fix: scope routing and support report-only plan audits - #2808
Draft
surim0n wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
|
Merging to
After your PR is submitted to the merge queue, this comment will be automatically updated with its status. If the PR fails, failure details will also be posted here |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why (in your own words)
The proactive router treats weak keyword matches as a reason to invoke a skill, and an explicit read-only plan audit can enter the interactive decision workflow. This narrows routing to the requested outcome and gives explicit report-only audits a bounded path that returns findings and missing decisions without changing the plan or starting implementation. Interactive reviews and
/autoplankeep their existing flow.Live evidence
Pending: an actual model transcript demonstrating routing and report-only behavior before and after the change. This PR is a draft because automated tests do not satisfy that evidence requirement.
The following automated validation completed locally:
The system Bun 1.2.18 lacked the YAML support needed by the tests; the final passing run used the current Bun package. This is test evidence, not live proof of model behavior.
Scope
Liveness proof (required)
Pending a human-provided screenshot of
GSTACK PRtyped live into a real surface. No screenshot has been synthesized or submitted as human evidence.Checklist
GSTACK PRtyped live into a real surface (not edited onto the image)