Skip to content

Fix self-improve topic-scoped path resolution - #2732

Merged
Yeachan-Heo merged 1 commit into
devfrom
fix/issue-2731-self-improve-topic-scope
Apr 19, 2026
Merged

Yeachan-Heo merged 1 commit into
devfrom
fix/issue-2731-self-improve-topic-scope

Conversation

@Yeachan-Heo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Summary

  • add a scoped self-improve path resolver that defaults new runs to topic-specific roots while preserving legacy flat-root fallback
  • teach self-improve validation and docs/templates to resolve topic-scoped settings paths consistently
  • add targeted regression coverage for default, explicit-topic, and legacy self-improve path resolution

Verification

  • npm run test:run -- src/cli/tests/self-improve-paths.test.ts
  • npm run build
  • npm run lint -- src/cli/tests/self-improve-paths.test.ts

Closes #2731

Add a dedicated resolver for self-improve artifact roots, teach validation to resolve scoped settings, and document the topic-scoped layout while preserving legacy flat-root fallback. The focused regression test covers default, explicit-topic, and legacy compatibility behavior without widening into unrelated self-improve changes.

Constraint: Keep scope narrow to self-improve topic-scoped path resolution and compatibility
Rejected: Reworking broader self-improve runtime behavior | unnecessary for issue #2731
Confidence: high
Scope-risk: narrow
Reversibility: clean
Directive: Route future self-improve path reads through the resolver instead of hardcoding .omc/self-improve/
Tested: npm run test:run -- src/cli/__tests__/self-improve-paths.test.ts
Tested: npm run build
Tested: npm run lint -- src/cli/__tests__/self-improve-paths.test.ts
Not-tested: Full self-improve runtime end-to-end loop execution

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: ce6972e523

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment on lines +84 to +86
if [[ -n "${candidate}" ]]; then
SETTINGS="${candidate}"
return 0

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

P1 Badge Reject nonexistent topic settings during scoped resolution

When --project-root is combined with --topic/--slug, resolve_settings_from_project_root accepts any settings_path string from resolve-paths.mjs without checking that the file exists. If the selector is wrong (for example, a typo in --slug), resolve_settings_path still succeeds, and check_sealed_files later prints “No settings file found — skipping sealed file check.” and exits successfully. This silently disables sealed-file enforcement in the exact multi-topic flows this change introduces, so benchmark/protected files can be modified without being blocked.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@Yeachan-Heo
Yeachan-Heo merged commit a545291 into dev Apr 19, 2026
9 checks passed
Yeachan-Heo pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 20, 2026
Release includes:
- feat(team): cursor-agent as 4th tmux worker type (#2736)
- fix(keyword-detector): stop false-positive autopilot on "autonomous" (#2739)
- fix(self-improve): scope artifacts by topic for safer resumes (#2732)

Constraint: 4 version files must remain in sync (package.json, plugin.json, marketplace.json, package-lock.json)
Constraint: dist/ is gitignored but tracked; force-add required for new files
Confidence: high
Scope-risk: narrow

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant