Two structural issues flagged by the CEO:
1. Task technical-depth dilution — intake's rich analysis (file:line
targets, code examples, rationale) was getting lost as it traveled
umbrella -> root-subtask -> cell -> dev. The detail IS preserved in
Task.description; the dilution was in delegation (PMs re-authoring)
and the intake prompt not demanding depth.
Fixes:
- evidence_repo: ancestor_context_for_task walks the parent chain
(cycle-guarded, depth-capped 16, desc-clipped 1500) and surfaces it
as parent_context in the evidence payload, so a leaf dev finally
sees the upstream intake analysis instead of a bare title.
- evidence_builder: Task.description now rides in the payload;
EvidencePayload gains description + parent_context (omit-when-empty
so no null noise).
- orchestrator: _description_body (capped 4000) injects the
description into the dev spawn prompt + SessionStart briefing.
- role prompts (main_pm/cell_pm/developer/prompter): teach pass-the-
torch, don't-dim-it; prompter now demands file:line/code-examples
in the_work/notes (reconciled with the no-code-level-ACs-on-roots
rule). main_pm's brief-not-a-spec scoped: not-a-spec applies to the
solution only, facts forward verbatim.
2. PR-review/QA scope too narrow — they only checked the AC checklist,
not whether the change is coherent with project structure/intent.
Fixes:
- qa.md + pr_reviewer.md: Coherence & intent rule (intent via
description+parent_context, coherence with project patterns,
standards). Criterion-less major findings allowed for intent drift
(Finding.criterion is optional).
- parent_context + description wired into the gate/QA/inbound-PR
evidence builders (fail-open, logged).
Skipped per YAGNI: a technical_spec JSONB column (detail is already in
description) and a criterion_kind enum (criterion is already optional).
All gates green: ruff, mypy (1152), pytest (12883 passed, 94.82% cov),
xenon, vulture, bandit, pip-audit, deptry, alembic, import-linter,
foundation-check.
Co-authored-by: Renn F <rennf93@users.noreply.github.com>
