|
|
@@ -234,6 +234,12 @@ and fix-round diffs need it.
|
|
|
later dispatches — a real session's dispatch hit 42k chars of which 99%
|
|
|
was pasted history. A fresh subagent needs its task, the interfaces it
|
|
|
touches, and the global constraints. Nothing else.
|
|
|
+- The dispatch carries the no-subagents contract (it is in the
|
|
|
+ implementer template): the implementer never dispatches subagents —
|
|
|
+ not helpers, and never a reviewer. Review arrives from you, after the
|
|
|
+ report. In real sessions, every reviewer a worker spawned duplicated
|
|
|
+ the task review the controller dispatched anyway — a full extra
|
|
|
+ review seat per task.
|
|
|
- If an earlier task parked a finding in the area this task touches, carry
|
|
|
a pointer to that ledger entry in the dispatch.
|
|
|
- Record the implementer's agent identity from the dispatch result —
|
|
|
@@ -445,6 +451,7 @@ Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch.
|
|
|
| "The fix was small, skip the re-review" | Unreviewed fixes are how regressions land. Every round ends with a scoped re-review. |
|
|
|
| "Reviews slow the loop down" | The loop without reviews is just unverified churn. Reviews are the loop's brakes and steering. |
|
|
|
| "Ledger bookkeeping is overhead" | The ledger is what survives compaction. Controllers without one have re-dispatched entire completed task sequences. |
|
|
|
+| "The implementer spawned its own reviewer — free extra assurance" | It's a duplicate seat reviewing the same diff; the task review is the gate. A worker-spawned reviewer is a defect to flag, not rigor. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Example Workflow
|
|
|
|