93a386e706cc11272f9787915b0c144901206dd7
3
Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
 Omar SobhandClaude Opus 5
|
f52cff3e04 |
feat(skill-use): progressive disclosure, as an arm and not a switch
Trigger — did the agent reach for the skill when it applied? — cannot be measured while every body is inlined into the prompt. Nothing was reached for. `skill_use` has been reporting `NotObservable` for that reason, and it was right to. The skills door made retrieval possible; this makes it a delivery arm. `index` sends each pinned skill's name, description, `when_to_use` and the uri that returns its body, and the agent fetches what it judges relevant. `inline` is unchanged and stays the default. An A/B rather than a switch, because `index` can only cost Compliance: under `inline` the procedure sits in front of the model whether or not it noticed it applied. Trading a measured axis for an unmeasured regression in another is not an improvement, so both arms stay runnable and the arm is recorded on the mission row. Three things the mechanism refuses to do: - `index` without a door falls back to `inline`. An index names bodies and says how to fetch them; with no `clawmates_skills` server reachable that is a list of dead ends, and it fails as an agent ignoring its skills rather than as a missing config. `install_skills_door` now returns whether it installed, because the caller needs the answer and not just the log line. - The scorer reads the arm off the recorded PROMPT, not off the mission row. The row says what the mission is configured to do now; the score is being computed against a turn that ran then. - Under `index`, a skill that was offered and never read is a Fail, not the inline arm's `NotObservable` — but only where the skill had a checkable consequence in that phase. Reusing the inline text would have said "this skill was inlined into the prompt" about a skill whose body was never sent, and scoring a real miss as a structural blind spot is the failure this measurement already made once. The arm is per mission (`config.skill_delivery`), not only per deployment. Both arms run against one server process; restarting between them would put a confound in the comparison that the numbers would not show. 829 tests, 108 binaries, green. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]> |
||
|
Omar SobhandClaude Opus 5
|
769e002bb3 |
feat(skills): deliver on every tier, record what agents receive, let them self-author
Three phases of the approved plan, plus a correction to what the last one
claimed.
CORRECTION: skills reached ONE tier, not all of them
The previous commit said "skills can now reach a mission agent". That was
true only for the container/ZeroClaw tier — the fall-through that queues a
topology_runs row for topology_worker, which drives the executor that was
patched. compose_turn_prompt/pinned_skills_text had exactly one production
caller, and phase_runner's three other paths (composed microVM, solo
microVM, direct session) never called it. CAPABILITY-REVIEW.md said the
broad thing too; both are corrected.
Those three tiers share one task string and have no per-turn alias, so
their skills resolve per PHASE from the mission's crew and are appended
there. The container tier deliberately still injects per turn, with the
running node's own role — appending in both places would put every crew
member's skills in every turn twice.
The behavioural tests prove phase_skills_text and compose_turn_prompt work.
They cannot prove the three launch_* calls pass the composed string, and
that substitution is a one-word edit that would silently return all three
tiers to delivering nothing with every test still green. So there is also a
source-level assertion on the call sites, following the precedent in
mission_events::the_cap_is_enforced_in_one_statement. Its negative control
names the exact tier.
PROVENANCE: what an agent received, and what it said it did
Both were unanswerable. The prompt was never stored anywhere on any tier —
re-deriving it later re-runs the skill lookup against a catalogue that has
since changed, and once agents author their own skills it certainly will
have. The reasoning rows were durably write-only: pushed live once, then
never read from the database again by anything except the GC that deletes
them.
- prompt.composed records the exact bytes, on all four tiers
- the session tier writes its checkpoint record and a reasoning row,
instead of eprintln! and nothing — the same defect the solo microVM
path was fixed for, in the last tier that still had it
- narrative_for_mission reads both back
Found while doing it: the 400-event per-phase cap counted EVERY kind, so a
busy phase could push out its own phase.completed and its own provenance.
The cap now counts only the two unbounded kinds it was written for.
Negative control confirms the old behaviour dropped the prompt.
Retention is now a per-mission hold (0080) rather than a raised global —
with a test asserting unheld missions are still reaped, because an
exemption that applies to everything is not an exemption.
SELF-AUTHORING: agents apply their own skill drafts, no human click
By operator decision. level_up has generated complete drafts from a model
since it shipped; only a checkbox stood between propose and apply.
What replaces the gate is not another gate but four properties, each held
by a test:
- workspace-scoped, so a hand-authored skill can never be modified
- a draft cannot take a hand-authored skill's name. Ids are scoped and
bindings resolve by skill_id, so it could not overwrite or shadow one
anyway — but two procedures under one name means nobody reading a
transcript can tell which the agent followed, and that ambiguity is
fatal in a system where the skill is the standard being graded against
- every revision appends a skill_versions row, so it can be reverted and
a past run can be read against the text it was actually judged under
- approved_by = NULL. An agent's decision is never attributed to a person
who did not make it
Only skill_candidate applies autonomously. identity_refinement and
brain_consolidation still wait for a human: they change what an agent IS
rather than adding a procedure it can consult. State is announced at boot,
because a safety gate that changes silently is one nobody notices changed.
CLAWMATES_SKILL_SELF_AUTHORING=0 restores it.
Also: the test Postgres ran out of /dev/shm mid-suite (Docker's 64MB
default) and surfaced it during MIGRATIONS, which reads like a schema fault
and is not one. --shm-size=1g, and a pointer to the `clean` subcommand that
already existed for the 779 leaked test databases.
Full workspace suite green: 106 binaries, no failures.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]>
|
||
|
Omar SobhandClaude Opus 5
|
e4942ce985 |
fix(missions): skills can now reach a mission agent at all
Repairing the 55 broken skill bindings made the catalogue correct. This
makes it reachable, which it was not — for any skill, on any mission, since
the catalogue was built.
The skills had exactly ONE delivery channel: the `clawmates_skills` MCP
server. A mission claw could not reach it for three independent reasons:
1. `provision_claw` wrote the constant `["clawmates_door"]` and ignored
the template's mcp_bundles — which mission_orchestrator had already
resolved and stored on the team row.
2. The runtime config defines no `clawmates_skills` bundle. The live
local config defines no bundles at all, not even the door.
3. Mission claws run on `claude_cli`, which the runtime's own config
comments document as text-only: it cannot surface a tool call, so no
MCP server is reachable from a mission turn regardless of bundles.
And a mission turn's whole system context is two sentences synthesised from
the role slot in topology_exec::build_prompt. The template's role prose is
not used either — mission_orchestrator documents this, and it means the
role prompts describing which procedures to follow were never read.
Two doc comments in cm-runtime describe the mission path as already having
the summary-and-fetch contract. It never did. The belief was written down
twice and checked zero times, which is why nobody looked — and it is why
the Skill-Use measurement this review planned could only ever have returned
a trigger rate of zero. That would have read as a finding about the agents.
- provision_claw takes the bundles, with clawmates_door always added: a
template that forgets to list it must not get an ungated agent
- all 11 templates now request clawmates_skills; web_fetch removed, since
a list that is honoured must not name a bundle that does not exist
- the re-provision sweep re-asserts the team's own stored bundles rather
than a constant, which would have silently stripped a capability
mid-mission
- pinned skill BODIES are injected into the mission prompt, bounded and
with truncation stated. Bodies, not an index: there is no `skills.read`
tool on this path, so an index would advertise a capability that does
not exist — the exact failure this whole change is about
Three tests: the body reaches the prompt, an agent with no skills adds no
heading (an empty "Your skills" section announces skills the agent does not
have), and the composition is exercised separately from the lookup, because
`pinned_skills_text` working and `run_turn` calling it are different claims
and the second is the one that was false.
Also adds the three review documents: CAPABILITY-REVIEW (inventory, what
was repaired, what is deferred and why), PROVENANCE-ASSESSMENT (assess
only, per decision — what each store answers and the two candidate paths),
and RESEARCH-SWEEP (the fortnight's papers and what we did about each,
including the ones we deliberately did nothing about).
Full workspace suite green.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]>
|