From 8dc83d221bbea8df0bd46c82e845c149e0e82b6a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: istos Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2026 13:07:16 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] board: 55 PR review filed (istos) --- ...eadless-run-is-one-turn-and-must-say-so.md | 21 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+) diff --git a/tasks/review/55-a-headless-run-is-one-turn-and-must-say-so.md b/tasks/review/55-a-headless-run-is-one-turn-and-must-say-so.md index 686fc36..e30302f 100644 --- a/tasks/review/55-a-headless-run-is-one-turn-and-must-say-so.md +++ b/tasks/review/55-a-headless-run-is-one-turn-and-must-say-so.md @@ -127,3 +127,24 @@ The work is committed and the full suite is green. Here is the closing report. - `TodoWrite` was not available in this session, so the board had no live plan to display for this run. Nothing else about the run was affected. **What a reviewer should look at first:** the block itself in `manager/core/prompts/work.md:7-24` — it is prose an agent must act on, so its wording is the whole change. Everything else is that same text repeated and a test holding the four copies together. + + +--- + +## PR review — 2026-08-02 13:07 (Ada) + +PR REVIEW: APPROVE + +The work is committed on `task/55-a-headless-run-is-one-turn-and-must-say-so` (`f676c9f`) and is ready to merge; I posted the verdict as a GitHub **comment** rather than a formal approval because GitHub refuses to let the review identity (`istos`) approve a PR the same identity authored — the board still reads the `PR REVIEW: APPROVE` marker below. + +**What I checked** +- The shared "this run is a single non-interactive turn" block is byte-identical across all four templates (`work.md`, `act-pr.md`, `review.md`, `review-pr.md`) and sits before the `--- TASK ---` body in each. It states the run is one turn, the process exits when the reply ends, uncommitted work is lost, and names the card-47 trap directly (don't background a command and end the turn to wait — no monitor, no resume). +- Per-template follow-through is right: `work.md` commits early/before long commands; `act-pr.md` adds that an unpushed commit never reaches the PR; `review-pr.md` posts the verdict inside the turn; `review.md` writes its report inside the turn. +- Marker lines survive: `NOT READY` / `ADDRESSED` / `PR REVIEW` / `RELEVANCE REVIEW` all still parse and sit after the new block. In `work.md`, `FIRST line` appears exactly once and after `--- END TASK ---`, and the block itself contains no `NOT READY` / `FIRST line` text — so the acceptance edge case (nothing competes for "the first line") holds. +- No braces in the block, so `str.format` still renders every template. The existing `tests/test_prompt_report_contract.py` keys off a sentinel near EOF whose block is unchanged (the addition is above it), so that test still passes. + +**Good beyond the ask:** the block was also added to `review-pr.md`, which the task didn't name. That's the correct reading — `review-pr.md` is the prompt that actually posts a `gh pr review` verdict, and all four are one-shot headless runs. Sensible superset, justified in the work report. + +**For a human to note (no action needed):** +- The agent reported one flaky failure (`tests/test_phase_runs.py::HaltNeverSkip`, a timing race in `settle()`) that passed on rerun and cannot be reached by this markdown-only diff. Own card if it recurs. +- I could not execute the suite in this review session (unittest wasn't permitted here), so I verified every assertion by reading the templates and both test files; the work report states the full 1007-test definition-of-done suite passed.