feat(specify): record in-context fork resolutions as auditable issue comments
The `spec-skeptic` `scope-fork` juror reads only the seeding issue plus the spec. On the legitimate `specify` direct-entry path — a fork settled in a long in-context design discussion — that resolution lives only in ephemeral chat the juror cannot replay. When the issue body lags the discussion (still lists the fork open), the juror correctly blocks, and a design BLOCK escalates without self-correction. The result: auto-sign was structurally almost unreachable for the in-context entry path. Close the blind spot by giving the juror an auditable source instead of weakening the gate. When `specify` enters in-context and a tracker issue still lists a now-resolved fork as open, the orchestrator posts a reconciliation comment recording each fork's resolution WITH provenance (a record of the user's decision, never a fresh orchestrator one) before writing the spec. The comment is persistent and audit-able — unlike a carrier digest — so it, not the orchestrator's confidence, is what the juror checks. Separation of powers keeps it honest: the orchestrator writes the comment, the adversarial juror enforces the provenance requirement. A bare `decision: X` with no provenance does not resolve the fork — the re-dispatched juror blocks on it. The escalation rule and the three-field carrier are untouched; only the juror's information changes. Mechanics: - specify Step 1.5: reconciliation-comment sub-step, provenance format, issue-less fallback (auto-sign -> human sign-off, no weak spec-note). - spec-skeptic: replace the "quoted in the dispatch" drift; juror reads the issue WITH comments via `issue_tracker.show_cmd`; provenance check. - new profile slot `issue_tracker.show_cmd` (must render comments); documented in schema + template. - issue skill: `tea issues <idx>` is body-only; `--comments` required (verified against tea 0.14.1 and Aura #55 — 180 vs 144 lines). - consistency: design.md out-of-scope, README, pipeline.md, boss skill.
This commit is contained in:
+5
-1
@@ -113,7 +113,11 @@ signs. A `BLOCK` is never signed over: an editorial one (`criterion` /
|
||||
`ambiguity` / `plan-readiness`) is repaired in a bounded ≤ 2-round loop
|
||||
that re-runs the objective gates and re-dispatches all five lenses each
|
||||
round; a design one (`scope-fork` / `grounding`), an `INFRA_ERROR`, or
|
||||
an exhausted budget falls back to the human sign-off pause. See
|
||||
an exhausted budget falls back to the human sign-off pause. When the
|
||||
entry is in-context and the seeding issue still lists a now-resolved
|
||||
fork as open, `specify` posts a provenance-bearing reconciliation
|
||||
comment on the issue (Step 1.5) so the `scope-fork` juror can ratify the
|
||||
resolution instead of blocking on the stale body. See
|
||||
`../specify/SKILL.md` Step 6 and `../boss/SKILL.md` §"Spec auto-sign".
|
||||
|
||||
### planner
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user