feat(brief): add the CE workflow boundary to every worker brief - #3
Merged
Merged
Conversation
The CE workflow toolkit is a second, human-in-the-loop orchestrator: its skills assume a captain is present and that the session ships its own work. Inside a firstmate task neither holds, so the two systems overlapped on shipping authority, review gates, and where durable knowledge goes. Every ship and scout brief now carries a fixed `# CE workflow boundary` section owned by bin/fm-brief.sh: the shipping ban, the banned and allowed CE skills, the decision-return route through needs-decision, and the knowledge-placement rule. A worker learns the discipline from its brief instead of having had to read the CE skills first. AGENTS.md's delivery-path section gains one pointer line, since the section text is owned in exactly one place. Secondmate charters are supervisor contracts, not worker briefs, and stay out of scope. The new test asserts the section for all three ship modes and scouts, pins each banned and allowed skill by name, and re-asserts the pre-existing Setup/Rules/Definition-of-done structure and placeholders.
…step The CE boundary bullet banned opening a PR outright, which contradicted the direct-PR delivery path's own Definition of done in the same generated brief (brief-review finding ce-boundary-no-pr-contradicts-direct-pr, escalated to firstmate as an ask-user finding). Firstmate ruled the fix: the ban targets shipping on the worker's own authority, and the delivery path's Definition of done is the one place a PR is opened. The test now pins both the carve-out and the absence of the absolute phrase; it fails on the previous wording.
onyx-space
changed the title
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.
Intent
The captain's words: the CE workflow must be optimized for the current firstmate system. He has walked through the proposal and answered "let's go with it" - that is, execute the boundary contract set in
data/ce-firstmate-boundary/proposal.md.The contract in one sentence: CE owns "thinking it through + writing it down + executing inside a worker"; firstmate owns "who is dispatched, at what tier, when it is delivered, who merges, and where knowledge is stored". Three hard lines: a worker never ships on its own; there is no captain inside a worker, so every CE decision gate goes back to firstmate; CE no longer creates its own
solutions/knowledge store.This task is the firstmate side of the contract (CE's refusal guards are the other half, dispatched separately and out of scope here). Why this half is needed: a worker should know the discipline the moment it starts, rather than being trusted to have read the CE skills first.
What this half must land (approved proposal item 4.1): a fixed CE boundary section in the worker brief - the banned list, routing decisions back to firstmate, and where knowledge goes - plus one sentence in AGENTS.md section 7 stating that the delivery path owns shipping and that CE's shipping skills do not take part in worker delivery.
What changed
bin/fm-brief.shnow renders a fixed# CE workflow boundarysection into every ship and scout worker brief, encoding the CE toolkit's contract for a worker: the shipping ban (no default-branch push, no merge, and a PR only where the task's own Definition of done requires it), the banned CE skills, the default-deny rule for every other CE skill, review owned by the delivery path, decisions routed back throughneeds-decision, and the ban on creating a repo-localsolutions/store.AGENTS.md's delivery-path section now points at the worker brief's CE boundary section as the single owner of that contract, including that CE's shipping skills never participate in worker delivery.tests/fm-brief.test.shgains coverage asserting that the boundary section renders for no-mistakes, direct-PR, local-only, and scout briefs, and is absent from secondmate charters.Risk assessment
Low: a bounded prose change (one fixed section in the generated worker brief plus one pointer line in AGENTS.md) that satisfies every required intent element, with the fix round reproducing the human-authorized wording verbatim.
Testing
Scaffolded briefs directly with
bin/fm-brief.shfor all three ship modes plus scout and secondmate charters, confirming the# CE workflow boundaryblock appears in every ship and scout brief with the full banned list, the default-deny rule, the two-way review rule, the no-captain decision route, and thesolutions/ban, while the secondmate charter omits it and the shipping ban yields to the delivery path's own PR step (no absolute PR ban; the direct-PR Definition of done opens the PR while local-only forbids it). The committed suite passes. Four of five live scenarios were driven against the product; the fifth is a static documentation assertion for AGENTS.md section 7 with no runtime surface, so it is marked untested.中文版（原始正文）
Intent
队长原话：「ce工作流要对现在firstmate体系做优化」。他已经跟完提案并回「就这样」，也就是按提案定下的边界契约执行。
契约一句话：CE 管「想清楚 + 写下来 + 在 worker 内执行」；firstmate 管「派谁、什么档、何时交、谁合并、知识存哪」。三条硬线：worker 不许自己出厂（不推默认分支、不开 PR、不合并）；worker 里没有队长，所以 CE 的拍板 gate 一律交回 firstmate；CE 不再另建 solutions/ 知识库。
本任务是契约的 firstmate 侧那一半（CE 侧的拒绝守卫是另一半，另派/另做，不在你范围）。为什么需要这一半：worker 一启动就该知道纪律，而不是指望它自己读过 CE skill 后才守规矩。
这一半要落的事（队长批准的提案第 4.1 条）：在 worker brief 里加一个固定的 CE 边界段——禁用清单、要拍板就把决定交回 firstmate、知识往哪写；并在 AGENTS.md §7 附近补一句：交付路径独占出厂，CE 的出厂类 skill 不参与 worker 交付。
What Changed
bin/fm-brief.sh现在会在每个 ship 和 scout worker brief 中渲染一个固定的# CE workflow boundary章节，编码 CE toolkit 面向 worker 的契约：shipping ban（禁止推送 default-branch、禁止 merge；仅在任务自身 Definition of done 要求时才走 PR）、禁止与允许的 CE skill 列表、由 delivery path 持有 review 归属、通过needs-decision将决策路由回 firstmate、以及禁止创建本地solutions/store。AGENTS.md的 delivery-path 部分现在指向 worker brief 的 CE boundary 章节，作为该契约的唯一 owner，并注明 CE shipping skills 绝不参与 worker delivery。tests/fm-brief.test.sh新增覆盖，断言 boundary 章节在 no-mistakes/direct-PR/local-only 和 scout 模式下均能渲染，同时不进入 secondmate charter。Risk Assessment
✅ Low: 一个边界清晰的纯文本变更（生成的 worker brief 中一处固定部分加上 AGENTS.md 中一行指针），完全满足所有必需的 intent 要素，fix-round commit 逐字复现了人类授权的措辞。
Testing
直接运行 bin/fm-brief.sh 实际生成全部三种 ship mode 加 scout 和 secondmate charters, 确认
# CE workflow boundary区块在每份 ship 和 scout brief 中呈现, 包含完整 banned 列表、default-deny allowlist、双向 review 规则、无 captain 决策路由和禁止solutions/规则; secondmate charter 省略该区块; shipping ban 让位于 delivery path 自身的 PR 步骤 (无绝对 PR 禁令; direct-PR DoD 打开 PR, 而 local-only 禁止)。已提交的测试套件通过。前 4 个运行时场景 live 通过; 第 5 个场景 (AGENTS.md §7 的静态文档断言) 无运行时产品表面, 无法 live 驱动, 标记为 untested。FM_HOME=<tmp> ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> some-proj --mode <no-mistakes|direct-PR|local-only>, 并检查生成的 brief; 渲染后的区块捕获于 ce-boundary-ship-brief.txt。FM_HOME=<tmp> ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> some-proj --scout; 区块存在, 包含 banned 列表、default-deny 引导句、双向 review 规则和 needs-decision 路由。FM_SECONDMATE_CHARTER=... ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> --secondmate --no-projects; 对 charter 执行grep -c '# CE workflow boundary'返回 0。Evidence: 来自 ship brief (no-mistakes) 的 CE workflow boundary 区块
Source: 来自 ship brief (no-mistakes) 的 CE workflow boundary 区块
Evidence: direct-PR Definition of done (打开 PR, 无 pipeline)
Source: direct-PR Definition of done (打开 PR, 无 pipeline)
Evidence: local-only Definition of done (禁止 push/PR/merge)
Source: local-only Definition of done (禁止 push/PR/merge)
Pipeline
Updates from git push no-mistakes
✅ **intent** - passed
✅ No issues found.
✅ **Rebase** - passed
✅ No issues found.
🔧 **Review** - 1 issue found → auto-fixed ✅
bin/fm-brief.sh:370- The# CE workflow boundarysection adds a positive 'Allowed here' allowlist (ce-workreturn-to-caller,ce-debug,ce-simplify-code,ce-translate) on top of the intent's required 禁用清单 (banned list). It does not cleanly partition the CE skill set: ~15 CE skills (ce-plan, ce-ideate, ce-brainstorm, ce-explain, ce-handoff, ce-doc-review, ce-pov, ce-strategy, ce-proof, ce-test-browser, ce-update, ce-compound-refresh, ce-commit, ce-optimize, ce-riffrec-feedback-analysis) are neither banned nor allowed, and ce-code-review is banned only 'under mode no-mistakes' (line 371) even though AGENTS.md §7 already tells the faster path to proceed 'without adding an independent reviewer'. If 'Allowed here' is meant to be exhaustive it silently forbids those skills during a task's intended usage (e.g. a worker that needs ce-plan or ce-explain finds neither permission nor a ban); if not exhaustive, the list has no defined semantics. The intent requires only a 禁用清单, so the allowlist is a component no stated requirement needs. Confirm the intended contract: either drop the allowlist and rely on the banned list alone, or make it exhaustive/authoritative and reconcile the omitted skills and the mode-scoped ce-code-review carve-out.🔧 Fix applied.
✅ Re-checked - no issues remain.
✅ **Test** - passed
✅ No issues found.
FM_HOME=<tmp> ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> some-proj --mode <no-mistakes|direct-PR|local-only>, 并检查生成的 brief; 渲染后的区块捕获于 ce-boundary-ship-brief.txt。FM_HOME=<tmp> ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> some-proj --scout; 区块存在, 包含 banned 列表、default-deny 引导句、双向 review 规则和 needs-decision 路由。FM_SECONDMATE_CHARTER=... ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> --secondmate --no-projects; 对 charter 执行grep -c '# CE workflow boundary'返回 0。bash tests/fm-brief.test.sh (全部 22 个测试通过, 含 test_ce_workflow_boundary_section)FM_HOME=<tmp> ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> some-proj --mode no-mistakes (live scaffold)FM_HOME=<tmp> ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> some-proj --mode direct-PR (live scaffold)FM_HOME=<tmp> ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> some-proj --mode local-only (live scaffold)FM_HOME=<tmp> ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> some-proj --scout (live scaffold)FM_SECONDMATE_CHARTER=... ./bin/fm-brief.sh <id> --secondmate --no-projects (live scaffold)grep -n 'CE workflow boundary' AGENTS.md (第 342 行)grep 绝对 PR 禁令 ('do not open a PR') 覆盖所有 ship briefs = 0, 以及 direct-PR/local-only Definition-of-done 一致性检查✅ **Document** - passed
✅ No issues found.
✅ **Lint** - passed
✅ No issues found.
✅ **Push** - passed
✅ No issues found.