4 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Omar SobhandClaude Opus 5.5	9ca71e5fa4	fix(memory): verdict lines carry the brief and a distinguishing mission id ... The first self_audit run on a planted brief/condition mismatch found the pattern and quoted it, then diagnosed "the agent skipped the section": the record held the condition but not the brief, and working agents never see the condition. It also read two missions as one — a UUIDv7's first 8 chars are a timestamp, and missions 34 s apart both rendered as 01a0cb38. - verdict_line records the phase brief (config.task) beside the condition - the short mission id is the uuid tail - self_audit copies the record into the checkout (the judge cannot read /mission/memory) and compares brief with condition Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <[email protected]>	2026-09-22 17:42:37 -05:00
Omar SobhandClaude Opus 5.5	642b6ef44b	feat(self-audit): continuous_improvement audits the project record it can actually reach ... Its first run could not do its job. The template audited "every project agent's .brain" through per-agent APIs — fetch a brain, submit to /api/claws/{id}/level-up, pull claw metrics — none of which a mission can reach; agent brains live in the server's /data/brains volume and nothing delivered them in. It spent itself searching, found a ROSTER.md in a scratch repo, and audited that. A delivery channel alone would not have helped: per-mission crews carry ~2 KB seed brains with no history, because missions write memory to the REPOSITORY brain, one judge verdict per phase. That is where a project's history actually accumulates, so that is the subject now. mission_memory::export renders the whole repo brain as markdown — the .brain is HDF5 and a mission container has no library to read it — and mission_orchestrator installs it at /mission/memory/PROJECT-MEMORY.md, outside the checkout so it is input and never lands in the diff, the same way install_skill_files delivers skills. The three roles are rewritten for that record: an inspector that finds patterns (several UNMET lines on the same kind of work) and quotes them; a proposer that ties each proposal to at least two lines or drops it; and an evaluator that checks the cited lines exist verbatim and marks each proposal SUPPORTED, WEAK or UNSUPPORTED. Each says outright that "no change is warranted" is a complete result — the property that kept the first run from inventing improvements out of empty brains. Local: 523 passed; the two DB-backed world tests panic PoolTimedOut because Docker Desktop is down here. CI runs them against real Postgres. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 (1M context) <[email protected]> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WZb5A2kfVfjpdwSochkuHz	2026-09-22 15:27:09 -05:00
Omar SobhandClaude Opus 5	33560c7fe6	feat(decide): memory rerank and paper triage on the decision tier ... mission_memory::recall is two stages when a key is set: BM25 proposes 8 candidates, one Noul per candidate ('this earlier verdict is relevant to the task') reorders them and drops those under 0.3, three are kept. BM25 measures keyword overlap, and a verdict about MICROVM.md shares words with every task that names a file. Without a key the BM25 order stands. continuous_research: topic_tags was written as [] on every manifest line since the manifest existed. triage_papers asks, per harvested paper, a Choice over the mission's topics (readable names, the arXiv query as the description, 'none' offered) and a four-level relevance Score; the tags (every topic ≥ 0.3) and {score, confidence} land on the line the agents already read. Probe on PORTICO's abstract: relevance 3.0 at 1.0; topic 'none' 0.59 / verification 0.41 — true, the topic list has no authority/sandboxing entry. Untriaged papers write the old empty line. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]>	2026-09-21 14:09:28 -05:00
Omar SobhandClaude Opus 5	13f7fb3aff	feat(memory): missions remember their verdicts, per repository ... Until now missions wrote no memory. The chat path records every turn into the claw's .brain, but a mission's crew is minted per mission, so a brain keyed by agent would be written once and never read. What persists across missions is the repository: mission_memory keeps one .brain per repo_id, writes each judge verdict into it (reason when met, sanitized guidance when not — the operator reason may quote the acceptance text), and recalls against the next phase's task text into the brief, under a heading all three executors carry because it rides on the task. Recall is BM25 over the keyword index, no embedder; the harness asserts the brief carries the section once the repo has one judged mission behind it, and says 'first mission' rather than failing before that. OpenClaw's flush-before-compaction was the other half of this item and is moot here: the chat loop has no compaction and already remembers both halves of every turn. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <[email protected]> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01WZb5A2kfVfjpdwSochkuHz	2026-09-20 22:11:55 -05:00