Follow-up defect in the reviewer accounting added by e2aec01, found by review
and confirmed by probe before fixing.
validateFindings only WARNS on a missing `reviewer` field, so a payload can
fail schema while carrying no name. ingest then records `reviewer: null`, and
runContract turned that null into the literal reviewer name "unnamed reviewer".
MEASURED before the fix:
runContract([{findings:[{file:'x.mjs',line:1,rule_key:'NOPE',severity:'MAJOR'}]}],
{expectedReviewers:['code-correctness-reviewer']})
-> missing_reviewers = ["unnamed reviewer", "code-correctness-reviewer"]
One failure, two entries, one of them an agent nobody launched. The
`reported.delete(s.reviewer)` line was also inert for that case, since a null
name was never in the set to begin with.
Fix: skipped payloads are split by whether they carry a name. Named ones go to
missing_reviewers as before; anonymous ones increment the new
`unattributable_payloads` count, which forbids ALLOW on its own - so stripping
a reviewer name from a payload cannot restore ALLOW, and the floor does not
depend on the caller passing expectedReviewers. `allow_blocked_by` reports the
two facts separately: `missing-reviewer:<name>` and `unattributable-payload (n)`.
The old behaviour never produced a false ALLOW - it failed in the safe
direction - but it named a reviewer that did not exist, which is the kind of
output an operator would chase.
Iron Law: two failing tests first (double entry; anonymous-payload-alone must
forbid ALLOW), then the fix.
Also verified in this pass, by temporarily adding a fake reason to
UNVERIFIED_REASONS: the prose-vocabulary pin does go red when a reason is
declared in the lib but missing from agents/review-coordinator.md. A pin that
cannot fail is not a pin.
Suite 1034 (1032/0/2) -> 1036 (1034/0/2), 0 failures.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
computeVerdict counted only the findings handed to it (reasoned.kept), so a
finding removed by Pass 2 or Pass 3, and a reviewer whose payload was thrown
away or never arrived, were arithmetically identical to a finding that never
existed. All three pushed the verdict toward ALLOW.
Measured before the fix (probes, 2026-09-01):
- a BLOCKER with a 101-character title -> ALLOW (Pass 2 succinctness)
- a payload with one ad-hoc rule_key is skipped WHOLE at ingest, taking a
valid BLOCKER sibling with it -> ALLOW
- a reviewer that never reported -> ALLOW
Pass 3's own no-citation / unknown-rule_key branches turned out unreachable
through runContract (validateFindings rejects those payloads first), so the
reachable exposure was Pass 2 plus the skipped/absent reviewer.
THE OPEN DESIGN DECISION, and why it went against the order's default.
The order proposed: indeterminate file-existence YES, plain succinctness NO
("a too-long finding is not an uncertain finding"). I kept the first and
overrode the second, on one principle:
A removal is `dropped` only when the test REFUTED the finding as a claim
about this codebase. Every other removal is `unverified`.
Succinctness and actionability read a `.length`. They never examine the claim,
so they cannot establish the finding is unreal - and dropping a BLOCKER for a
101-character title is precisely the fail-open shape being fixed. Three things
settled it:
1. Under the order's default the fix would have been almost inert. Pass 3's
drop branches are unreachable via runContract, so leaving Pass 2 out would
have left the only reachable finding-level exposure open.
2. Cost asymmetry, priced rather than asserted: the verdict is not a gate.
Handover 6 feeds `findings` filtered to BLOCKER+MAJOR into /trekplan
(commands/trekplan.md:218); `verdict` is optional metadata
(docs/HANDOVER-CONTRACTS.md:353). Nothing loops or re-plans on WARN. So a
false `unverified` costs WARN plus a printed reason; a false drop costs a
silent ALLOW over a live BLOCKER.
3. unknown-rule_key joins them for the same reason: an ad-hoc key is a real
defect wearing the wrong label, and v5.1.1 high-effort mode already KEEPS
those, normalised to PLAN_EXECUTE_DRIFT. Refuting them at normal effort
while keeping them at high effort would be incoherent.
no-citation stays a drop: a finding whose file is empty or whose line is
negative names no location, so it makes no checkable claim at all - the one
deterministic refutation, and what the Pass 3 prose already said it was.
Iron Law: tests/lib/coordinator-contract.test.mjs first, red (missing export +
the three measured ALLOWs), then production code. Two existing assertions were
updated AFTER implementation as contract changes, not to make the red pass.
A known-positive control pins that ALLOW is still reachable - without it,
"no ALLOW" is not a fail-closed contract, only a broken one.
lib/review/coordinator-contract.mjs
+ classifySuppression / REFUTING_REASONS / UNVERIFIED_REASONS - one
vocabulary owned by the lib, including the tokens only the LLM
coordinator emits (accuracy:refuted, file-existence:refuted/indeterminate),
so prose and lib cannot drift. Unclassified reasons default to unverified:
the default fails closed.
~ judgeFilter / reasonablenessFilter return {kept, dropped, unverified}
~ computeVerdict(findings, {unverified, missingReviewers}) -> + allow_blocked_by.
Never raises a verdict, only withholds ALLOW. Unverified findings are NOT
counted into a severity tier: their severity was never substantiated, and
counting it would be invention.
~ runContract(payloads, {expectedReviewers}) -> + unverified,
missing_reviewers, allow_blocked_by. `suppressed` stays the union of
dropped + unverified, so existing consumers (gold-eval) keep their meaning.
agents/review-coordinator.md - Pass 2/3 tables gain a fate column, new
"Suppression is two-valued" section, Pass 4 threshold table gains the two
fail-closed rows, Executive Summary must state a withheld ALLOW, Suppressed
Findings tags each line [dropped]/[unverified]. Pass 3's unknown-rule_key
bullet explicitly says high-effort does not reach that branch, so the same
input never has two documented fates.
commands/trekreview.md - Phase 5 "Reviewer accounting": the expected set is
written down before the spawn, a silent reviewer gets one re-ask and then
STOP. That extends the pattern already in the file (schema failure -> 2
bounded re-asks -> "do not feed unvalidated findings to the coordinator") to
the other two ways a reviewer goes missing, rather than softening it to WARN.
The lib's missing_reviewers stays as belt-and-braces for direct callers.
docs/agent-return-channel-defect.md - the "inferred, not observed" caveat on
the unnamed arm above 66 lines is struck: akashic-intelligence S27
(f168630) measured 2/2 unnamed agents returning against a 4370-line plan,
30449 B and 10989 B, both valid JSON. Recorded with akashic's own two
caveats intact - the measurer owns the finding, and byte-identity between
the returned string and the file on disk was not proven. The separate S25
named-arm figures are left standing; these are two measurements, not a
correction of one by the other.
No release, no version bump, no tag, no catalogue ref, no Workflow port.
Suite 1025 (1023/0/2) -> 1034 (1032/0/2), 0 failures.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Scores committed agent-run fixtures against the golden corpus at
(file, rule_key) granularity, building on the deterministic coordinator
contract (4a). Offline: committed reviewer payloads, no live agent spawn,
no LLM, no network (the LLM-in-the-loop grading is the separate 4c tier).
- lib/review/gold-scorer.mjs: scoreFindings (precision/recall/f1 at
(file,rule_key) granularity, line+severity ignored) + scoreVerdict; pure,
with documented vacuous-set conventions.
- tests/fixtures/bakeoff-rich/runs/run-perfect.json: committed run that
reproduces all 5 seeded gold findings through runContract.
- tests/lib/gold-eval.test.mjs: the scoring RUN (precision/recall/f1 = 1.0,
verdict == expected_verdict BLOCK, nothing suppressed/skipped).
- lib/util/test-census.mjs: third census category (goldEval) — a scoring run
is neither behavior coverage nor a doc-pin; honest-count invariant now 3-way.
- docs/eval-corpus/README.md: 4b moved from Future hardening to implemented.
Suite 809 -> 822 (820/0/2). gold-scorer covers TP+FP+FN+degenerate paths.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01BJQYC5vpkJWxndS55vQQZ6
Phase 9's dedup hand-off was broken on two layers, both surfaced by the S22
dogfood: (a) plan-critic + scope-guardian (Read/Glob/Grep, no Write) were told
to write /tmp/*-out.json the dedup helper reads — they cannot; (b) even with
Write, their Output format emits markdown, not the helper's
{agent,findings:[{file,line,rule_key,text}]} schema. readJsonOrNull then
swallowed the absent files -> a silent empty merge that discarded every finding.
Fix (operator-chosen A'): keep the reviewers read-only; make the hand-off run.
- plan-review-dedup.mjs gains a --stdin mode reading {plan_critic,scope_guardian};
malformed stdin exits non-zero so a broken hand-off surfaces loudly instead of
collapsing into a silent empty merge. File mode + its tests are untouched.
- plan-critic.md + scope-guardian.md now emit a trailing machine-readable `json`
findings block (the inline hand-off; no Write tool needed).
- trekplan.md + planning-orchestrator.md Phase 9 rewritten in lockstep: extract
both blocks, pipe via heredoc into --stdin. No temp files, portable, no
pathguard dependency.
TDD: malformed-stdin test failed first (CLI ignored stdin -> exit 0 = the bug),
green after impl. New S23 doc-pin asserts both docs use --stdin (not the dead
/tmp paths) and both agents declare the json block. Suite 724 (722/2/0); live
HEAD baseline was 720, not the stale 705 STATE carried forward.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LqBYc8Ltrk7LipyJmGxXiB
Build the prose-vs-Workflow bake-off machinery for /trekreview Phase 5-6 and
run a 1-run/arm smoke to de-risk before the full measurement (operator posture:
build + smoke, then pause for go/no-go on the full >=3-runs/arm run).
New:
- lib/review/fidelity-diff.mjs (+ tests) — the PRIMARY metric: parse two
review.md (or two structured arm outputs) and compare verdict + jaccard over
(file,line,rule_key)-IDs + per-finding severity/rule_key. Reuses jaccard +
frontmatter + NW1 findings-schema + finding-id. fidelityDiffStructured avoids
rendering review.md per run.
- scripts/trekreview-armB.workflow.mjs — Arm B: Phase 5-6 as a Workflow
(parallel([conformance, correctness]) schema-forced -> JS dedup-by-triplet ->
agent(review-coordinator) verdict schema). Path-based input via args (reviewers
carry Read). Inlines dedup + the 12-key rule_key enum (scripts have no imports).
- tests/fixtures/bakeoff/ — committable fixture: real diff of b149538 (NW1) +
brief reconstructed from plan S9. Both arms review the same pinned input.
- docs/T2-bakeoff-results.md — smoke results + verdict + go/no-go recommendation.
Smoke result: SMOKE PASS. Arm B runs the full pipeline (3 agents) with ZERO
classifier interference; fidelity EQUIVALENT to Arm A at the verdict level
(both ALLOW; jaccard 1.0). Caveat: the clean TDD'd fixture yielded ~0 findings,
so finding-SET fidelity was not stressed (only verdict fidelity proven). A
reviewer-level divergence appeared (Arm B raised 1 raw finding, coordinator
filtered it; Arm A raised 0) — to be quantified in the full run on a
richer-finding-surface fixture. NOT the T2 §5 POSITIVE/NEGATIVE verdict.
Suite 647 -> 662 (660 pass / 2 skip / 0 fail; +15 fidelity-diff). claude plugin
validate clean (known root-CLAUDE.md warning only). Plan: docs/W1-narrow-wins-plan.md S10.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LqBYc8Ltrk7LipyJmGxXiB
Codify the /trekreview Phase 5 reviewer JSON contract as a validated schema so
main validates each reviewer's output instead of merely JSON.parse-ing it, and
re-asks on schema failure (not just parse failure). Retires the fragility at
trekreview.md:202-204. No Workflow dependency (S8 tier 1, ships regardless).
New lib/review/findings-schema.mjs (3-layer Content -> Raw-text -> CLI shim,
reusing result.mjs error-shape + rule-catalogue RULE_KEYS/SEVERITY_VALUES):
- validateFindings(payload): hard errors on load-bearing fields the dedup
triplet + verdict depend on — file, rule_key (in catalogue), severity (enum),
line (integer >= 0); accumulates all errors; per-finding location.
- extractFindingsBlock(text): last fenced ```json block (the :202 contract).
- validateReviewerOutput(text): extract + parse + schema, unifying parse and
schema failures under one bounded re-ask path.
Stable codes: FINDINGS_NOT_OBJECT/_NOT_ARRAY/_NO_JSON_BLOCK/_PARSE_ERROR (top),
FINDING_MISSING_FILE/_MISSING_RULE_KEY/_UNKNOWN_RULE_KEY/_BAD_SEVERITY/_BAD_LINE
(per-finding). Descriptive fields + unknown keys tolerated (forward-compat).
Phase 5 prose: replace "parse last json block; on parse error re-emit" with
"validate against findings-schema; on failure re-ask conforming JSON, bounded
N=2; never feed unvalidated findings to the coordinator".
TDD: 27 failing tests first, then minimal code to pass. Suite 606 -> 647
(645 pass / 2 skip / 0 fail). claude plugin validate clean (only the known
root-CLAUDE.md warning). Plan: docs/W1-narrow-wins-plan.md S9.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01LqBYc8Ltrk7LipyJmGxXiB
