Skip to content

docs(archive): Preserve discussion for PR #5773 #5796

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
AceHack wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

docs(archive): Preserve discussion for PR #5773 #5796

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
118 changes: 118 additions & 0 deletions ...ussions/PR-5773-feat-b-0914-7-falcon-auto-research-doc-template-substrate-19.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,118 @@
---
pr_number: 5773
title: "feat(B-0914.7): Falcon auto-research-doc template substrate; 19 tests pass \u2014 completes 7-of-7 B-0914 candidate substrate-engineering gap substrate"
author: "AceHack"
state: "MERGED"
created_at: "2026-05-28T11:27:53Z"
merged_at: "2026-05-28T12:22:14Z"
closed_at: "2026-05-28T12:22:14Z"
head_ref: "otto-cli/b-0914-7-falcon-auto-research-doc-template-generator-substrate-engineering-substrate-2026-05-28"
base_ref: "main"
archived_at: "2026-05-28T12:45:11Z"
archive_tool: "tools/pr-preservation/archive-pr.ts"
---

# PR #5773: feat(B-0914.7): Falcon auto-research-doc template substrate; 19 tests pass — completes 7-of-7 B-0914 candidate substrate-engineering gap substrate

## PR description

## Summary

Sakana Robin Falcon agent pattern: 8-section research-doc template scaffold + Markdown renderer. Downstream LLM substrate-engineering populates pending sections.

**19 tests pass / 0 fail.**

## Completes 7-of-7 B-0914 candidate substrate-engineering gap substrate

| Gap | PR |
|---|---|
| B-0914.1 TrueSkill | #5764 |
| B-0914.2 Closed-loop | #5769 (L) |
| B-0914.3 N-parallel + consensus | #5770 |
| B-0914.4 Gen-reflect pairing | #5768 (M) |
| B-0914.5 Evolution mash-refine | #5767 (S) |
| B-0914.6 Proximity-dedup | #5772 |
| **B-0914.7 Falcon auto-research-doc** | **THIS PR** |

## Test plan

- [x] 19 tests pass; all 9 section kinds rendered
- [x] EmptyProposalId / NoSectionsRendered validation
- [x] Pending markers preserved (substrate-honest)
- [x] ResearchDocSection exhaustive switch
- [ ] CI: lint(tsc tools)
- [ ] Auto-merge armed

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

## Reviews

### COMMENTED — @copilot-pull-request-reviewer (2026-05-28T11:30:57Z)

## Pull request overview

Adds a new TypeScript-side “research doc” scaffold/renderer under `tools/workflow-engine/` (B-0914.7), intended to generate a structured Markdown template (Falcon-style) from a proposal/hypothesis, with accompanying Bun tests to lock in the section shapes and rendering invariants.

**Changes:**
- Introduces `ResearchDocSection` / `ResearchDoc` types plus `buildSkeleton`, `renderSection`, `renderResearchDoc`, and `buildAndRender` helpers.
- Implements Markdown rendering for all section kinds, including placeholder “PENDING …” markers.
- Adds a comprehensive Bun test suite covering validation, rendering behavior, and union exhaustiveness.

### Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

| File | Description |
| ---- | ----------- |
| tools/workflow-engine/research-doc.ts | New research-doc template generator + Markdown renderer APIs. |
| tools/workflow-engine/research-doc.test.ts | Bun tests for skeleton construction, rendering, placeholders, and exhaustiveness checks. |

### COMMENTED — @copilot-pull-request-reviewer (2026-05-28T12:22:24Z)

## Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

## Review threads

### Thread 1: tools/workflow-engine/research-doc.ts:31 (resolved)

**@copilot-pull-request-reviewer** (2026-05-28T11:30:56Z):

The rule-path references in this header comment don’t match the actual rule filenames under `.claude/rules/` (e.g., `asymmetric-authorship` and `monad-propagation-pattern` aren’t present as such). Please update these references to the correct rule IDs/filenames (consistent with `tools/workflow-engine/README.md`), so cross-references stay greppable and don’t drift.

### Thread 2: tools/workflow-engine/research-doc.ts:67 (resolved)

**@copilot-pull-request-reviewer** (2026-05-28T11:30:57Z):

`ResearchDocFeedback` includes `InvalidOperationalStatus`, but `operationalStatus` is already a string-literal union and there’s no code path that can produce this feedback. Either remove this feedback variant, or change/parse `operationalStatus` from an untrusted string and validate it so this variant is reachable.

### Thread 3: tools/workflow-engine/research-doc.ts:23 (unresolved)

**@copilot-pull-request-reviewer** (2026-05-28T12:22:23Z):

P1 (codebase_conventions): This header comment introduces named attributions (e.g., “Sakana Robin”, “Amara”). Per `docs/AGENT-BEST-PRACTICES.md` Operational standing rule “No name attribution in code, docs, or skills” (docs/AGENT-BEST-PRACTICES.md:671-736), current-state code under `tools/` should use role-refs / neutral citations rather than proper-name attribution. Please rewrite these references to be name-free (e.g., cite the paper/venue/year or a stable identifier) and keep named provenance on allowlisted history surfaces if needed.

### Thread 4: tools/workflow-engine/research-doc.ts:215 (unresolved)

**@copilot-pull-request-reviewer** (2026-05-28T12:22:24Z):

P1 (maintainability): `buildSkeleton` seeds structured fields like `supporting`, `risks`, and `substrates` with placeholder sentinel strings (e.g., "[PENDING …]"). Because these arrays are otherwise meant to contain real evidence/risk/substrate identifiers, downstream code can’t reliably distinguish “pending” from “real value” without string parsing. Prefer representing pending-ness structurally (e.g., empty arrays plus separate pending markers/notes fields, or put placeholders only in `content`/`raw` sections).

### Thread 5: tools/workflow-engine/research-doc.ts:225 (unresolved)

**@copilot-pull-request-reviewer** (2026-05-28T12:22:24Z):

P1 (bug): `id` is described as a canonical filename-safe identifier, but it’s derived from the raw `proposalId` without trimming/collapsing and can become non-informative (e.g., proposalId="!!!" → id="___"), increasing collision risk and making it hard to use as a stable filename. Consider normalizing more strongly (trim, collapse runs of `_`, strip leading/trailing `_`, and ensure a non-empty fallback) so `id` is genuinely canonical.

### Thread 6: tools/workflow-engine/research-doc.ts:10 (unresolved)

**@copilot-pull-request-reviewer** (2026-05-28T12:22:24Z):

P2 (documentation): The header comment says the scaffold “takes a Hypothesis + produces a research-doc template”, but the exported API (`buildSkeleton`/`buildAndRender`) currently takes `ResearchDocSkeletonContext` (proposalId/title/scope/attribution) rather than a `Hypothesis<T>`. Consider rewording the comment to match the actual API shape so readers don’t go looking for a Hypothesis dependency here.

## General comments

### @chatgpt-codex-connector (2026-05-28T11:27:57Z)

You have reached your Codex usage limits for code reviews. You can see your limits in the [Codex usage dashboard](https://chatgpt.com/codex/cloud/settings/usage).
Loading