/view` for CRUD, `gh-sub-issue` extension (yahsan2, 110 stars, MIT) for parent-child management until `gh` CLI gains native support (cli/cli#10298). GitHub Projects v2 for optional kanban/roadmap visualization.
+
+Labels encode machine-readable state: `harness-spec`, `layer-{n}`, `status:{status}`. Issue comments serve as immutable execution audit trail.
+
+**Fork safety**: `.pi/harness/specs/` is gitignored — never committed, never forked. `ultimate-pi harness init` bootstraps a fork's own issue tracker (enable issues, create labels, set `gh` repo context). Zero upstream spec leakage into forks.
+
+Init flow: detect fork → enable issues → create labels → set repo → gitignore cache → ready. Idempotent re-runs are no-ops.
+
+**Content-addressed spec identity**: Every HardenedSpec carries a `SHA256(intent + criteria + done)` fingerprint embedded in the issue body (`<!-- spec-fp: <hash> -->`). Harness resolves specs by hash search across repos, not by brittle issue numbers. When fork merges upstream: `ultimate-pi harness migrate` transfers specs via `gh issue transfer` + relays labels. Idempotent. ~2-3 days to implement.