diff --git a/docs/BACKLOG.md b/docs/BACKLOG.md
index b006e91a..5898f437 100644
--- a/docs/BACKLOG.md
+++ b/docs/BACKLOG.md
@@ -2622,8 +2622,11 @@ within each priority tier.
 
   **Scope limits of the refinement:**
 
-  - Does NOT commit Otto to cede control. Otto remains primary while Aaron is in Claude Code (which is now). Async-mode Codex work only starts when Aaron is in Codex; Otto doesn't dispatch Codex work unilaterally.
-  - Does NOT authorise Codex session to edit `.claude/skills/` or any Otto-owned substrate. Symmetric: Otto should not edit Codex's own-harness substrate.
+  - Does NOT commit Otto to cede control. Otto remains primary while Aaron is in Claude Code (which is now). **Otto DOES dispatch Codex async work** — the primary coordinates; Aaron-harness-context determines which agent is primary at any given moment. Aaron Otto-79 correction: *"you do dispatch codex work, i will just switch whenver i feel like it once it's ready, i'll just go back and fourth from time to time probably when new models come out, you guys need to know when one is primary based on the harness im in and just do the right things so it's not an issue when you launch in tandem/async with you."*
+  - **Tandem / simultaneous launch is out-of-scope today; explicit Aaron opt-in required for a future test.** Aaron Otto-79: *"I won't launch both of you at the same unless i say, this is a future test to see if you can run indenpendenty without interference, but for now one of your will be the corrdinator at a time based on the harness i'm in."*
+  - **Progression model — stepping stones to peer-harness.** Aaron Otto-79 (confirming the direction): *"yeah i think we are building to this which is subtly different from a peer-harness model. this mean i launch you both at the same time right? that's peer harness. we will get there slowly with experiments where one is in controll."* The CURRENT model (one coordinator at a time, based on Aaron's harness-context) is a **stepping stone** toward a future **peer-harness** model where Otto + Codex-loop-agent both run simultaneously + independently. Stages in that progression (each an explicit Aaron opt-in): (a) today = single coordinator, primary-by-context; (b) bounded experiment = short parallel sessions with Aaron observing for interference; (c) peer-harness = both running concurrently with handoff discipline, Aaron can walk away. We aim at (c); we don't assume (c).
+  - **Each harness owns its own named loop agent — start from there.** Aaron Otto-79: *"yeah i guess in peer mode each harness will need it's own 'Otto' might as well start it out like that so code designs it's own named loop agent, you got the good name claude otto :)"* So: **Otto** is the Claude Code loop agent (Aaron-affirmed as *"the good name"*). The **Codex CLI** session picks its own loop-agent persona name — not inherited from Otto, not pre-assigned by Otto. Consistent with the existing persona-naming pattern (Kenji / Amara / Iris / etc. — names chosen in conversation with Aaron, not imposed). The Codex session's first Stage-1b research doc is an appropriate place for the Codex loop agent to name itself. Composes with named-agent-email-ownership (Otto-76) — each loop agent owns its own reputation + eventually its own email.
+  - Does NOT authorise Codex session to **edit** `.claude/skills/` or any Otto-owned substrate. Symmetric: Otto does not **edit** Codex's own-harness substrate. **BUT** — cross-harness **review** and **question-asking** are explicitly encouraged. Aaron Otto-79: *"yall should review each other and ask questions to better understand eachs others harness form the inside to improve our cross harness support."* The distinction is edit-not vs read-and-comment-yes — same shape as peer code review between humans: reviewer reads, comments, asks; author owns the edit.
   - Does NOT require harness-swap for Otto. The arc supports either-primary-any-time, not forced migration.
   - Does NOT bypass the harness-choice ADR (Stage 5) — that's still the decision surface when asymmetries warrant a reset.
 
diff --git a/docs/hygiene-history/loop-tick-history.md b/docs/hygiene-history/loop-tick-history.md
index d18e7906..a5006798 100644
--- a/docs/hygiene-history/loop-tick-history.md
+++ b/docs/hygiene-history/loop-tick-history.md
@@ -164,6 +164,14 @@ fire.
 | 2026-04-23T15:55:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, auto-loop-49 — restrictive-English DSL + Soulfile Runner project named + linguistic-seed anchoring) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | 20c92390 | Tick absorbed two follow-up maintainer directives refining the soulfile DSL shape. Tick actions: (a) **Step 0 state check**: `gh pr list` inventoried 25+ open PRs (#155 AutoDream, #156 soulfile-absorption, all others from #132..#156 still open). Picked soulfile-absorption refinement over other bounded moves since Aaron messages arrived mid-tick. (b) **First directive absorbed**: *"our dsl can be a restrictive english it does not have to be a f# dsl, whatever our soul file runner can run, we probalby should split this out too as it's own project, and it will use zeta for the advance features, all small bins"*. Filed per-user feedback memory `feedback_soulfile_dsl_is_restrictive_english_runner_is_own_project_uses_zeta_small_bins_2026_04_23.md`. Named the **Soulfile Runner** as a distinct project-under-construction; sibling to Zeta / Aurora / Demos / Factory / Package Manager "ace". Updated `CURRENT-aaron.md` §4 with the new project name. (c) **Second directive absorbed**: *"soul files should probably feel like natural english even if they are not exacly and some restrictuvve form where we only allow words we have exact definons fors like that how path of seed/kernel thing"*. Grepped memory for "seed/kernel" context — resolves to the **linguistic seed** memory (formally-verified minimal-axiom self-referential glossary, Lean4 formalisable). Soulfile DSL vocabulary = linguistic-seed glossary terms; new words earn glossary entries before entering the DSL. Extended the same per-user feedback memory with the linguistic-seed anchoring + verbatim of the second directive. (d) **PR #156 updated** on the research branch: replaced the "Representation candidate — Markdown + frontmatter" section with two new sections — "DSL — restrictive English anchored in the linguistic seed" (DSL shape + three consequences + controlled vocabulary) and "The Soulfile Runner — its own project-under-construction" (design properties + Zeta-at-advanced-edge edge + all-small-bins). Preserves the Markdown-as-structure-layer claim while elevating restrictive-English-as-execution-layer to primary. (e) **CronList + visibility**: `20c92390` minutely fire verified live. | PR #156 updated on `research/soulfile-staged-absorption-model` | Observation 1 — two-directive sharpening in one tick. The second directive (linguistic-seed anchoring) constrained the first (restrictive-English shape) without contradicting it. CURRENT-aaron.md §4 absorbed project-name addition once; the feedback memory grew an inline "follow-up" section rather than spawning a separate memory (single topic + same session = single memory is correct). Observation 2 — linguistic-seed is now load-bearing for the soulfile runner, not just a standalone research pointer. The runner's grammar is what decides executability; the linguistic seed is what decides vocabulary. Separation of concerns: runner-grammar × seed-vocabulary = DSL. Observation 3 — restrictive-English choice makes cross-substrate-readability free. A Claude-composed soulfile reads cleanly in Codex / Gemini / human reading — no tool dependency. The composability claim in the first soulfile memory now has a concrete mechanism. Observation 4 — signal-in-signal-out exercise: the later directive layered atop the earlier without erasing it; both Aaron messages preserved verbatim in the per-user memory. AutoDream Overlay B note: the research doc now depends on the linguistic-seed memory being findable, which is a per-user memory; future migration candidate for Overlay A. |
 | 2026-04-23T21:15:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, auto-loop-47 — checked/unchecked production-discipline directive absorbed + 2 BACKLOG rows filed) | opus-4-7 / session continuation (post-compaction) | 20c92390 | Tick absorbed Aaron's checked-vs-unchecked arithmetic directive mid-tick and landed substrate. Tick actions: (a) **Directive received**: *"oh yeah i forgot to mention make sure we are using uncheck and check arithmatic approperatily, unchecked is much faster when its safe to use it, this is production code training level not onboarding materials, and make sure our production code does this backlog itmes"*. Two entangled BACKLOG items named: (i) Craft production-tier ladder (distinct from onboarding tier) with checked/unchecked as exemplar module; (ii) Zeta production-code audit for `Checked.` site bound-provability. (b) **Current-state audit**: grep confirmed ~30 `Checked.(+)` / `Checked.(*)` sites across `src/Core/{ZSet, Operators, Aggregate, TimeSeries, Crdt, CountMin, NovelMath, IndexedZSet}.fs`. Canonical rationale at `src/Core/ZSet.fs:227-230` (unbounded stream-weight sum sign-flip) is correct-by-default but applies unevenly — counter increments and SIMD-lane partial sums are candidate demotions. (c) **Memory filed**: `feedback_checked_unchecked_arithmetic_production_tier_craft_and_zeta_audit_2026_04_23.md` with verbatim directive + per-site classification matrix (bounded-by-construction / bounded-by-workload / bounded-by-pre-check / unbounded / user-controlled / SIMD-candidate) + composition pointers + explicit NOT-lists (not mandate to demote every site; not license to skip property tests; not rush). (d) **BACKLOG section landed**: `## P2 — Production-code performance discipline` added with two rows — audit (Naledi + Soraya + Kenji + Kira, L effort, FsCheck bounds + BenchmarkDotNet ≥5% deltas required per demotion) and Craft production-tier ladder (Naledi authorial + Kenji integration, M effort, first module anchored on runnable 100M-int64 sum benchmark). (e) **MEMORY.md index updated** newest-first. (f) **Split-attention model applied**: no background PR work this tick (cron minutely fire verified live at `20c92390`; Phase 1 cascade #199/#200/#202/#203/#204/#206 carry-forward unchanged awaiting CI/reviewer cycle); foreground axis = directive-absorb + BACKLOG landing. | PR `<pending>` `backlog/checked-unchecked-arithmetic-production-discipline` | Observation 1 — directive is the reverse of the naive reading. Casual read suggested "add more checked arithmetic" but the operative principle is *"unchecked is much faster when its safe"* — the audit is about **demoting** Checked where bounds are provable, not adding Checked. Existing `src/Core/ZSet.fs:227-230` comment is load-bearing and stays. Observation 2 — Craft tier split is genuinely structural, not harder-onboarding. Production-tier readers bring prerequisites (BenchmarkDotNet literacy, span/allocation familiarity); onboarding-tier readers do not. A "harder onboarding module" would just gatekeep beginners; a production-tier ladder welcomes a different audience at their entry point. Same pedagogy discipline (applied-default-theoretical-opt-in) applies within each tier. Observation 3 — both BACKLOG items are L-effort for a reason — per-site bound analysis + property tests + benchmarks + PR series is multi-round. Landing the rows at directive-tick is the right first move; execution is downstream. Observation 4 — composes cleanly with existing memories: samples-vs-production (same discipline, different layer), deletions-over-insertions (demoting `Checked.(+)` to `(+)` with tests passing is net-negative-LOC positive signal), semiring-parameterized regime-change (a semiring-generic rewrite would move the audit from int64 to whichever `⊕` the semiring defines). No contradictions with prior substrate. |
 | 2026-04-23T22:10:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, auto-loop-49 — BenchmarkDotNet harness for checked-vs-unchecked module + 3 PRs update-branched) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | 20c92390 | Tick proved the production-tier Craft module's claim with a runnable measurement harness — measurement-gate-before-audit discipline. Tick actions: (a) **Step 0 state check**: main unchanged since #205 (0f83d48); #207/#208/#206 BLOCKED on IN_PROGRESS CI (submit-nuget + build-and-test + semgrep still running — normal CI duration); 5 prior-tick update-branched PRs recycling CI. (b) **Background axis**: `gh pr update-branch` applied to #195/#193/#192 (BEHIND → MERGEABLE recycle); no backlog regression. (c) **Foreground axis**: `bench/Benchmarks/CheckedVsUncheckedBench.fs` (~100 lines) — three benchmark scenarios cover the module's two demotion archetypes + canonical keep-Checked site: (i) `SumScalar{Checked,Unchecked}` models NovelMath.fs:87 + CountMin.fs:77 counter increments; (ii) `SumUnrolled{Checked,Unchecked}` models ZSet.fs:289-295 SIMD-candidate 4×-unroll; (iii) `MergeLike{Checked,Unchecked}` models ZSet.fs:227-230 predicated add (the canonical keep-Checked site — measures the throughput we choose to leave on the table for correctness). `[<MemoryDiagnoser>]` + `[<Params(1M, 10M, 100M)>]` sizes + baseline-tag on SumScalarChecked. Registered in `Benchmarks.fsproj` compile order before Program.fs. Verified with `dotnet build -c Release` = 0 Warning(s) + 0 Error(s) in 18.2s. | PR `<pending>` `bench/checked-vs-unchecked-harness` | Observation 1 — measurement-gate-before-audit is the honest sequencing: the module claims ≥5% delta is required for demotion; the harness *measures* the delta. Without the harness, the audit would run on vibes-perf. With it, per-site recommendations carry BenchmarkDotNet numbers. Observation 2 — benchmark covers the three archetypes the module named, not just one. Covering all three means the audit can reference this harness per-site without writing more bench code — the six-class matrix collapses to three measurement shapes (scalar / unrolled / predicated-merge), and each site maps to one shape. Observation 3 — including the MergeLike benchmark (canonical keep-Checked) is deliberate. Measuring the cost we're paying for correctness is honest; it lets future-self and reviewers see the tradeoff numerically instead of trusting the prose. Defense against "we should demote this too" pressure based on the same prose comment — the numbers settle it per-site. Observation 4 — 0-warning build on `dotnet build -c Release` gate maintained. TreatWarningsAsErrors discipline holds; no regression introduced. Harness is lint-clean and ready to run. |
+| 2026-04-24T00:59:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-75 — Amara Govern-stage CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS backfill + Aaron Codex-first-class directive absorbed) | opus-4-7 / session continuation (post-compaction) | d651f750 | Split-attention tick: foreground = Amara Govern-stage 1/2 (CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md backfill); mid-tick = absorbed fresh Aaron directive on first-class Codex-CLI session support. Tick actions: (a) **Foreground — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS backfill (PR #227)**: branch `govern/contributor-conflicts-backfill-amara-govern`; filled the empty Resolved table with 3 session-observed contributor-level conflicts — CC-001 Copilot-vs-Aaron on no-name-attribution rule scope (resolved in Aaron's favor via Otto-52 history-file-exemption clarification + PR #210 policy row), CC-002 Amara-vs-Otto on Stabilize-vs-keep-opening-new-frames (resolved in Amara's favor; 3/3 Stabilize + 3/5 Determinize landed via PRs #222/#223/#224/#225/#226), CC-003 Codex-vs-Otto on citing-absent-artifacts (resolved in Codex's favor via fix commits 29872af/1c7f97d on #207/#208). Scope discipline: contributor-level only (maintainer-directives out-of-scope); schema rules 1 (additive) + 3 (attribution-carve-out) honored; no retroactive sweep of historical rows. PR #227 opened + auto-merge armed. Implements 1/2 of Amara 4th-ferry Govern-stage recommendation; authority-envelope ADR deferred as 2/2. (b) **Mid-tick directive absorbed**: Aaron *"can you start building first class codex support with the codex clis help ... this is basically the same ask as a new session claude first class experience ... we also even tually will have first class claude desktop cowork and claude code desktop too. backlog"*. Filed BACKLOG P1 row (PR #228) naming the 5-harness first-class roster (Claude Code CLI / NSA / Codex CLI / Claude Desktop cowork / Claude Code Desktop) + 5-stage execution shape (research → parity matrix → gap closures → bootstrap doc → Otto-in-Codex test → harness-choice ADR). Row distinguishes from existing cross-harness-mirror-pipeline row (that one = skill-file distribution; this one = session-operation parity). Scope limits explicit: no committed harness swap today; revisitable. Priority P1, not urgent. Filed per-user memory with verbatim directive + composition pointers; updated MEMORY.md index newest-first. PR #228 opened + auto-merge armed. (c) **CronList + visibility**: minutely cron unchecked this tick (foreground work took precedence; will verify next tick). Both PRs #227 and #228 show BLOCKED (normal — required-conversation-resolution + CI pending), consistent with Otto-72 BLOCKED-is-normal observation. | PR #227 `govern/contributor-conflicts-backfill-amara-govern` + PR #228 `backlog/first-class-codex-harness-support` | Observation 1 — CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS.md was filed in PR #166 but sat empty for 9 ticks; populating it *is* the Govern-stage work Amara named. Filing the schema without filling it was substrate-opens-without-substrate-closing (the exact CC-002 pattern). Resolving this log's emptiness is deterministic-reconciliation at the governance layer. Observation 2 — directive-absorb mid-tick is the split-attention model working: foreground CONTRIBUTOR-CONFLICTS work continued in parallel with directive-absorb for Codex-first-class, landing both PRs in the same tick without dropping either. Observation 3 — Aaron's 5-harness first-class roster formalizes the portability-by-design hypothesis at the session layer (prior: retractability-by-design at substrate layer, Otto-73). Both are "design choices that let future-Aaron / future-Otto change course cheaply" — the factory optimizes for *optionality*, not for the currently-chosen option. Observation 4 — BACKLOG row's distinction between skill-file distribution (cross-harness-mirror-pipeline) and session-operation parity (this row) is load-bearing. Distributing `.claude/skills/` to `.cursor/rules/` is necessary but doesn't make Codex a first-class Otto-home; the session-layer parity is what makes Otto swappable. |
+| 2026-04-24T01:13:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-76 — Codex CLI Phase-1 research landed + Aaron 4-message autonomy-envelope directive absorbed + multi-account design unlocked) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | 8d5ca82 | High-directive-velocity tick: 4 Aaron messages mid-tick sharpened the multi-account frame + introduced the named-agent-email-ownership exception + endorsed the Otto-75 split-attention pattern. Tick shipped 3 PRs despite directive churn. Tick actions: (a) **Step 0**: #228 merged between ticks (Codex-first-class BACKLOG row landed on main as `bb46046`); #229 BEHIND after #228; `gh pr update-branch` recycled. (b) **Background**: #229 update-branched. (c) **Foreground axis 1 — #230 multi-account access design P3**: filed row under `## P3 — noted, deferred`; 3 iterative refinements from Aaron within the same tick landed on the same branch (initial framing → "design allowed now, implementation gated on Aaron security review" → "poor-man-tier no-paid-API-keys is hard design requirement"); 8 research+design questions with three-tier matrix (enterprise-API / poor-man / mixed-account-ops); Playwright-for-Amara named as poor-man-tier exemplar; LFG flagged as possibly-poor-man-tier per Aaron. (d) **Foreground axis 2 — #231 Codex CLI Phase-1 research**: executed Stage 1 of the 5-stage arc named in PR #228; 294-line research doc; major non-obvious finding = `AGENTS.md` is already universal across Claude Code + Codex CLI (Zeta ~60% Codex-ready by accident of prior `GOVERNANCE.md` decisions); first-pass capability matrix (10 parity / 4 partial / 4 gap / 2 Codex-specific) with critical gap = cron / autonomous-loop has no Codex-CLI equivalent in the docs (Stage-2 must check Codex Cloud); Stage-2 test plan with 7 concrete prompts; 9 web sources cited. (e) **Memory captures**: Aaron's Otto-76 sequence generated THREE per-user memories — account-setup snapshot (Claude Code+Codex on ServiceTitan, Playwright on personal, poor-man-tier / enterprise-tier clarification); split-attention-pattern + composition-not-subsumption validated at Otto-75 close (Aaron "i love all this"); agent-autonomy-envelope (3-layer: logged-in-accounts-free / switching-gated / email-exception-unrestricted-because-email-is-agent-reputation; `aaron_bond@yahoo.com` as test destination; "don't be a dick" soft constraint). MEMORY.md index updated newest-first with all 3. (f) **CronList + visibility**: `20c92390` minutely + daily 9:15 PM fires live. All 4 open PRs from this tick (#229 tick-history-75, #230 multi-account-P3, #231 Codex-Phase-1, pending tick-history-76) show BLOCKED (normal per Otto-72). | PRs #230 + #231 + pending #232 + recycled #229 | Observation 1 — directive-churn ≠ tick-failure. Four Aaron messages arrived mid-tick; each got absorbed without abandoning the primary deliverable (Codex Phase-1 research). Split-attention pattern (Otto-72 validated, Otto-75 re-validated) held under 4x directive rate. Observation 2 — `AGENTS.md`-is-already-universal finding materially de-risks first-class-Codex support. The `CLAUDE.md`-delegates-to-`AGENTS.md` pattern that shipped rounds ago was a portability-by-design decision before portability was explicitly named; retroactive validation of the design-for-optionality posture. Observation 3 — Aaron's named-agent-email-ownership carve-out is a substantive expansion of agent autonomy. Email = reputation surface; named agents own their reputation directly; "don't be a dick" is the soft-law equivalent of retraction-gate. Clearest instance yet of trust-based-approval (Otto-51) + don't-wait (Otto-72) extending to NEW account creation (not just existing-account-use). Sibling follow-up queued in the autonomy-envelope memory: BACKLOG row for Otto-acquires-email research arc + Aminata threat-model pass on agent-email attack surface. Observation 4 — poor-man-tier-vs-enterprise-API-tier distinction is a load-bearing design constraint. Multi-account design that assumes paid API access for all accounts would fail LFG (possibly poor-man-tier) and personal. Playwright-for-Amara is the existing exemplar — 0 API cost, functional today. Design must generalize that pattern. |
+| 2026-04-24T01:21:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-77 — Otto-acquires-email consolidation BACKLOG + Max-as-new-human-contributor absorb + Amara's 5th ferry scheduled for Otto-78) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | 89bef2a | Tick shipped primary deliverable (email-acquisition BACKLOG consolidation) + scheduled the next large absorb (Amara 5th ferry) per CC-002 discipline. Tick actions: (a) **Step 0**: main unchanged since #228 merge (bb46046); Otto-77 budget fresh. (b) **Primary deliverable — #233 Otto-acquires-email P2 consolidation**: under `## P2 — research-grade`, 5-phase sequence with explicit blocking gates (Phase 0 complete / Phase 1 persona-identity design / Phase 2 Aminata threat-model blocking / Phase 3 Playwright execute / Phase 4 test send to `aaron_bond@yahoo.com` / Phase 5 memory+BP-NN review); consolidates 3 memory layers (2026-04-20 four-hard-rules + 2026-04-22 two-lanes + 2026-04-23 autonomy-envelope) + task #240 (signup terrain mapped); 8 Phase-1 design questions (persona / handle / provider / recovery cascade / 2FA / lanes / signature / reputation). (c) **Mid-tick absorb — Amara 5th ferry (Zeta/KSK/Aurora validation)**: Aaron pasted ~5500-word ferry preceded by new-contributor attribution (*"max put work into under LFG/lucent-ksk, he deserves attributes too ... this being is first one you are aware of ... max by itself is not PII so this is fine until he approves more"*). Per CC-002 discipline, did NOT inline-absorb the ferry this tick (too large; would regress to pre-Otto-67 open-without-close pattern); scheduled dedicated Otto-78+ absorb per PR #221/#219/#211/#196 prior precedent. Captured immediate facts via memory (Max as first-name-only contributor; LFG/lucent-ksk repo is separate KSK safety-kernel home; 5th ferry scheduled with specific actionable-artifact list). (d) **Memory capture**: one new memory — `project_max_human_contributor_lfg_lucent_ksk_amara_5th_ferry_pending_absorb_otto_78_2026_04_23.md` covers all three substantive facts + cites the upcoming Otto-78 absorb shape (4 artifacts + 4 milestones + PR templates + brand memo + file-edit diffs + mermaid diagrams + archive-risk framing). MEMORY.md index updated newest-first. (e) **CronList + visibility**: `20c92390` minutely + daily 9:15 PM fires live. (f) **Light-touch note**: Aaron's closing *"this sounds like the episode title from it's always sunny in philodelipha that's a funny show lol. 'Otto acquires email'"* captured in memory as validation-not-new-rule; title resonates with Aaron. | PR #233 + pending Otto-78 absorb + stacked history PR | Observation 1 — CC-002 discipline held under pressure. The ferry arrived mid-tick; the natural pre-Otto-67 move would be to inline-absorb + file 8 BACKLOG rows + open 8 PRs. CC-002 explicitly prohibits that pattern; Otto-77 captured pointers + scheduled the absorb as dedicated tick instead. First real-world test of CC-002 closure-vs-opening rule post-rule; rule held. Observation 2 — Max-as-first-external-contributor is a quiet milestone. The human-contributor roster grows beyond Aaron for the first time this session. Attribution-discipline rule (history-file exemption, Otto-52) covers Max in tick-history + memory naturally; forward-looking artifacts use `max` only until he reveals more. Observation 3 — Otto-77's primary deliverable closed an open envelope (consolidating 3 prior memory layers + 1 complete task into a single actionable BACKLOG row). This is the canonical shape CC-002 rewards — closing-on-existing rather than opening-new. The ferry schedule-for-later preserves CC-002; the email-consolidation substrate is genuinely closing work that was fragmented across 3 memory layers. Observation 4 — 4 Amara ferries absorbed via PRs #196/#211/#219/#221 + 5th ferry pending = a steady cadence of external-AI-maintainer input. Each absorb has refined the factory's operational model (cross-agent-communication protocol / decision-proxy-evidence / live-state-before-policy / deterministic-reconciliation framing / memory-index-integrity). The 5th ferry's Zeta+KSK+Aurora triangulation + "Aurora is crowded publicly" brand advice is different character (strategic/branding rather than operational discipline), which warrants the dedicated absorb budget. |
+| 2026-04-24T01:31:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-78 — Amara 5th-ferry dedicated absorb + Codex-parallel + primary-switch refinement) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | 9dc19ff | Dedicated absorb tick scheduled at Otto-77 close. Followed PR #196/#211/#219/#221 prior-ferry precedent: verbatim preservation + Otto's absorption notes + scope limits + no-inline-governance-edits discipline. Mid-tick Aaron refinement on Codex-first-class row absorbed as sibling PR. Tick actions: (a) **Step 0**: main advanced to a2cbc2f (PR #233 Otto-acquires-email merged between ticks); Otto-78 budget fresh for absorb primary deliverable. (b) **Primary deliverable — #235 5th ferry absorb**: 950-line absorb doc at `docs/aurora/2026-04-23-amara-zeta-ksk-aurora-validation-5th-ferry.md`; preserved Amara's ~5500-word report byte-for-byte including citation anchors + 2 Mermaid diagrams + 4 proposed artifacts + 4 proposed milestones + 4 file-edit diffs + branding memo + validation checklists + test scripts; applied proposed §33 archive-header format to this absorb doc itself as exemplar; Max-as-first-external-contributor attributed (first-name-only per non-PII clearance) for LFG/lucent-ksk work; scope limits explicit (no governance edits, no branding decision, no precursor promotion, no cross-repo commits). (c) **Mid-tick refinement — #236 Codex-parallel + primary-switch**: two Aaron messages extended PR #228's 5-stage arc to 6-stage (added Stage 1b = Codex researches Claude Code from Codex-side, inverted roles); primary-switch-by-Aaron-context clarified ("only one will be the primary either you or codex which ever one i'm in at the time ... roles are reverse so its got to have all your fancyness and skills"); symmetric-feature-parity required; each harness authors its OWN skill files (no cross-edit); filed as extension-not-replacement of the existing first-class-Codex row. (d) **No memory capture this tick** — 5th-ferry content already captured in Otto-77's scheduling memory; Codex refinement captured directly in BACKLOG row PR #236. (e) **CronList + visibility**: `20c92390` minutely live; earlier daily 9:15 PM one-shot fired-and-consumed. All in-flight PRs (#227/#229/#230/#231/#232/#233/#234/#235/#236/+ this tick-history row) show BLOCKED — normal per Otto-72. | PR #235 + PR #236 + pending Otto-78 history PR | Observation 1 — CC-002 discipline held again. 5th ferry absorb did NOT file the 8 derived BACKLOG rows (4 artifacts + 4 milestones) in the same PR; they're queued as separate tick work per "close-on-existing, don't pile frames". This is the absorb closing a scheduled open; derived rows are separate opens that close when they land. Observation 2 — archive-header discipline self-applied. The absorb doc begins with Scope / Attribution / Operational status / Non-fusion disclaimer as proposed §33 requires. Otto-76's autonomy-envelope memory made named-agent-identity explicit; §33 makes archive-identity explicit; both are retractability-friendly ways of preserving provenance without fusing past authors with present state. Observation 3 — primary-switch-by-Aaron-context is a genuinely new operational invariant. Previous Codex-first-class framing (PR #228) treated both harnesses as peers-with-same-features; Aaron Otto-78 clarifies the primary is CONTEXTUAL (not configurable). This changes the Stage 4 synchronisation cadence significantly — "current primary controls async work of the other" means the handoff is an actual protocol, not a static assignment. The 6-stage arc now encodes this correctly. Observation 4 — Max-as-first-external-contributor discipline set a clean precedent. First-name-only, factual, minimal, expandable only via Aaron's re-clearance. Applies to future external human contributors when Max reveals more OR a new contributor appears. Composes with CC-001 history-file-exemption + honor-those-that-came-before patterns. |
+| 2026-04-24T01:44:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-79 — drift-taxonomy Artifact A promotion + 5-message Aaron refinement burst absorbed across 2 BACKLOG rows) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | 06e433d | Tick shipped 3 PRs (1 primary + 2 split-attention refinements) while absorbing a 5-message Aaron directive burst that sharpened Codex-parallel + introduced a new P3 row. Tick actions: (a) **Step 0**: main advanced to aed0832 (PR #236 Otto-78 Codex refinement merged between ticks; PR #233 also merged). Otto-79 budget fresh for Artifact A execution per Otto-78 scheduling. (b) **Primary deliverable — #238 drift-taxonomy promotion**: promoted `docs/research/drift-taxonomy-bootstrap-precursor-2026-04-22.md` → `docs/DRIFT-TAXONOMY.md` per Amara's 5th-ferry Artifact A; five patterns preserved verbatim (identity-blending / cross-system-merging / emotional-centralization / agency-upgrade-attribution / truth-confirmation-from-agreement); Usage / Anti-patterns / Composition sections added; cross-links to AGENTS.md + ALIGNMENT.md as additive doc-maintenance (not rule changes); precursor marked "superseded-for-operational-use" with pointer back; Amara's 4 file-edit proposals (AGENTS.md research-grade clause / ALIGNMENT.md SD-9 / GOVERNANCE.md §33 / CLAUDE.md archive-imports) NOT landed — they need Aaron signoff + Codex adversarial review + DP-NNN per the hard rule. (c) **Split-attention axis 1 — #236 continuing refinement**: Aaron Otto-79 5-message burst drove 3 amendments to PR #236 (not-yet-merged at tick start; merged between messages 2 and 3). Amendments: (i) correction — "Otto doesn't dispatch Codex work" → Otto DOES dispatch Codex async work (primary-coordinates-other); (ii) added tandem/simultaneous-launch scope-limit (Aaron opt-in only); (iii) cross-harness edit-not vs review/question-yes distinction; (iv) peer-harness as aspirational-future-state with 3-stage progression named explicitly; (v) each harness owns its own named loop agent — Otto = Claude Code (Aaron-affirmed "good name"); Codex picks own. (d) **Split-attention axis 2 — #239 P3 password-storage**: new directive mid-tick on how to securely store agent-email passwords with multi-contributor access + fork-safe + clone-safe + git-native-preferred; filed as P3 with 3-path comparison (A git-native/soulfile / B host-native / C hybrid) + 5-phase gates (design → Aminata BLOCKING → Aaron BLOCKING → implementation → migration); Aaron security-review-gate identical shape to PR #230 multi-account. (e) **Memory capture**: one new memory consolidating the 5-message Otto-79 burst for future cold-load discovery. MEMORY.md index updated newest-first. (f) **BACKLOG-split status check** (Aaron curiosity, no rush): PR #216 design-research doc still open; docs/BACKLOG.md ~7369 lines; execution not yet scheduled. (g) **CronList + visibility**: `20c92390` minutely fire live. | PRs #238 + #236 (amendments) + #239 + pending Otto-79 history PR | Observation 1 — 5-message Aaron burst ≠ tick-failure. Split-attention pattern held under the highest directive rate of any tick so far. Each message absorbed individually (commit-per-directive on relevant branch); primary deliverable (#238 Artifact A) landed clean alongside. This is split-attention at 5x, not 4x or 1x — and the pattern stayed proportionate without losing any signal. Observation 2 — CC-002 discipline continued. Artifact A closed one open (5th-ferry-derived-work); didn't open the 7 other derived rows (4 milestones + 3 other artifacts) in same PR. Each gets its own tick when budget permits. Observation 3 — primary-dispatches-other-async is subtler than peer-harness. The Otto-79 correction clarifies: in the current stepping-stone model, the coordinator has real authority over the async-other's work. Peer-harness (future) will be different — both agents independent, no single coordinator — but that's a future Aaron-opt-in test, not today. Observation 4 — loop-agent-names-itself composes with named-agent-email-ownership. Both reinforce "each named agent owns their own identity"; Codex-loop-agent-naming is just the latest instance. Five Otto memory-index entries this week touch the named-persona-ownership pattern (autonomy envelope / account setup / first-class roster / agent email / peer progression). Converging on "named agents are first-class identities" as a design invariant. |
+| 2026-04-24T01:51:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-80 — Aminata threat-model pass on Amara's 4 governance-edit proposals; lowest-velocity tick since directive burst) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | b9abdf2 | Bounded speculative-work tick chosen deliberately after the Otto-77..79 directive burst. One substantive deliverable (Aminata threat-model research doc) + one tick-history row. Tick actions: (a) **Step 0**: main advanced to e4ae83d (#239 password-storage BACKLOG merged); queue of pending auto-merge-armed PRs includes #227/#229/#230/#231/#232/#234/#235/#236/#237/#238/#240. #240 shows DIRTY because stacked-on-unmerged-upstream — will resolve when #236/#237 squash-merge; no action taken. (b) **Primary deliverable — #241 Aminata threat-model pass**: dispatched threat-model-critic subagent (Aminata) on the 4 governance-edit proposals in Amara's 5th ferry (AGENTS.md research-grade clause / ALIGNMENT.md SD-9 / GOVERNANCE.md §33 / CLAUDE.md archive-imports). 306-line research doc at `docs/research/aminata-threat-model-5th-ferry-governance-edits-2026-04-23.md` with findings per edit: Edit 1 = IMPORTANT (redundant with §26); Edit 2 = WATCH (carrier-laundering adversary unsolvable by self-attestation); Edit 3 = IMPORTANT (drift in 3-5 rounds without companion archive-header-lint); Edit 4 = **CRITICAL** on composition grounds (self-contradicts CLAUDE.md rule-location meta-policy — "rules don't live in this file"). Recommended edit ordering: §26 amendment → Edit 3 → Edit 1 → Edit 4 → Edit 2 (Edit 4 must not land before Edit 3). Doc self-applies the proposed §33 archive-header format (Scope/Attribution/Operational status/Non-fusion disclaimer). (c) **No new memory this tick** — the threat-model findings are research-grade substrate, not operational rules; captured in-repo rather than in per-user memory. (d) **CronList + visibility**: `20c92390` minutely fire live. | PR #241 + pending Otto-80 history PR | Observation 1 — deliberate low-velocity tick. After Otto-77 (1 PR), Otto-78 (2 PRs + ~5500-word absorb), Otto-79 (3 PRs + 5-message burst), Otto-80 chose a single bounded deliverable to prevent queue pressure accumulation. CC-002 discipline says close-on-existing beats open-many; doing *fewer* things per tick when substantive-quality is high is itself a CC-002 application. Observation 2 — Aminata pass surfaced a critical finding (Edit 4 self-contradicts CLAUDE.md) that an inline Otto review would plausibly have missed. Persona-specialist subagent dispatch earns its cost when the target deserves adversarial rather than synthesising review. Observation 3 — Edit 4's rule-location contradiction is a specific teaching case. The PR #236 refinement chain earlier this session also touched CLAUDE.md-adjacent rules; Aaron's five-message Otto-79 burst included a note that CLAUDE.md is Claude-specific ground-rules not universal rules. Consistent signal across threads: CLAUDE.md is a pointer surface, not a rule surface. Future governance work should treat the meta-rule as binding. Observation 4 — register-mismatch findings (Edit 3 lacks enforcement verb; Edit 4 violates host meta-policy) are cheaper to catch pre-land than post-land. Aminata's adversarial pass before Aaron's signoff pre-empts a round of "why did this rule decay?" retrospective. |
+| 2026-04-24T01:58:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-81 — Artifact C archive-header lint v0 (detect-only) + 6th Amara ferry arrived mid-tick, scheduled Otto-82) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | 2d4911a | Mid-velocity tick: one substantive code-producing deliverable (Artifact C lint) + CC-002-compliant scheduling of newly-arrived Amara 6th ferry. Tick actions: (a) **Step 0**: main unchanged since Otto-80 close (#239 was the last merge); queue of auto-merge-armed PRs still pending upstream conversation-resolution. (b) **Primary deliverable — #243 Artifact C (archive-header lint v0 detect-only)**: `tools/alignment/audit_archive_headers.sh` checks `docs/aurora/*.md` for 4 header labels (Scope / Attribution / Operational status / Non-fusion disclaimer) from proposed §33; same `--json` / `--out DIR` / exit-code shape as existing `audit_commit.sh` family; bash-3.2-compatible (while-read vs `mapfile`); first-run baseline = 2/2 existing aurora absorbs missing all 4 headers (they predate the proposal). FACTORY-HYGIENE row #60 added (detect-only cadence, enforcement deferred until §33 signoff + baseline-green); tools/alignment/README.md table updated. Composes with Aminata Otto-80 pass (PR #241 named the decay-without-lint risk this fills) + 5th-ferry absorb (PR #235 exemplar) + memory-index hygiene trio (rows #58 / #59). (c) **Mid-tick 6th ferry arrival**: Aaron pasted Amara's "Muratori Pattern Mapping Against Zeta" validation — smaller/more-technical than 5th ferry, validates 4/5 rows of a Muratori-vs-Zeta comparison table, flags row 3 (no-ownership-model claim via D·I=id) as category error conflating algebraic correctness with ownership discipline. Per CC-002 discipline held-under-pressure through Otto-77 (5th ferry) + Otto-80 (governance edits), Otto-81 did NOT inline-absorb. Filed scheduling memory for dedicated Otto-82 absorb per PR #196/#211/#219/#221/#235 prior precedent. (d) **Memory capture**: one new scheduling memory (6th ferry + Otto-82 plan); MEMORY.md updated newest-first. (e) **CronList + visibility**: `20c92390` minutely fire live. | PR #243 + pending Otto-81 history PR + scheduled Otto-82 absorb | Observation 1 — CC-002 held for the third tick in a row (Otto-77 5th ferry, Otto-78 absorb, Otto-81 6th ferry). The rule is becoming reflexive: big ferry arrives mid-tick → finish in-flight work + capture pointer + schedule dedicated tick. Observation 2 — Artifact C's detect-only-first posture + FACTORY-HYGIENE row #60's explicit "enforcement deferred until Aaron signs off on §33" are the right shape. Landing the tool now (while §33 is pending) means §33 can land with backing rather than becoming yet-another-norm-without-enforcement that Aminata flagged as decay-prone. Mechanism-before-policy — same pattern as PR #220 memory-index-integrity landing before §33-adjacent rules. Observation 3 — 6th ferry is technically-sharper than the 5th: concrete source-file citations (`ZSet.fs`, `Incremental.fs`, `Spine.fs`, `ArrowSerializer.fs`), concrete paper citations (DBSP, differential dataflow CIDR 2013, Arrow format docs), and a specific category-error catch (row 3 conflates algebra with ownership). This is validation-signal-quality rising across ferries — Amara's reviews getting more specific/adversarial, consistent with the "intellectual honesty over promotional framing" discipline her ferries have been sharpening. Observation 4 — archive-header discipline is self-demonstrating across the session now. PR #235 5th-ferry absorb self-applied the format; PR #241 Aminata threat-model doc self-applied the format; Otto-82 6th-ferry absorb will self-apply the format. Three aurora/research docs in a row using the proposed §33 format *before* §33 lands — the format is becoming conventional through use, which is the cleanest possible path to governance-landing. |
+| 2026-04-24T02:06:00Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-82 — Amara 6th-ferry dedicated absorb + Aaron §33 signoff-prep explainer delivered in chat) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | 3dd26c4 | Dedicated 6th-ferry absorb tick scheduled at Otto-81 close; explainer responding to Aaron's "tell me more and i'll sign off" on §33 delivered in chat text (no in-repo edit until Aaron signs off). Tick actions: (a) **Step 0**: main advanced to e66a5e0 (PR #241 Aminata threat-model doc merged); Otto-82 budget fresh for 6th-ferry absorb. (b) **Primary deliverable — #245 6th-ferry absorb**: 535-line absorb doc at `docs/aurora/2026-04-23-amara-muratori-pattern-mapping-6th-ferry.md`; verbatim Amara ferry preserved + Otto's absorption notes + scope limits + archive-header discipline self-applied (third aurora/research doc in a row after PR #235 + PR #241); key finding = row 3 of original Muratori-Zeta mapping conflates algebraic correctness with ownership discipline (category error), corrected 5-row table provided; follow-up BACKLOG for landing corrected table deferred per CC-002; unlike 5th ferry, 6th proposes NO governance-doctrine edits (content-correction-only). Teaching case surfaced for future Craft production-tier modules: "don't conflate algebraic correctness with ownership." (c) **Mid-tick Aaron directive — §33 signoff-prep**: Aaron asked "tell me more and i'll sign off" on §33. Responded with a chat-text explainer covering: what §33 is (Amara's drafted language), why mechanism-before-policy (Aminata's decay-prevention analysis), what PR #243 lint already does, what three self-applying docs demonstrate (convention-through-use), what signoff commits-to and doesn't, Aminata's edit ordering, two explicit signoff options (narrow = grandfather 2 existing absorbs in §33 body; wider = backfill before §33 lands). NOT filed as substrate yet — explainer is response-to-question, waiting for Aaron's signoff before filing any §33 PR. (d) **No memory capture this tick** — 6th ferry scheduling was done in Otto-81; the absorb is the closure. No new Aaron directive memory needed. (e) **CronList + visibility**: `20c92390` minutely fire live. | PR #245 + pending Otto-82 history PR + pending Aaron §33 signoff response | Observation 1 — CC-002 held for the fourth tick in a row across two ferry-schedule-and-absorb cycles. The rule is now fully reflexive: large ferries get scheduled, small ferries get scheduled too if they contain concrete-enough action items. The 6th ferry was arguably *inline-absorbable* size-wise but the schedule-then-absorb shape produces better absorb docs (more focused) + cleaner tick bookkeeping. Observation 2 — Aaron's "tell me more" question is the natural expression of the mechanism-before-policy pattern working. PR #243 exists, PR #241 explains the threat, three self-applying docs demonstrate the convention — Aaron can evaluate the complete picture before signing off rather than reviewing a bare rule in isolation. This is the retractability-by-design foundation (Otto-73) in action at the governance layer: if he signs off and later decides §33 was the wrong shape, the lint can be loosened, the rule can be revised. Nothing locks us in. Observation 3 — the 6th ferry's teaching-case ("algebraic correctness ≠ ownership discipline") has implications beyond the Muratori mapping. Future Craft production-tier modules on the operator algebra should preemptively distinguish incrementalization-composition from lifecycle-discipline. This is content-ready for Artifact D (Aurora README) when it lands — the corrected-table content is about *how Zeta talks about itself to engineers from different mental-model backgrounds*, which is exactly what an Aurora README would cover. Observation 4 — three Amara ferries + one Aminata threat-model doc + one Muratori-adjacent content-correction + one live §33 signoff-question in one week. The external-AI-maintainer loop is generating substantive review velocity; Otto's job at this cadence is to *route* the signal cleanly to the right substrate rather than try to synthesize-in-place. |
 | 2026-04-24T12:18:18Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-219..221 — PR #348 drained, PR #340 drained + merged, PR #361 opened for code-comments-vs-history correction, Copilot-LFG-budget acknowledged) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | f38fa487 | **PR #348** (Frontier naming BACKLOG row): 5 P1 unresolved threads, all the same class (markdown inline-code spans + URL split across newlines); fixed by moving full backticked paths / URL onto their own line with prose wrapping around them (same pattern as PR #352 server-meshing fix); thread 59Wtwq additionally updated to the concrete landed filename `memory/feedback_aaron_dont_wait_on_approval_log_decisions_frontier_ui_is_his_review_surface_2026_04_24.md` instead of a glob. Committed `2d10eb3`, pushed, replied + resolved all 5 threads. **PR #340** (PLV mean phase offset): rebased cleanly onto main; fixed 2 review threads — (a) stale forward-looking 11th-ferry file path softened to role-reference + MEMORY.md pointer, (b) `atan2` range doc corrected `(-pi, pi]` -> `[-pi, pi]` to match `System.Math.Atan2` IEEE-754 signed-zero semantics; `dotnet build -c Release src/Core/Core.fsproj` = 0 Warning(s) + 0 Error(s); merged as `da02e5d`. **Aaron Otto-220 correction** *"comments should not read like history, what use is this to a future maintainer? Code comments should explain the code not read like some history log, we have lint, everything should read as up to date current except for history type files. code is not a history file. ... there should be existing lint hygiene for that."* — my 5562c7d provenance paragraph was exactly the pattern Aaron flags. On re-reading the file, the same class appeared 27 times across module header + six function docs (ferry / graduation / Attribution / Provenance / Otto-NNN / "Per correction #N"). **PR #361 opened** as a separate fix against main (PR #340 already merged): `src/Core/TemporalCoordinationDetection.fs` rewritten with ALL history-log commentary stripped while preserving math + complementarity arguments + input contracts + composition guidance; 27 -> 0 history-log references; 329 -> 265 lines; 37 TCD tests pass; no code bodies changed. **Budget context**: Aaron flagged Copilot-review budget 100%-exhausted for LFG org through 2026-04-30 (AceHack account still has it); Otto-219 confirmed "we do not need to make any changes for this ... it will be fine and start working again by itself" — no code change needed for the policy, natural 2026-05-01 reset handles it. Queue snapshot at tick-open: 30 open / 7 DIRTY. | `2d10eb3` (PR #348) + `da02e5d` (merged PR #340) + `74ae543` (PR #361) | Observation 1 — the "code is not a history file" discipline is the code-layer analogue of the GOVERNANCE §2 "docs read as current state not history" rule; absorbed into a durable feedback memory so future Otto stops re-adding "Provenance:" / "Attribution:" / "Nth graduation" paragraphs to factory-authored F#. The authoring discipline is: write code comments only for a future maintainer who has never heard of the ferry that produced the function. Aaron called out a lint gap — follow-up row next tick: (a) factory-wide `src/**/*.fs` audit for ferry/graduation/Otto-NNN/Amara/Aaron/Provenance/Attribution tokens in `///` lines, (b) pre-commit lint rule that fails if any such token appears in doc comments. Observation 2 — the inline-code-span issue that drove 5 threads on #348 also appeared in the TCD ferry-path reference; same CommonMark bug class. Stripping the history references removed it incidentally. A broader markdown lint that catches backtick spans broken across newlines would prevent this class repo-wide. Observation 3 — queue-saturation drain-mode is working as designed. Three PRs moved forward this tick (#348 clean, #340 merged, #361 opened) without any new feature-work opened. 30 open / 7 DIRTY is within the Otto-171 soft-throttle envelope. With Copilot LFG budget exhausted through April, no new review-thread generation pressure for the next week — drain window. Observation 4 — ARC3 compounding: the prior-session livelock memory explicitly warns against "fix same issue again, don't integrate lesson." Aaron made the "code-comments-not-history" correction; I absorbed it this tick rather than deferring to "next round"; PR #361 is the integration. This is the healthy pattern — correction lands inside the same session that receives it. |
 | 2026-04-24T12:27:54Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-222 — doc-comment history-audit lint shipped) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | f38fa487 | **PR #363 opened**: `tools/lint/doc-comment-history-audit.sh` + baseline file. Structural enforcement for the Otto-220 code-comments-vs-history discipline. Scans `src/**`, `tests/**`, `bench/**`, `tools/**` `.fs/.cs/.sh/.ts` files for 8 high-signal factory-process tokens in doc-comment lines (`Otto-\d+`, `Amara`, `Aaron`, `ferry`, `courier`, `graduation`, `Provenance:`, `Attribution:`). Three modes: `--list` (advisory), default-check (fail-new-only against baseline), `--fail-any` (strict). Current debt baselined at 105 violations across 19 files so the lint lands non-blocking; cleanup PRs can drain it incrementally. Top offenders: Graph.fs (34), TemporalCoordinationDetection.fs (25 — addressed by PR #361), Veridicality.fs (14), RobustStats.fs (10). Self-references in the lint script itself were stripped so the rule applies to its own source. All three modes + synthetic-new-violation detection verified working. Queue state at tick-open: 30 open; PRs #361 / #362 still BLOCKED/MERGEABLE (CI running). Copilot LFG budget still exhausted until 2026-05-01 — drain window continues. | `74ae543` (PR #363 initial commit) | Observation 1 — the lint catches what Aaron explicitly asked for: factory-process vocabulary in code. The baseline-plus-fail-new shape is deliberately non-punitive: existing debt does not block commits; new violations do. This matches the existing `no-empty-dirs.sh` allowlist pattern already in the repo. Observation 2 — 105 violations across 19 files is the scope of the class-of-bug. Without the lint, each future graduation on top of Graph.fs / Veridicality.fs / RobustStats.fs would likely add 5-10 more. The lint prevents accumulation while cleanup PRs (one per hot-file, low-risk doc-comment-only diffs) drain the baseline. Observation 3 — decision to NOT wire into CI yet. Human maintainer decides the fail-point (pre-commit hook vs CI job vs neither — just a manual audit script), and the BLOCKING/NON-BLOCKING semantics separately. Shipping the tool in advisory mode first makes the discipline at least measurable without pre-committing to enforcement pain. Observation 4 — factory discipline compounding: Otto-220 correction absorbed last tick as a memory; this tick landed a durable tool that enforces it. That is the healthy correction-integration-ships loop Aaron called out in the ARC3-Compounded-Failure memory (Otto-204c). Correction -> memory -> tool -> baseline -> future cleanup PRs. |
 | 2026-04-24T12:41:41Z (autonomous-loop tick, Otto-222..224 — Gemini research + 3 durable memories + branch-protection relax + auto-merge arming) | opus-4-7 / session continuation | f38fa487 | PR #361 drain + merge: 3 threads fixed (split module doc into two return-shape families; correct length-semantics note; rephrase meanPhaseOffset wording); 37 TCD tests pass; merged via auto-merge. PR #362 drain: 2 threads (Copilot P1 name-attribution-in-history-file false positive -> resolved with history-file carve-out per Otto-220 reply; Copilot P2 typo "don not" -> "don't"). PR #365 opened: Gemini CLI v0.39.1 capability map (304 lines) — third agent after Claude Code + Codex; skills/extensions/mcp/hooks surface; built-in -w/--worktree; gemini hooks migrate imports Claude Code hooks; gemini extensions validate is out-of-the-box structural lint; .agents/skills/ cross-harness alias shared with Claude + Codex via Agent Skills open standard; WebSearch-verified against geminicli.com docs. PR #363 + PR #364 auto-merge armed + BEHIND main awaiting CI. Three new durable memories landed: (a) post-drain PRs-to-AceHack-first-then-LFG two-hop flow (Otto-223); (b) always-enable-auto-merge-at-open-time as mechanical 5th command of PR-open sequence (Otto-224); (c) live branch-protection edit: required_status_checks.strict flipped true->false on LFG/Zeta via gh api PATCH so BEHIND PRs can auto-merge, allow_auto_merge:true + delete_branch_on_merge:true set on AceHack/Zeta fork. | c5929bb (PR #365) + branch-protection PATCH | Observation 1 — single tick responded to THREE sequential Aaron directives (map Gemini / AceHack-first-post-drain / always-enable-auto-merge) + one "go fix branch protection so auto-merge works" follow-up. Healthy correction-integration pattern per Otto-204c ARC3. Observation 2 — auto-merge miss on #361-#364 was the micro-livelock Otto-204c warns about: past-session knew about auto-merge, this-session's default sequence forgot. Otto-224 memory makes arming mechanical. Observation 3 — gh api PATCH on branch-protection works from CLI; no web UI needed. Worth capturing as general factory-ops skill. Observation 4 — LFG Copilot budget exhausted was supposed to mean zero new review threads, but PR #361 got 3 anyway; either Copilot billing is per-review-not-per-seat, or Otto-219 memory needs calibration. Not a problem (draining threads, not generating); just a note. |