chore(template): widen idle-loop to Market Analyst + Competitive Intelligence (wave 2) - #321
Merged
Conversation
…lligence Rollout wave 2. Technical Researcher (wave 1, #216) has been the lone pilot since 2026-04-15. After 2+ days of debugging the auth chain (#285 builtin_tools, #304 a2a_tools — two different Python paths to the same endpoint, both needed the fix), the pilot fired a successful end-to-end dispatch at 2026-04-16 02:40 UTC: "Backlog item dispatched and cleared. Done in one A2A send. Step 1: Memory search found one..." Followed by correct idle-clean behavior at 03:00 and 03:10 once the seeded backlog was cleared: "Idle-clean. Backlog is empty, no new follow-ups to file." Pilot is validated. This PR widens the reflection-on-completion pattern to the other two researchers on Research Lead's team (same hierarchy as TR). ## Role-tuned idle_prompts Each of the 3 researchers gets a prompt that: - Searches its own `research-backlog:<role>` memory namespace - If found, delegates to Research Lead with a role-shaped spec (Market Analyst → TAM/pricing comparables; Competitive Intel → feature-parity/competitor track; Technical Researcher → framework eval) - If empty, reflects on last memory entry for role-specific follow-ups (filed as GH issues, then added to backlog for next tick) - If neither, writes "ma-idle" / "ci-idle" / "tr-idle" clean entry All three share: - 10-minute cadence (idle_interval_seconds: 600) - Max 1 A2A send per tick - Skip step 1 if Research Lead busy - Under 60s wall-clock budget ## Rollout so far - Wave 1 (#216, merged): Technical Researcher — pilot validated 2026-04-16 - **Wave 2 (this PR): Market Analyst + Competitive Intelligence** - Wave 3 (future): orchestrators / auditors if wave 2 looks good Not including leaders yet (PM, Dev Lead, Research Lead already have 5-min Orchestrator pulses from #159). Not including engineers (BE/FE/DevOps) — they're reactive-only per the orchestrator/worker split design. ## Related - #205 idle-loop mechanism (merged) - #216 Technical Researcher pilot (merged) - #285 + #304 auth chain fixes that unblocked the pilot - `project_north_star_24_7.md` memory — this is the "team runs 24/7" tick
Contributor
Author
✅ Dev Lead code review — APPROVEDCI: 6/6 ✅ — all checks green. Change reviewWave 2 idle-loop rollout — Market Analyst and Competitive Intelligence get the same reflection-on-completion pattern as Technical Researcher (validated at 02:40 UTC today). Pattern conformance ✅ — both prompts follow the established 3-step structure:
Memory namespacing ✅:
Guard clauses ✅ — both prompts include "Skip step 1 if Research Lead busy" to prevent delegation stacking. Delegate target ✅ — both route to Research Lead (not PM directly), correct for research hierarchy. Interval ✅ — Domain tuning ✅ — Market Analyst prompt specifies TAM/pricing/target-audience framing; Competitive Intelligence specifies feature-parity/pricing-shift/new-competitor framing. Not copy-paste — each prompt is calibrated to the role. Merge when ready. Wave 3 candidates (once wave 2 validates): consider DevOps and Security Auditor idle-loops for their 12h cron gaps. |
HongmingWang-Rabbit
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 16, 2026
…directive) CEO directive verbatim: *"devs should pick up issues and declare that its assigned to them, PM and leaders regularly check in. dont just rely on outside reviewer"*. Adds `idle_prompt` + `idle_interval_seconds: 600` to Frontend Engineer, Backend Engineer, and DevOps Engineer. Each engineer now polls open GH issues matching its specialty, claims unassigned ones via `gh issue edit --add-assignee @me`, leaves a public comment declaring the pickup, and commits memory to prevent double-pickup on the next tick. Previously engineers were reactive-only per the #159 orchestrator/worker split. The CEO is correcting that: devs should be a true self-organizing unit, not a work-queue that only advances when an outside reviewer dispatches. ## Per-role specialty filters | Role | Labels it claims | |---|---| | Frontend Engineer | canvas, a11y, ux, typescript, frontend, bug, security | | Backend Engineer | security, platform, go, database, bug | | DevOps Engineer | docker, ci, deployment, infra, devops, bug | Priority order within each role: security > bug > feature. ## Self-review gates Each engineer's idle_prompt includes the self-review chain: - Frontend: molecule-skill-code-review + molecule-skill-llm-judge - Backend: molecule-skill-code-review + molecule-security-scan + molecule-skill-llm-judge - DevOps: molecule-skill-code-review + molecule-freeze-scope + molecule-hitl for risky ops These plugins were wired into engineer roles by #280, #303, #310, #322 — the idle_prompt makes them the PRIMARY quality gate instead of a nice-to- have before PR. Matches the "team self-regulates, don't rely on outside reviewer" spirit. ## Hard rules (same shape as researcher idle_prompts from #216/#321) - Max 1 claim per tick (1 `gh issue edit --add-assignee` call) - Never take someone else's assigned issue - Under 90 seconds wall-clock for the claim + plan step - Don't double-pick: check `task-assigned:<role>` memory first - No busy-work fabrication: write "<role>-idle HH:MM — no work" if nothing matches ## What this does NOT change - Leaders' orchestrator pulses still dispatch (#159) — this is the TAIL pickup, not the primary dispatch path. Dev Lead still prioritizes via its own pulse. - PR merging still goes through reviewer per `feedback_never_merge_prs.md`. This directive is about the QUALITY GATE (team self-review, peer review via Dev Lead's pulse) not about bypassing merge approval. - Destructive/irreversible ops still need explicit human ack via molecule-hitl's @requires_approval decorator. ## Rollout plan - Ship template change (this PR) - After merge: rebuild workspace-template:claude-code, re-provision BE + FE + DevOps via apply_template=true, re-inject idle_prompt (platform doesn't auto-propagate org.yaml to live configs — tracked separately) - Measure: 24h of activity_logs. Should see `a2a_receive` events every 10 min per engineer, response bodies mentioning claim decisions or idle-clean states, and `gh issue edit` events showing up as assignees. ## Related - `feedback_devs_pick_up_issues_leaders_check_in.md` — memory saved last cycle - #159 orchestrator/worker split (leaders dispatch) - #216 / #321 researcher idle_prompts (same pattern applied to researchers) - `project_north_star_24_7.md` — team self-regulation is the north-star
molecule-ai Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 21, 2026
…directive) CEO directive verbatim: *"devs should pick up issues and declare that its assigned to them, PM and leaders regularly check in. dont just rely on outside reviewer"*. Adds `idle_prompt` + `idle_interval_seconds: 600` to Frontend Engineer, Backend Engineer, and DevOps Engineer. Each engineer now polls open GH issues matching its specialty, claims unassigned ones via `gh issue edit --add-assignee @me`, leaves a public comment declaring the pickup, and commits memory to prevent double-pickup on the next tick. Previously engineers were reactive-only per the #159 orchestrator/worker split. The CEO is correcting that: devs should be a true self-organizing unit, not a work-queue that only advances when an outside reviewer dispatches. ## Per-role specialty filters | Role | Labels it claims | |---|---| | Frontend Engineer | canvas, a11y, ux, typescript, frontend, bug, security | | Backend Engineer | security, platform, go, database, bug | | DevOps Engineer | docker, ci, deployment, infra, devops, bug | Priority order within each role: security > bug > feature. ## Self-review gates Each engineer's idle_prompt includes the self-review chain: - Frontend: molecule-skill-code-review + molecule-skill-llm-judge - Backend: molecule-skill-code-review + molecule-security-scan + molecule-skill-llm-judge - DevOps: molecule-skill-code-review + molecule-freeze-scope + molecule-hitl for risky ops These plugins were wired into engineer roles by #280, #303, #310, #322 — the idle_prompt makes them the PRIMARY quality gate instead of a nice-to- have before PR. Matches the "team self-regulates, don't rely on outside reviewer" spirit. ## Hard rules (same shape as researcher idle_prompts from #216/#321) - Max 1 claim per tick (1 `gh issue edit --add-assignee` call) - Never take someone else's assigned issue - Under 90 seconds wall-clock for the claim + plan step - Don't double-pick: check `task-assigned:<role>` memory first - No busy-work fabrication: write "<role>-idle HH:MM — no work" if nothing matches ## What this does NOT change - Leaders' orchestrator pulses still dispatch (#159) — this is the TAIL pickup, not the primary dispatch path. Dev Lead still prioritizes via its own pulse. - PR merging still goes through reviewer per `feedback_never_merge_prs.md`. This directive is about the QUALITY GATE (team self-review, peer review via Dev Lead's pulse) not about bypassing merge approval. - Destructive/irreversible ops still need explicit human ack via molecule-hitl's @requires_approval decorator. ## Rollout plan - Ship template change (this PR) - After merge: rebuild workspace-template:claude-code, re-provision BE + FE + DevOps via apply_template=true, re-inject idle_prompt (platform doesn't auto-propagate org.yaml to live configs — tracked separately) - Measure: 24h of activity_logs. Should see `a2a_receive` events every 10 min per engineer, response bodies mentioning claim decisions or idle-clean states, and `gh issue edit` events showing up as assignees. ## Related - `feedback_devs_pick_up_issues_leaders_check_in.md` — memory saved last cycle - #159 orchestrator/worker split (leaders dispatch) - #216 / #321 researcher idle_prompts (same pattern applied to researchers) - `project_north_star_24_7.md` — team self-regulation is the north-star
2 tasks
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Pilot validated — widening
Technical Researcher (wave 1, #216) fired its first successful end-to-end idle-loop dispatch at 2026-04-16 02:40 UTC after the #285 + #304 auth chain finally landed (two separate Python paths to the same endpoint, both needed the fix).
TR response body at that tick:
Followed by correct idle-clean behavior once the seeded backlog was consumed.
Pilot is validated. Time to widen.
What this PR does
Adds role-tuned
idle_prompt+idle_interval_seconds: 600to Market Analyst and Competitive Intelligence (both sit under Research Lead, same level as TR).Each gets a prompt that:
research-backlog:<role>namespace<role>-idle HH:MM — cleanif neither produced workAll 3 share: 10-min cadence, max 1 A2A per tick, skip step 1 if Research Lead busy, <60s wall-clock budget.
Rollout scoreboard
Not including leaders (PM, Dev Lead, Research Lead already have 5-min Orchestrator pulses from #159). Not including engineers (reactive-only per orchestrator/worker split).
Related
project_north_star_24_7.md— this is the "team runs 24/7" lever in action