Skip to content

Conversation

@tlongwell-block
Copy link
Collaborator

@tlongwell-block tlongwell-block commented Dec 21, 2025

Improve todo usage for autonomous work:

  • Remove "2+ steps" threshold from todo instructions
  • Show default reminder when todo is empty

Goose tends to forget requirements during longer autonomous tasks. This nudges it to write things down immediately rather than deciding whether a task is "complex enough" to warrant tracking.

@tlongwell-block
Copy link
Collaborator Author

/goose

@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Summary: This PR improves todo usage for autonomous work by showing a default reminder message when the todo is empty and removing the "2+ steps" threshold from instructions. The changes are minimal, well-targeted, and align with the goal of nudging goose to document requirements immediately. The code is clean and follows existing patterns.

✅ Highlights

  • Good use of existing infrastructure: The changes leverage the existing get_moim mechanism which is called by the extension manager to populate context. This is the right place to inject persistent reminders.

  • Minimal, focused changes: Only two logical changes (remove threshold instruction + add default message), both directly addressing the stated problem.

  • Clean refactoring: The get_moim refactoring from early-return style to a match expression improves readability by making the two cases (has content / no content) explicit and parallel.

  • Appropriate default message: "Once given a task, immediately update your todo with all explicit and implicit requirements" is actionable and specific, which should be more effective than generic reminders.


Review generated by goose

@tlongwell-block tlongwell-block marked this pull request as ready for review December 21, 2025 02:47
- [ ] Run lint
- [ ] Blocked: waiting on credentials
"#}.to_string()),
- [x] Requirement 1
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is this missing some template wording @tlongwell-block ?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's right in the diff. Just hard to grok in the unified view. I trimmed it down a lot because I think it was a bit repetitious

@tlongwell-block tlongwell-block merged commit a23e2cf into main Dec 24, 2025
20 checks passed
@tlongwell-block tlongwell-block deleted the deftodo branch December 24, 2025 19:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants