1016914fc1
- package.json med node:test runner og scripts (test, simulate), zero deps - settings.json: fjern vestigial exploration- og agentTeam-blokker (verifisert leset av ingen kode via grep) - docs/: commit subagent-delegation-audit.md og ultraexecute-v2-observations-from-config-audit-v4.md (begge real arkitektur-notater) - docs/: arkiver ultra-suite-brief_2.md som _archive- (var paste fra annet plugin-arbeid, irrelevant her) - tests/helpers/hook-helper.mjs kopiert fra llm-security m/ provenance-kommentar Forberedelse for Spor 1 (lib/-moduler), Spor 2 (HANDOVER-CONTRACTS + PreCompact-hook), Spor 3 (bug-fixes + CC-features). Plan: ~/.claude/plans/det-neste-vi-gj-r-eventual-adleman.md Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
136 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
136 lines
6.9 KiB
Markdown
# Subagent Delegation Audit — Main-Context Pressure Analysis
|
||
|
||
**Status:** Exploratory brief — findings + options, not a decision
|
||
**Date:** 2026-04-19
|
||
**Scope:** ultraplan-local v2.3.2, all six user-facing commands
|
||
|
||
## Problem
|
||
|
||
Main context fills up quickly during ultraplan-local runs. The plugin's
|
||
design principle is Context Engineering — the main context should
|
||
**orchestrate**, subagents should **execute**. In practice, the exploration
|
||
phases do delegate aggressively, but the **synthesis and writing phases
|
||
remain inline**, which is where the bulk of heavy reading and reasoning
|
||
actually happens.
|
||
|
||
## Verified findings
|
||
|
||
### 1. Exploration is already well-delegated
|
||
|
||
Agent-spawn density per command (nominal):
|
||
|
||
| Command | Agents spawned |
|
||
|--------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
|
||
| ultraresearch-local | ~9–14 (5 local + 4 external + 1 bridge + up to 2 follow-ups) |
|
||
| ultraplan-local | ~10 (6 initial + conditional research-scout + up to 3 deep-dives) |
|
||
| ultra-cc-architect-local | 4 (feature-matcher, gap-identifier, critic, scope-guardian) |
|
||
| ultrabrief-local | 1–3 (brief-reviewer per iteration, max 3) |
|
||
| ultraexecute-local | 0 (explicit no-agent rule) |
|
||
| ultra-skill-author-local | 3 (concept-extractor → skill-drafter → ip-hygiene-checker) |
|
||
|
||
This part is healthy.
|
||
|
||
### 2. Synthesis and writing is inline
|
||
|
||
The main context does the heavy cognitive work after swarm completion:
|
||
|
||
- **`commands/ultraplan-local.md:483–498` (Phase 7 Synthesis):**
|
||
"Read all agent results carefully" + "Build a mental model of the codebase
|
||
architecture" + "Catalog reusable code" + "Integrate research findings".
|
||
This forces 6–10 agent outputs to remain resident in main context simultaneously.
|
||
|
||
- **`commands/ultraplan-local.md:499–548` (Phase 8 Deep Planning):**
|
||
Main context writes the entire plan.md from scratch, including all required
|
||
sections, quality standards, and file-path validation.
|
||
|
||
- **`commands/ultraresearch-local.md:302–323` (Phase 6 Triangulation):**
|
||
Explicitly labelled "the KEY phase that makes ultraresearch more than
|
||
aggregation". Dimension-by-dimension comparison of local vs external
|
||
findings, contradiction flagging, confidence rating — all inline.
|
||
|
||
- **`commands/ultraresearch-local.md:325–341` (Phase 7 Synthesis):**
|
||
Writes the research brief inline using the template.
|
||
|
||
- **`commands/ultra-cc-architect-local.md:181+` (Phase 5 Synthesize):**
|
||
Writes overview.md (6 sections + YAML frontmatter) inline from brief +
|
||
research + catalog + feature-matcher output.
|
||
|
||
### 3. Root cause — v2.4.0 foreground migration
|
||
|
||
Each command carries a `> **Why foreground?**` block
|
||
(`ultraplan-local.md:330`, `ultraresearch-local.md:192`,
|
||
`ultra-cc-architect-local.md:127`) documenting that the background
|
||
orchestrators were removed because agents spawned from background
|
||
orchestrators silently degraded. The swarm-spawn logic was lifted into the
|
||
main context — but so was the synthesis logic the orchestrators used to
|
||
carry. The "summarizer" link is missing.
|
||
|
||
## Candidate interventions
|
||
|
||
Presented as options, ordered by estimated main-context savings. Numbers
|
||
are rough estimates based on the size of the phase bodies — not measured.
|
||
|
||
| # | Intervention | Target phase | Rough saving |
|
||
|---|---------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|--------------|
|
||
| 1 | `synthesis-agent` — digests all exploration outputs into findings + reuse catalog + gaps | ultraplan Phase 7 | 40–50% |
|
||
| 2 | `plan-writer-agent` — writes plan.md from synthesis + template | ultraplan Phase 8 | part of #1 |
|
||
| 3 | `triangulation-synthesizer` — per-dimension local vs external diff + confidence rating | ultraresearch Phase 6 | 25–30% |
|
||
| 4 | `research-brief-writer` — writes research brief from triangulation output | ultraresearch Phase 7 | part of #3 |
|
||
| 5 | `architecture-writer` — writes overview.md from matcher + gap output | ultra-cc-architect Phase 5 | 15–20% |
|
||
|
||
## Tradeoffs (important)
|
||
|
||
- **Iteration friction.** A synthesis- or writer-agent does not see the
|
||
live conversation. If the user wants to push back on the plan ("split
|
||
step 3 in two", "re-phrase the risks"), refinement still has to happen
|
||
in main context. Delegation works best for the first pass; the revision
|
||
loop is harder to delegate.
|
||
|
||
- **Adversarial review still needs main.** `plan-critic` and
|
||
`scope-guardian` already return findings to main context — which then
|
||
has to act on them. If the plan was written by an agent, main must
|
||
either re-invoke the writer agent with critic feedback, or absorb the
|
||
plan back in to revise it. Neither is free.
|
||
|
||
- **Artifact quality gates.** The current inline phases enforce
|
||
quality rules (e.g., "every file path must exist in the codebase").
|
||
A writer-agent needs the same codebase context the exploration agents
|
||
had — re-delivering that context to the writer burns tokens the
|
||
delegation was meant to save.
|
||
|
||
- **Debuggability.** Inline synthesis is inspectable in the transcript.
|
||
Agent-synthesis hides the reasoning inside the agent's return message —
|
||
fine when it works, harder to diagnose when it doesn't.
|
||
|
||
## Recommendation (tentative)
|
||
|
||
If only one change is made, **intervention #1 (synthesis-agent for
|
||
ultraplan Phase 7)** has the largest ROI. It isolates the heaviest read
|
||
(all 6–10 agent outputs) behind a summarizer, and its output — a compact
|
||
findings document — is small enough to keep resident for Phase 8 planning
|
||
and Phase 9 review.
|
||
|
||
Interventions #3 and #5 are smaller-scope and lower-risk proofs-of-concept
|
||
that could validate the pattern before touching the main planner.
|
||
|
||
## Open questions
|
||
|
||
1. Should the synthesis-agent write to disk (`synthesis.md` alongside
|
||
`plan.md`) for inspectability, or return in-memory?
|
||
2. Does the adversarial review phase (plan-critic + scope-guardian) need
|
||
access to the full exploration outputs, or is the synthesis artifact
|
||
enough?
|
||
3. Is there a way to measure current main-context usage per phase so the
|
||
savings estimates above can be replaced with real numbers before
|
||
committing to changes?
|
||
4. Does this interact with `REMEMBER.md`'s note that "ultraplan schema-drift
|
||
on 4.7 produces Phase-plans instead of v1.7 step-schema"? A writer-agent
|
||
might either help (isolated, more controllable) or hurt (another layer
|
||
where drift can happen) the schema-drift problem.
|
||
|
||
## Out of scope for this brief
|
||
|
||
- Implementation details of the new agents
|
||
- Changes to ultraexecute-local (no-agent by design)
|
||
- Changes to ultrabrief-local Phase 3 interview (must be inline to drive
|
||
user dialogue)
|