Commit Graph
1430 Commits
Author SHA1 Message Date
bvandeusen 6da39e0298 Merge pull request 'The prompt-boundary rule arm, and a slot a preference cannot lose (#3852, #3894)' (#151) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 11s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 52s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 54s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m25s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 26s
2026-09-11 11:11:59 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 d5f96563fd feat(rules): a slot a preference cannot lose (#3894)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 1m1s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 1m7s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m44s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 35s
Milestone 399 step 4. A rule and a preference are not equally served by one
ranking, because their losses are not equal:

  - a RULE crowded out at the prompt boundary still fires at an act arm. A
    push reaches pre_tool_rule, a write reaches write_path_rule. The prompt
    hit is a preview of a second chance.
  - a PREFERENCE about how to answer has no second chance. The response IS
    the act, so crowded out there it is never delivered at all.

A straight ranking therefore favours the record whose loss is recoverable
over the one whose loss is total, and does it INVISIBLY: the rule that won is
a legitimate hit, the telemetry reads healthy, and the only symptom is a
preference that quietly never arrives. reuse_slot exists for the same shape
one corpus over (#2463).

`semantic_search_rules` gains a `kind` filter, so the slot's query can only
answer with what the slot is for. Verifying afterwards would be weaker — an
unfiltered search that happened to return a rule would spend the slot on it,
and that line would be indistinguishable from one that earned its place.

THE SLOT BUYS POSITION, NOT A LOWER BAR, matching reuse_slot. A weak
preference cannot buy it, so silence stays the default. The task asked for a
separate threshold; I did not add one, and the reason is that the worry
behind it — reading a miss rate as a fact about preferences — is answered by
`preference_slot` being its own logged source, where best_available_id names
which preference was refused. A knob added on a guess is a way to
misconfigure the surface; a bar moved on evidence is an argument. The
evidence arrives on its own now.

IT EXTENDS, IT NEVER DISPLACES — and here it parts from reuse_slot, which
evicts its menu's weakest hit. A displaced hit sits in prompt_rule's
retrieval_logs row while never being surfaced, so that source's two tables
stop agreeing and #3668's identity breaks for a reason nothing in the data
explains. Milestone #379 is what losing that identity costs: five steps
planned against two counters disagreeing, not a write path dropping rows. One
extra line in a rare case is the cheaper price.

It also runs BEFORE the bail-out. An empty general result is not proof no
preference qualifies: that search overfetches by distance then collapses, so
a preference ranked below the window is invisible to it while a kind-filtered
query finds it at once. Bailing first would make the slot dead in exactly the
corpus it exists for.

One existing assertion repinned from a bare call_count to a per-source
filter: the slot logs its own query on the same call, and a count would pin
the number of arms rather than the property — going red the next time one is
added, which is rule 167's false alarm about the thing it protects.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-11 08:44:24 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 44e0b0541f feat(rules): rules retrieve against the operator's message (#3852)
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 53s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 1m1s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m35s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 38s
The third rule arm, and the one the other two cannot reach. `write_path_rule`
is keyed on code, `pre_tool_rule` on a command — both things the session is
about to DO. A rule that governs what to SAY has no such trigger: extract
intent from loose phrasing, raise a conflict before acting, hand off an
action with its reason, end a finding with an offer all bind on a RESPONSE,
and no tool call precedes one.

The operator's message is the only query that exists before a response is
composed. That hook searched notes alone, so no rule had ever been retrieved
against a thing the operator actually said — and residency was the only
surface those rules had, which is what milestone 394 removes.

A SEPARATE FUNCTION, not a branch in build_autoinject_hint, because of its
early returns. That arm bails when auto-inject is disabled, when the query is
blank, when nothing clears the note bar — every one a statement about NOTES.
Folded in, an operator who turned the awareness menu off would silently lose
their rules, a coupling with no symptom since both look like a quiet hook.
Two functions, two sets of gates, composed in the route. Guarded as "the rule
arm never asks the notes arm's config", which is the structural fact.

Joins _ARMS rather than getting its own test file. #3497's history is that
the pre-tool arm inherited a defect from its sibling by being MODELLED on it
instead of sharing with it, and a third arm modelled on two is two chances to
repeat that. Repeat rendering, fresh-only counting, log-before-bailout, the
kind register and the two-recorders identity are properties of every arm or
of none.

The bar is INHERITED and says so. 0.72 was tuned against code and commands;
prose is a different query shape against the same documents, and triggers are
written in the vocabulary of the moment — which for most rules is act
vocabulary. Starting at the only number with evidence behind it and logging
every call from the first deploy is what makes it settleable; guessing lower
would put an unmeasured bar in front of a corpus that binds.

k=3, anchored on this hook's own budget rather than the act arms'.
RULEHINT_LIMIT is 1 because that arm fires before every Bash call; this one
fires once per turn, beside a notes menu already spending three slots. And a
prompt genuinely contains more than one act — "merge to main and then start
on X" is two — where a command is one thing.

`prompt_rule` added to RANKED_SOURCES: a ranker picked it, and a ranked
source missing from that tuple is silently counted as bulk delivery and drops
out of the pull-through denominator.

The hook reads and writes the SHARED rule ledger under scribe-priorart, not a
private one — one session keeps one list, aged (#3751), so a rule named here
is not re-announced before the next Bash call.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-11 07:56:19 -04:00
bvandeusen 5f77fc29c1 Merge pull request 'Preferences — a rule kind that Scribe keeps up to date (#3849 steps 1–3)' (#150) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 12s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 58s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 55s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m27s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 24s
2026-09-10 23:34:16 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 8406871085 fix(plugin): the instruction surfaces still said every rule binds (#3849)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 12s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 54s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 1m3s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m27s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 41s
Step 3 shipped a line a session can receive — "Preference that may apply
here …" — into surfaces that told it, in the most authoritative voice it
has, that anything arriving in that shape is binding. That is the confusion
milestone 399 exists to prevent, arriving through the one channel a session
has least reason to doubt.

Silent in both directions, which is why it could not wait for step 6. A
session treating a preference as a rule refuses to proceed over something
the operator merely preferred; and it loses the whole reason preferences
exist, which is that they are brought up to date rather than obeyed.

Three surfaces, each to its own budget:

- SKILL.md gets the full account: kind decides force, the injected line names
  which in its opening words, and a preference is the one record a session
  keeps current itself (update_preference, with what taught the change).
- scribe_static_context.md gets six lines — enough to tell the kinds apart
  and to say a preference is yours to update.
- _INSTRUCTIONS gets four words. It is a MAP at 1978 of its 2000-char budget
  (#2562), and the detail belongs in the surfaces above and in the tool
  docstrings, which is what that budget exists to force.

Guarded so it cannot drift back: a surface that claims rules bind must name
the kind that does not. Pinned on the CLAIM rather than the word "bind",
because a bare substring also matches bind_repo, list_repo_bindings and
server.py's DNS-rebinding comment — a guard that would one day fail a skill
about repo binding is rule 167's named failure, raising a false alarm about
the very thing it protects. Falsified against all three surfaces losing the
mention.

Plugin version minted: the cache refreshes only on a version bump (#2209),
so a skill edit without one reaches no installed plugin.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-10 23:20:04 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 26e0dff706 feat(rules): a preference does not speak in a rule's voice (#3849 step 3)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 53s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m27s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 1m31s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 41s
Two independent axes on one hint line. `kind` decides the head, `seen`
decides the tail, and neither reads the other — which is what let a second
kind arrive without reopening #3750's repeat question. Whether a record is
already on the exclusion ledger has nothing to do with how much force it
carries, so the seen branch is shared verbatim.

The noun carries the whole visual difference, deliberately. A reader skimming
an injected block gets one word to place the register, so the word that moves
is the one naming force: "Standing rule" / "Preference". Everything
structural after it is identical, so the kinds read as one set rather than
two formats.

Force is asserted in exactly one other place, and that moves too. A rule's
line says to read it BEFORE DECIDING IT DOES NOT APPLY, because dismissing a
rule unread is how the thing it prevents happens. A preference makes no such
claim: it says where to find HOW THIS HAS BEEN DONE BEFORE, and following it
buys consistency rather than correctness.

Guarded on both places at once. Pinning the noun alone would pass a line
reading "Preference … before deciding it does not apply" — label swapped,
instruction kept — which is worse than not distinguishing them, because it
looks handled.

And a guard on the independence claim itself, exercising all four
combinations: the way this breaks silently is a seen branch that grows a kind
test, leaving one combination rendered by nobody's intention.

Noted, not fixed: plugin/skills/using-scribe/SKILL.md still says "Standing
rules are binding" with no room for a kind that does not. That surface is
step 6's.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-10 22:04:14 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 89d16d89a9 feat(rules): a preference updates without asking, and says what taught it (#3849 step 2)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 5s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 12s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 1m7s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 1m8s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m37s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 33s
The write path, and the step where a preference stops being a relabelled
rule. `create_preference` / `update_preference` on the MCP surface, plus
`kind` on update_rule and both HTTP doors.

SEPARATE TOOLS, NOT A `kind=` ARGUMENT. create_rule's docstring IS the
approval gate (#3557): propose, offer three answers, wait. That is right for
a rule — the person it binds should have agreed. A preference inverts it, and
one reached through create_rule would be read through that prose, so the
caller would hesitate over exactly the act this kind exists to make routine.
Two doors, two contracts, one table. Reads stay shared: a preference IS a
rule row, and "what governs this" wants both.

Two required fields, each buying something:

- `when_to_apply`, because the trigger is two-thirds of the embedded
  document. Without one the record is written, stored, and silently never
  delivered — indistinguishable from one nobody wrote.
- `arose_from_id`, the price of the ungated write. A corpus that drifts with
  no record of what taught each change cannot be audited, and the operator's
  veto over drift is worth exactly as much as their ability to read why it
  happened.

The near-duplicate gate is what lets this corpus be written freely and stay
small: the second preference about a thing updates the first. It is
title-scoped and kind-blind, so it also catches a preference restating a rule
that already binds.

The asymmetry is guarded as two PRESENCE facts — the rule door still asks,
the preference door still says write it — never as an absence. An absence
check passes against a docstring that was deleted or rewritten into something
else, which is snippet #3352's warning and would read as coverage here while
proving nothing.

`_plain_detail` moved to tests/helpers on its second copy, per that module's
own reason for existing (#2825).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-10 21:59:23 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 4aae4973f7 fix(tests): the backup stand-ins predate kind (#3849 step 1)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 45s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 56s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m38s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 48s
Two unit tests build a rule with SimpleNamespace rather than the model, so
adding a column broke them — the fixture has no `kind` for `_rule_rows` to
read. Fixture-only; the export itself was already right, which the existing
column-coverage guard confirmed by passing.

Adds the guard that coverage check cannot make. `_stand_in` walks
`__table__.columns` and proves the KEY is emitted; it cannot prove the VALUE
survives. A preference exported as a rule is a silent failure — the restored
rule reads fine and simply binds when it was only ever a preference — and a
fixture carrying the default would pass against a `_rule_rows` that dropped
the field and let the importer's `or "rule"` refill it. So the new test
asserts on `preference`, the one value that cannot be reconstructed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-10 21:31:16 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 c63172272d feat(rules): a preference is a rule that does not bind (#3849 step 1)
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 11s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 2s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 54s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 1m4s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Failing after 1m11s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Skipped
Adds `kind` to rules — `rule` binds, `preference` is how the operator wants
work done. One column, because the two differ in exactly one dimension and
everything else a preference needs already lives on `rules`: a trigger
column, a trigger-dominated embedding document, ownership-scoped search,
three retrieval arms with telemetry, typed relations, and versioning.

Defaults to `rule`, so nothing changes force on upgrade — 0088's argument
for `tier`, unchanged.

`rule_versions` gets the column too, and that half is not bookkeeping.
`record_if_changed` decides whether an edit deserves a snapshot by comparing
the fields a version carries, so a field absent from SNAPSHOT_FIELDS is a
field whose change records no history at all. Without it, turning a rule
into a preference — the moment something stops binding, and the single most
consequential edit either kind can undergo — would leave the history silent.

Backup carries it through all four seams. A missed one would have restored
every preference as a rule, quietly.

Guarded on real Postgres in three halves: a preference writes, a typo is
refused (without which every other assertion would pass against a table
whose CHECK had been dropped), and a row written with no kind reads back as
`rule` — the migration's whole safety claim, asserted rather than assumed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-10 21:14:29 -04:00
bvandeusen d8017f9b96 Merge pull request 'A surfaced rule stops going permanently quiet (#3750, #3751, #3752)' (#149) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 12s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 43s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 53s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m18s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 24s
2026-09-09 22:44:28 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 c1aa1d8e92 feat(plugin): rule exclusions age, so salience decays without a context event (#3751)
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 13s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 38s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 45s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m9s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 27s
#3749 clears the ledger when an EVENT destroys context — a compaction, a
/clear. This is the case with no event at all: a long session where a
rule was named two hundred turns ago and has simply fallen out of
attention. It is #3702's argument at the tier level — present in context
and salient at the moment are different properties — applied to time
instead of to tier.

FORMAT: `id<TAB>epoch`, per entry.

Not a whole-file mtime: that is one line of shell and wrong in exactly
the session that needs it, since a single recent write keeps every stale
id alive, and the ids that go stale first come from the rules that fire
most.

Not a turn counter, though it would be the truer model — an idle session
does not forget. A hook has no turn number without keeping its own, which
is a second piece of session state to write, read, clear on compaction
and get wrong. Wall time costs a `date` call. The failure it accepts is a
session left idle over lunch treating its rules as forgotten, worth one
extra full line per rule and nothing else.

TTL 2700s (45 minutes), reasoned rather than picked (rule 32). About one
working stretch on a single task: long enough that a rule does not
re-announce itself while you are still doing the thing it governs, short
enough that a multi-hour session gets a refresh rather than one 9am
mention. It leans short because since #3750 being wrong on the short side
is the cheaper error — an expired entry costs one full line instead of
one short one, and the exclusion re-arms the moment it is spent. There is
no data on this yet; #3807's near-miss listing is what should revise it.

BOTH READERS THROUGH ONE HELPER, in scribe_defs.sh. The two hooks share
one ledger so a rule named by one arm is not re-offered by the other; a
format only one of them understood would break that on the first read.
The flat `tr '\n' ','` read would now send `156<TAB>1789002860` as an
exclude id — verified, which is why this is not a per-hook edit.

THE LAST ENTRY FOR AN ID WINS. The file is append-only, so a rule that
ages out, is surfaced fresh and is appended again has two lines. Reading
the first leaves it permanently expired, and it then re-announces itself
on every call for the rest of the session — the mechanism meant to
quieten things becoming the loudest thing in the hint.

A BARE ID IS LIVE. That is the pre-#3751 format, and every session in
flight when this ships has a ledger full of them. Reading unknown as
EXPIRED would make all of those sessions re-announce every rule they had
already been told, at once — the exact noise this prevents, delivered by
the feature on the day it ships. Unknown means "not measured", never
"old", the same discipline the nullable retrieval_logs columns use.

GUARDS (tests/test_rule_ledger_ageing.py, real shell, no credentials)

- old ages out AND recent survives, in ONE assertion (rule 167): either
  half alone passes against a broken helper — "old is gone" passes
  against one returning nothing, "recent survives" passes against the
  flat read this replaces, i.e. against the defect itself.
- the ping-pong case, which is the one that costs the most to get wrong.
- a bare id is live, including beside a stale stamped one.
- missing/empty ledger excludes nothing.
- an id repeated in the ledger appears once, with no empty list element.
- structural: neither hook reads the rule ledger flat again — pinned on
  the flat-read SHAPE, so a rename of the helper is not a failure and a
  hook that ages correctly some other way is not either.

The TTL's VALUE is deliberately not asserted. The tests read the constant
out of the shell and assert the property around it, so a later tuning
change stays a tuning change instead of a red build.

Dropped a boundary test (`ttl` vs `ttl + 1`) before committing: racy by
construction, since a ledger written at T is read at T+n and the two
cases swap. A one-second distinction on a 45-minute window is also not
observable behaviour, so it pinned a flake rather than a property.

Plugin version minted to 2026.09.10.0221 — this is entirely hook-side,
so without the bump the cache would never pick it up and the merge would
ship nothing.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-09 22:21:32 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 c4908f093f feat(rules): a repeat is referenced, not withheld (#3750, #3752)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 11s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 40s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m9s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 37s
Both arms used to drop a hit already on the session's exclusion ledger
and emit nothing. That is correct only while the session still HOLDS
what it was told, and a compaction breaks exactly that: the earlier
injection is summarized away while the id stays on the ledger, leaving
the rule absent from context AND unreachable for the rest of the
session. #3749 closed the compaction half by clearing the ledger; this
closes the ordinary half, where a session simply stops holding a line
it read an hour ago.

Only ONE CLAUSE of the existing line is false on a repeat — the claim
that the rule is not in the session's loaded set — so only that clause
changes. The fresh line is byte-identical to what it was.

Both tails now come from one `_rule_hint_line`. The arms phrase their
heads differently on purpose; everything after must not differ, and
#3497's history is that the pre-tool arm inherited a defect by being
modelled on its sibling rather than sharing with it.

THE BUDGET DECISION, recorded at RULEHINT_LIMIT. A repeat competes for
the single slot on rank alone: nothing is fetched behind it, and it
never rides alongside as a second line. Promoting a fresh rule past a
better-ranked repeat would reinstate the withholding one rank deeper,
and a second line is the one thing the limit exists to forbid. The
consequence is deliberate — a rule that keeps ranking first for a
recurring situation keeps being referenced, and its decay belongs to
exclusion ageing (#3751), not to a first-place rule being demoted for
having won before.

THE TELEMETRY, decided before shipping rather than after a number moved
(#3752): nothing changes. A reference is a RENDERING decision, not a
retrieval outcome. `results` stays `fresh`, `suppressed` stays
len(hits) - len(fresh), and `record_rule_surfaced` still counts only
what the arm freshly chose. This matters more than it reads: the naive
implementation drops the `fresh` filter and takes suppressed_count to
zero everywhere — and #3739's near-miss fix identifies repeat-caused
zeros by `suppressed_count > 0`, so the contamination corrected on
2026-09-08 would return by a different route, in the same field, with
the fix still in the code and no longer working. A test asserts the
counters as unmoved, because "nothing changed" is only worth something
if it is checkable.

Also corrects two comments that outlived #3702 — both arms still
claimed CONDITIONAL ONLY while the module-level note above
RULEHINT_LIMIT said the opposite, in the exact code this change edits.

GUARDS

- an already-held hit produces a rule line at all (the regression),
  asserted on `get_rule(<id>)` rather than a truthy context: the
  write-path arm fills its context from four other sources, so
  truthiness passes under the OLD behaviour and pins nothing there.
- the two tails are distinguishable, each excludes the other, and
  neither injects the rule statement — the budget claim, both branches.
- the counters are unmoved, per #3752.
- test_a_rule_the_session_already_holds_is_not_re_offered asserted the
  old contract (`"161" not in context`). Repinned rather than deleted:
  the telemetry half of what it protected still holds.

Repinned the #3497 log-placement guard on structure (rule 167). It
read `body.index("if not fresh:")` — a local variable NAME, not the
property. This change renames that guard to `if not hits:`, so the
old assertion would have raised ValueError and reported #3497 as
back while the arm was entirely correct. Now walks the AST for the
first early return after the search and asserts the call row is
written before it. Falsified both ways: it fails on the #3497
mutation, and it refuses to pass when no early return exists at all.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-09 21:48:50 -04:00
bvandeusen a9fa8bddb6 Merge pull request 'Record WHAT the bar turned away, not only how close it came (#3807)' (#148) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 12s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 26s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 47s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m25s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 24s
2026-09-09 21:34:56 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 d5ac8408f6 feat(telemetry): record WHAT the bar turned away, not only how close it came (#3807)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 16s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 40s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 43s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m14s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 2m59s
#3670 added `best_available_score` so a threshold could be judged from its
rejections. It records how CLOSE the bar came to firing and not WHAT it
refused, and that is the half a decision actually needs.

Live, pre_tool_rule sits at a ~0.72 bar with a near-miss p90 of 0.7071 —
about 117 declines a day within 0.013 of firing. Dropping to 0.707 would
take that arm from 22 hits a day to roughly 139: six-fold, on a surface
that runs before every Bash call. The percentile says the mass is there.
Nothing said whether it was worth showing.

NEITHER OBVIOUS INSTRUMENT ANSWERS IT. Pull-through cannot: the injected
rule line already carries title and trigger, so a session can comply
without ever calling get_rule, and rule pull-through understates
usefulness by construction. Reading the rejected records can — and
`result_ids` holds only what was RETURNED, so on a zero-result call the
near-missed record had no name at all.

So the id, from the SAME ranked candidate as the score. Both searches
unpack `best` once and read both fields off it, because splitting that
into two expressions is exactly how a later edit pairs a score with its
neighbour's id — and a score attached to the wrong record is worse than no
id, since it invites judging the wrong one and concluding the bar is fine.

write_path withholds the id on the same condition it withholds the score
(#3739): a surviving id beside a null score names a record without saying
what it scored, the pair disagreeing in the other direction.

THE READ PATH IS A LISTING, NOT A STATISTIC — an id cannot be percentiled,
and a reader tuning a bar needs to go and read the records. Opt-in via
`near_miss_samples` (0-20, default 0) so the ordinary readout keeps its
size, and deliberately NOT a window function: this module's one production
outage was a grouped query Postgres rejected, swallowed by the broad
except, every counter reading zero while the mocked tests passed (#2663).
One flat ordered query, overfetched, bucketed in Python — the shape that
lesson prescribes.

Migration 0097, nullable and unbackfilled. Not a foreign key: the table
spans record types and `source` says which, exactly as result_ids works.

The integration guard pins the listing as PER SOURCE. A global LIMIT would
let a noisy source eat the whole quota and leave the surface being tuned
showing nothing — which reads as "nothing was close", the misreading this
milestone has spent itself correcting.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-09 21:24:32 -04:00
bvandeusen cd910e32a0 Merge pull request 'A search that never ran is not a decline' (#147) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 6s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 13s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 42s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 49s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m22s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 16s
2026-09-09 13:36:43 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 623464323e fix(telemetry): a search that never ran is not a decline (#3765)
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 13s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 46s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 52s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m21s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 36s
`best_available_score` was added by #3670 so a bar could be judged from
what it rejected, and it arrived null on four unrelated causes: the corpus
offered nothing, the query was empty, the embedder was down, or the
DATABASE QUERY FAILED. Only the first is a measurement. The fourth is the
#2663 shape — a swallowed failure rendering as a clean zero — inside the
field added to fix an instance of the #2663 shape.

Found while trying to explain why reuse_slot returned nothing on 45 of 45
calls, and auto_inject on 153 of 161. That investigation is still open;
what it established first is that the readout could not answer it.

THE FIX IS NOT A NEW COLUMN. A call that never searched writes no row, so
every remaining null means one thing: searched, and nothing came close.
That is the convention the pre-tool arm already follows for a blank
command — "a row here would report a call that never happened and drag the
clear-rate down with phantom declines" — extended from the case a caller
can see in advance to the ones only the search knows about.

Both searches stamp `report["searched"]` FALSE before anything can return
and True only where a real result set exists, so every early return leaves
it false. It has to be the first thing done to the dict: a return added
above that line would leave the key absent.

ABSENT IS A THIRD STATE AND IT DEFAULTS TO TRUE. A caller that passes no
report cannot know, and the safe reading there is the old behaviour. Only
a real search can report False, so absent means "nobody asked" and never
"it failed" — which is also why 66 existing mocked searches across twelve
test files keep working unchanged rather than being rewritten to simulate
a flag they do not care about.

A FAILURE IS NOT MADE INVISIBLE. semantic_search_notes already logs a
WARNING on a query failure, which is where a broken search belongs: a
counter cannot say "I am broken" without a reader already trusting it.

Three tests, and the middle one is what makes them discriminate — a
blanket `return` passes the first and fails the second, because a call
that searched and came back empty is the only evidence a threshold is too
high (#3497).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-09 12:47:46 -04:00
bvandeusen 1c4ace5199 Merge pull request 'write_path stops reporting records it withheld itself as near misses' (#146) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 34s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m8s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 14s
2026-09-09 00:44:44 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 277f5df515 fix(telemetry): write_path reported records it withheld itself as near misses (#3739)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m5s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 24s
Found by verifying the previous fix on live data — the check that fix was
meant to make possible.

    write_path   near_misses.max  0.822    p90 0.7521
                 top_score.min    0.6857   so the bar is at or below this

A "rejection" that outscored every acceptance, and not one outlier: the p90
is above the bar too.

#3739's fix keyed on `suppressed_count`, and I justified its NULL branch as
"null means the caller passed its exclusions INTO the search, so the score
is already post-exclusion". That holds for auto_inject and reuse_slot, both
of which log the RAW search output and do their Python filtering after. It
does not hold for write_path, the one note arm that filters TWICE:
`exclude_ids` takes `seen - pulled_seen` into the search, but the
pulled-and-seen ids stay in the query on purpose — the arm's query doubles
as the resemblance test — and are dropped afterwards in Python. So the row
carries a POST-filter count beside a PRE-filter score.

The suppression column cannot rescue it the way it does for the rule arms.
This arm's count would be PARTIAL — covering the drops made here and not
the ones `exclude_ids` made inside the search — and a partial number under
a name that reads as complete is the substitution this milestone exists to
stop.

So it reports null whenever its own filter removed anything: not measured
on this call, because the bar was not the only thing that turned something
away. Calls that withheld nothing keep reporting, which is most of them.

Both directions are asserted. Without the second test, setting the field to
null unconditionally would pass the first while deleting the measurement
#3670 was built for.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-09 00:34:11 -04:00
bvandeusen 6495236569 Merge pull request 'A repeat is not a rejection, and a compaction is not knowledge' (#145) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 42s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m9s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 15s
2026-09-09 00:13:01 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 ab14f783e1 chore(plugin): mint 2026.09.09.0408 — the hook change has to reach the cache (#3749)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 36s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m8s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 16s
The manifest gate caught this, which is what it is for:

    FAIL  plugin content changed but the version is still 2026.09.04.0140.

An install has two halves and only one self-updates. The marketplace clone
pulls on its own; the cache that actually EXECUTES refreshes only when this
string changes. So a hook edit shipped without a bump reaches the repo and
stops there — and the obvious debugging move, inspecting the clone, shows
the fix present while the broken copy keeps running. That is #2209, #1040
and #2220, and the only detector was the operator saying "I don't think it
updated".

Minted with scripts/mint_plugin_version.py rather than hand-edited: the
plugin ships straight from the repo with no build step, so there is no
moment at which CI could stamp a value, and the script is the path the
mint guard pins.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-09 00:08:55 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 1cfbf43ccd fix(plugin): the rule ledger clears when the context it describes is destroyed (#3749)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Failing after 8s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 11s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 36s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 21s
The prior-art and tool-rule hooks record every rule id they have named in
<state>/<sid>.rules.ids and hand it back as exclude_rule_ids, so a rule is
surfaced once per session and then goes quiet. That is correct while the
session still HOLDS what it was told.

A compaction breaks it in the worst available way: it summarizes the
earlier injections out of context and does not touch the filesystem. The
rule ends up absent from context AND still excluded — unreachable for the
rest of the session. The compaction banner this hook already prints tells
the model to re-pull its ALWAYS-ON rules, but a rule an arm surfaced is
conditional and is not in that set, so it has no other way back. The rules
most likely to be in that state are the ones that fire most often.

The stale ledger is genuinely found again rather than orphaned: the etag
marker further down this same hook is rewritten on `compact` and keyed by
session_id, which is only meaningful if the id survives a compaction.

CLEARED ON THE SOURCES THAT DESTROY CONTEXT, AND ONLY THOSE. `compact` and
`clear` destroy it while the file survives. `resume` does not — the
context came back intact, so clearing there would re-surface every rule
after a restore that lost nothing, which is the same defect from the other
side. `startup` is a no-op against a new session id. `fork` keeps it, and
the answer holds whichever way forks are keyed: a fork carries the
conversation, so an inherited id means an accurate ledger and a new id
means an empty file.

Only the RULE ledger. The same directory holds .ids / .sync.ids /
.derive.ids for the note arms; whether a surfaced note should return after
a compaction is a different question with a different answer, and a `rm`
glob would have decided it silently.

The guard pins the DISCRIMINATION, not the deletion: the whole source
table is asserted in one statement, so a blanket delete (all False) and a
no-op (all True) both fail, and neither can be made to pass by editing one
case. A second test pins the scope against that glob, and a third proves
an event with no session id clears nothing rather than falling back to a
wildcard.

Runs with no SCRIBE_URL/SCRIBE_TOKEN on purpose — the clear is local,
keyless and networkless, and must still happen against an unreachable
instance. That is also why it sits above the config read rather than
inside the dynamic tier.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-09 00:04:33 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 a165483b92 fix(telemetry): a repeat is not a rejection, and near_misses counted it as one (#3739)
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 31s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 35s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 45s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m27s
Caught on the first live read after deploying #3670. The readout
contradicted itself:

    pre_tool_rule   top_score.min    0.7204   the lowest score ever RETURNED
                    near_misses.max  0.7457   "rejected", but scored higher

`best_available_score` is measured pre-threshold, which is right, but for
the rule arms it is also PRE-EXCLUSION, which is not. The note arms pass
`exclude_ids` into semantic_search_notes so their score is already
post-exclusion and clean; `semantic_search_rules` takes no such parameter,
so the rule arms filter in Python after the search and a rule that cleared
the bar and was dropped as a repeat still reported its score on a
zero-result row.

That is #3497's distinction — a ranker decline versus a reader already
ahead of it — reintroduced one level up, inside the field built to replace
a tautology.

The population now also requires `suppressed_count IS NULL OR = 0`. The
NULL arm is principled rather than permissive: null means the caller
filtered INSIDE the search, which is exactly the case where the reported
score cannot be contaminated.

Deliberately conservative — a call carrying both a repeat and a lower
genuine miss is dropped whole, losing that point. It undercounts; it
cannot corrupt, which is the right way round for a number read against a
bar.

It also makes `near_misses.max < threshold` true BY CONSTRUCTION rather
than by fixture: an above-bar candidate nobody excluded would have been
returned, so its call is not in the population at all.

THE TEST DID NOT CATCH THIS, and that is the part worth keeping. The
assertion `nm["max"] < 0.72` was already there, with exactly the right
intent. It passed because the fixture contained no suppressed call — the
guard held because the breaking shape was absent, not because the code was
right. Rule 167's stated failure mode, in a test written while citing rule
167. The fixture now builds that shape: a 0.9 hit dropped as a repeat,
which lands in the population and drags `max` above the threshold unless
the predicate excludes it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 16:42:51 -04:00
bvandeusen 53df6742cb Merge pull request 'Milestone 379 closes: the readout can now say what it did not measure' (#144) from dev into main
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m3s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 36s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 39s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 15s
2026-09-08 16:06:14 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 e7c1af32a0 fix(telemetry): the bar can only be judged from what it rejected (#3670)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 23s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 28s
`cleared_threshold` was documented as the number to read first. It was a
tautology. The search applies the threshold before returning, so every
returned result cleared it by construction and a call with no results has
no top_score to compare — the condition was true exactly when
`result_count > 0`. It was `calls - zero_result_calls` under a name that
promised a second opinion, and `zero + cleared == calls` held on all
nineteen source/window readings ever taken, today's live seven included.

The reading procedure built on it asked the reader to compare a number
with itself, and a threshold change was unobservable through it: raise the
bar and both numbers move together, so the field could never show a bar
set too high.

REPLACED, NOT JUST REMOVED. The question the table exists to answer is
whether the bar is in the right place, and that is only answerable from
the calls that returned NOTHING: how close did the best rejected candidate
come? A 0.72 bar turning away a stream of 0.71s is set too high by a hair;
the same bar turning away 0.30s is working. Both render as a zero-result
call today and nothing separates them, because the losing score is
discarded inside the search.

So both searches now rank WITHOUT the bar and apply it in Python. The
qualifying set is provably identical — rows arrive ordered by distance, so
every above-bar row sorts ahead of every below-bar one, and an over-fetch
that returned N above-bar rows returns the same N plus some losers. What
changes is that the losers are visible instead of dropped in the query.
`report` carries the score out without changing what a search RETURNS:
eight of eleven call sites want hits and nothing else.

New column (migration 0096), nullable and unbackfilled. A row written
before this genuinely does not know, and a 0.0 would read as "the corpus
held nothing remotely relevant" — a claim invented out of a caller's
silence, which is the substitution this whole milestone corrects.

The new aggregate is a percentile_cont WITHIN GROUP over a CASE, one step
from the shape that produced #2663, where a rejected query was swallowed
by the broad except and every counter read zero. It carries an integration
guard for that reason: only real Postgres can say it parses, and the
symptom of failure is silence.

Also adds a guard that no int field in a bucket equals
`calls - zero_result_calls`. That identity is what `cleared_threshold`
satisfied for its whole life, and it survived because it had its own name
and nobody added the two numbers beside it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 13:50:05 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 277aea58e4 test(telemetry): pin the identity that falsified this milestone (#3668)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 27s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 23s
Reverts the deliberate break from 5e19a1b. `plugin_context.py` is now
byte-identical to before it; the only change against that baseline is the
guard itself.

FALSIFIED, not argued (rule 167). CI run 6046 with `results=hits` in both
arms failed exactly the predicted four cases —

    [one-already-held-write_path]   FAILED
    [one-already-held-pre_tool]     FAILED
    [all-already-held-write_path]   FAILED
    [all-already-held-pre_tool]     FAILED
    [nothing-held-*]                passed

— and the nothing-held cases passing is the point, not a gap: with no
exclusions both recorders see the same list however wrongly they are
wired, so that case can never discriminate and a guard built only from it
would read as coverage while catching nothing.

WHAT IS PINNED. Both arms build one `fresh` list and hand it to two
recorders in one function, so the call log and the surfacing log cannot
disagree about what a single call showed. Ids, not counts: equal counts
drawn from different lists is a real way for this to break, and a count
comparison would call it agreement.

Three hits, where production returns at most one. The identity holds at
any limit because both recorders read the same list, and stating it that
way survives RULEHINT_LIMIT moving again — it has moved once already
(2 → 1, 2385100), and that move is half of why the original
reconstruction misread its own numbers.

NOT DONE, deliberately: the readout-level self-check the task also
proposed. `cleared_threshold` counts CALLS that beat the bar while
`surfaced` counts RULES, so that identity holds only while the limit is
1 — it would fire on a healthy system the moment the limit rises. The
arm-level form has no such coupling, which is why the guard lives here.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 13:36:03 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 5e19a1b028 test(telemetry): FALSIFICATION — prove the identity guard can fail (#3668)
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 23s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 34s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Failing after 45s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Skipped
Deliberately broken, reverted in the next commit. Rule 167 requires every
guard be falsified against the regression it names before it is trusted,
and rule 10 puts CI as the only place that can run it — so the failure has
to be made to happen here rather than argued for.

The guard: both rule arms feed one `fresh` list to two recorders, so the
call log and the surfacing log cannot disagree about what one call showed.

The regression: `results=fresh` becomes `results=hits` in both arms, so
the call log counts what the ranker found while the surfacing log counts
what was shown. That is not a hypothetical shape. It is exactly the
divergence that would make a correct system report a lost write when the
two tables are later compared in aggregate — the reading that scoped this
milestone at five steps against a defect that did not exist.

Expected red: the one-already-held and all-already-held cases on both
arms. The nothing-held case must still PASS — with no exclusions both
recorders see the same list however wrongly they are wired, which is why
it could never have been the discriminating case.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 13:31:49 -04:00
bvandeusen be08edcd7e Merge pull request 'Telemetry coverage, and the rule arms stop filtering to one tier' (#143) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 13s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 34s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 24s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m4s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 13s
2026-09-08 11:11:40 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 7a2aff7bc1 fix(telemetry): a surface that stopped recording is not one that never ran (#3720)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 23s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 34s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 24s
`out["sources"]` was built only from the windowed aggregate, so a source
with rows in `retrieval_logs` but none inside the window got no bucket at
all. Absent is exactly how a source that never existed renders, so a
surface that WAS recording and went silent became unreadable — #2663 one
level up, the failure that looks like the correct answer.

Two queries at different scopes, and only one shaped the output.
`_complete_from` reads all-time and knows every source the table has ever
held; the windowed loop dropped whatever it did not return.

Every such source now gets a zero bucket. Zero is a real measurement here
rather than a manufactured one: the all-time query proves the source was
recording, and it made no calls across a window it fully covers. No
`covers_window` special case is needed either — a source whose first row
fell after `since` would have that row IN the window and already hold a
bucket, so anything reaching this branch began before it.

The counts are 0 and everything else is null. A sampled distribution is
not the same claim as a call count, and rendering p50 as 0.0 for a source
nobody sampled would assert a measurement — #3311's mistake, in the
readout built to prevent it.

Found while fixing #3712's fixture, which failed with KeyError for this
exact reason.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 11:07:21 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 0808e8259a test(telemetry): the old surface needs a row in the window to have a bucket at all (#3712)
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m5s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 15s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 11s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 11s
The per-source grain test gave `auto_inject` a single row 90 days back and
`pre_tool_rule` one 2 days back, then asserted on both buckets. Only the
young arm got a bucket: `out["sources"]` is built from the WINDOWED query,
so a source with no rows inside the window is absent entirely, and the
assertion died on KeyError before it could test anything.

`complete_from` and the bucket come from different queries — all-time for
the first, windowed for the second — and the fixture only satisfied one of
them. Gave `auto_inject` a second row inside the window, which is also the
shape being described: an old surface that is STILL recording. The 90-day
row still sets its `complete_from`.

Still discriminating: auto_inject reads True and pre_tool_rule False, and a
per-table `_complete_from` would make both 90 days and fail the second
assertion — the regression this test is for.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 10:39:42 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 950c93c5d4 fix(telemetry): the coverage helpers were defined inside the function they serve (#3712)
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / integration (push) Failing after 28s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 35s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m5s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 32s
`_complete_from` and `_coverage` landed between `retrieval_summary`'s
docstring and its body. Python does not object to that the way it looks
like it should: blank lines do not close a block, so the whole remaining
body — indented four spaces, sitting after `_coverage`'s `return` —
became unreachable code INSIDE `_coverage`, and `retrieval_summary`
became a function that is nothing but a docstring.

The error surfaced three ways at once, none of which named the cause:
fourteen F821s for `days` and `user_id` (real: those are
`retrieval_summary`'s parameters, and the body no longer lived there), a
SyntaxError on `async with` (real: `_coverage` is sync), and every test
module that imports this file failing to collect.

Moved both helpers above `retrieval_summary`, beside `_bucket` and
`_round`, where the file's other helpers already are. No behaviour
change — this is the code that was meant to be there.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 10:34:57 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 21a5831479 feat(telemetry): every counter says when it started being recorded (#3712)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Failing after 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / integration (push) Failing after 17s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Failing after 26s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 34s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Skipped
A window that opens before a counter existed reports that counter as though
it had been measured throughout. The reader cannot tell "zero because
nothing happened" from "zero because nobody was counting yet", and — worse
— cannot tell a partial count from a complete one. That middle case yields
a plausible FRACTION rather than an obvious zero, which is what makes it
dangerous.

It is not hypothetical. A 7-day window opened while the ranked rule
surfacing recorders were four days old produced an apparent 64% write loss,
which survived a code review, four ruled-out alternative causes and a
five-step milestone before an identity check falsified it in one read.

Every counter block now carries `complete_from` and `covers_window`.

THE GRAIN IS THE SOURCE. retrieval_logs accumulates for months, so a
per-table earliest row says months for every source it holds — including an
arm added days ago whose counter means something else entirely. The old
source would vouch for the young one, which is the exact reading this
prevents.

A SECTION TAKES ITS LATEST CONTRIBUTOR, NOT ITS EARLIEST. A figure summing
several sources is complete only once every one of them was being written,
so "*" is a max. Using min would reproduce the original error in miniature.

`covers_window` is null, never false, when nothing was ever recorded: "no
measurement" is not "partial measurement" — the null convention #3497
established for `suppression`, one level up.

Also corrects a stale claim in the tool docstring: it still taught readers
that write_path_rule "has never once declined to fire" (#3311). That was
the arm writing its retrieval_logs row only on calls that found something;
#3497 fixed it, and the arm declines the large majority of its calls.

_complete_from takes the caller's session rather than opening its own,
departing from the services canon (#2860) because it runs inside an
existing block; to be recorded against the ledger once it ingests.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 10:29:02 -04:00
bvandeusen 4a85220aea Merge pull request 'feat(rules): the rule arms stop filtering the corpus to one tier (#3702)' (#142) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 39s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 40s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m13s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 19s
2026-09-08 00:31:12 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 dd1e6e2645 feat(rules): the rule arms stop filtering the corpus to one tier (#3702)
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 1m3s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m7s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 1m29s
Both arms passed tier="conditional", on the reasoning that an always-on
rule is already in the session so re-surfacing it is pure noise. That
conflates two different things:

  PRESENT IN CONTEXT    the rule was delivered at session start
  SALIENT AT THE MOMENT the rule is in front of the reader when the action
                        it governs is about to be taken

A rule handed over in a list at turn zero is present while a session writes
a config value three hundred turns later. It is not surfaced. So the filter
did not skip a redundant hint — it made a whole class of rules permanently
ineligible for the only mechanism that puts a rule in front of an agent AT
the moment, and the more important a rule is, the likelier it sat in that
class.

Underneath, the filter was doing the THRESHOLD's job. Whether a rule belongs
in a hint is a relevance question and a similarity bar is the control for
relevance. A categorical exclusion standing in for a relevance judgment
cannot be tuned, cannot be measured, and cannot be wrong in a way anybody
notices.

MEASURED, NOT SETTLED. The old comment's fear is real: a hint that fires on
every write and says obvious things teaches the reader to skip the block. It
had simply never been checked, and retrieval_logs already records the scores
to check it with. Rules clearing often and high means the fear was justified
and the BAR is the work; rules clearing rarely in a thin band means relevance
was always sufficient.

Only eligibility moved. The bar stays at 0.72 and k stays at 1, so the
resulting distribution has one cause — and k=1 bounds the blast radius: a
wider pool can change which rule surfaces and how often, never how long a
single hint gets.

The threshold rationale's first premise ("the eligible corpus is TINY —
tier=conditional only") is updated rather than deleted: a larger pool makes
clearing the bar mean MORE, so that argument weakened, and the bar was left
alone anyway rather than move two variables at once.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-08 00:24:02 -04:00
bvandeusen 14ff41faf5 Merge pull request 'feat(rules): rule creation becomes propose-then-approve (#3557)' (#141) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 22s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 30s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m2s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 19s
2026-09-04 22:01:47 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 c3ecdf0972 feat(rules): the rule gate becomes a practice with a question, not a prohibition (#3557)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 11s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 25s
The first cut opened "NOT YOURS TO CALL UNPROMPTED", and that is the wrong
instrument. A caller reading a prohibition stops NOTICING rule-shaped things
rather than noticing them and asking — which trades a small failure for a
larger one. The wanted behaviour is more proposals, not fewer.

So both docstrings now describe the practice: propose readily, state the
four things, and close with a question the operator answers in one word —
approve it as written / let's talk about it / no. Named options where the
interface has them, three written-out options where it does not.

"Approve it as written" is what makes element 1 load-bearing: they approved
TEXT, so that text is stored verbatim. "Let's talk about it" is framed as
the expected answer rather than a setback. "No" routes the observation to
create_note, which records without binding.

The argument for asking is also better than consent. The operator's yes is
the one moment the rule is certainly in front of them: afterwards a
conditional rule is not read aloud at session start, and a project rule is
absent from an unfiltered list_rules(). The proposal IS the review.

Guard gains the answers-offered-back element and drops the wording that
forbade; its header records why the framing changed, so the prohibition does
not get reintroduced as a tidy-up.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-04 20:11:42 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 1a34363059 feat(rules): the rule-creation tools ask for approval, and ask what would enforce it (#3557)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 34s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 41s
Every gate on create_rule and create_project_rule was about SHAPE — rule vs
process vs snippet, one-thing-you-could-violate, general-enough, not-a-dupe.
All of them improve a rule someone has already decided to write. None asked
the prior question: has the person this will bind agreed to be bound by it?

Both docstrings now open with the gate, and with the four things a proposal
carries: what it would require in the words it would carry, its intent, why
now, and how it would be enforced.

The fourth is the one that decides it. "A test, a CI check, a hook, a schema
constraint... or nothing" is a question that sometimes dissolves the rule:
what a test can assert should BE that test, and a rule is what is left when
nothing mechanical can hold the thing. A rulebook grows by default and
shrinks only on purpose.

create_project_rule needs the gate more, not less, and says so: a project
rule is absent from an unfiltered list_rules(), and a conditional one is
absent from session start too, so one written there can bind for months
without ever having been in front of the person it binds.

test_rule_creation_asks_first pins structure, never wording — each element
matches a family of synonyms, and the gate must precede the Args: block,
because a caller who has decided to make the call reads the parameters and
not the prose under them.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-04 20:02:05 -04:00
bvandeusen 67df41ae00 Merge pull request 'feat(rules): the instruction surfaces say to RETRIEVE a rule, not only to receive one (#3523)' (#140) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m5s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 3m18s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 16s
2026-09-03 22:07:10 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 30d87e461a feat(rules): the instruction surfaces say to RETRIEVE a rule, not only to receive one (#3523)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m7s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 4m18s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 25s
Every instruction surface told a session to load the always-on rules and
stopped there. None said the loaded set is partial, so an empty one read as
"no rule applies" when it only ever meant "none was pushed" — different
claims, and only one of them has been checked.

That is #2198's asymmetry one level in. The earlier defect was trusting the
SessionStart push over the explicit pull; this is trusting the resident TIER
as if it were the whole rulebook.

It is also why the always-on tier was the only one that worked, on any install
rather than this one (rule 115): a rule nothing retrieves must be resident to
bind at all, and a resident rule costs tokens in every session forever — so a
rulebook that only delivers cannot grow past what one session holds.
Retrieval lifts that ceiling, and it fires only if something asks. A
tool-choice reflex asks least of all (#3476, #161).

The same obligation now lands on all three session-start surfaces, because
rule 119 makes them the specification jointly and a surface stating it
differently IS the product behaving differently (#2497). Pinned by
test_every_session_start_surface_states_the_conditional_retrieval, mirroring
the pull test beside it.

THE BUDGET TRADE. _INSTRUCTIONS sat at 1978 against a 2000 test budget, and
its own comment says an addition there is a trade, never an append. Bought the
new clause by trading out "Processes are saved procedures (follow verbatim)"
and "Deletes are trash-recoverable" — both already in DISPLACED_TOPICS and
already stated on a delivered surface, and both per-tool guidance, which by
this block's doctrine belongs in the tool docstring. Now 1976. Recorded in the
comment above the block so it is not silently reversed.

Plugin version minted: shipped plugin content moved.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-03 21:41:53 -04:00
bvandeusen 0915c48bb0 Merge pull request 'feat(telemetry): tell a ranker decline from a repeat before the observation window opens (#3497)' (#139) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 30s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 5m20s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 17s
2026-09-03 21:23:01 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 8be555d6dd feat(telemetry): tell a ranker decline from a repeat before the observation window opens (#3497)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 31s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 37s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m4s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 28s
Making the rule arms log every call exposed a second ambiguity in the same
row. `result_count == 0` is two unrelated events wearing one number:

  - the ranker found nothing above the bar — the only evidence a threshold is
    set too high; and
  - the ranker found only what this session had already been shown — which
    says nothing whatever about the bar.

A long session excludes its way into the second, so the arm reads worse the
longer it runs correctly. Rows written now carry the ambiguity permanently,
which is why this lands before any watch period rather than after.

`retrieval_logs.suppressed_count` (0095, nullable) holds what the caller
dropped as already-shown. Both rule arms report it; they filter in Python and
always know. The note arms pass exclusions INTO semantic_search_notes and
never see what was dropped, so they store NULL.

THE NULL IS LOAD-BEARING. It means "not measured here", and the readout
renders it as `suppression: null` rather than a zeroed dict. Defaulting to 0
would let an unmeasured surface read as a perfectly clean one — the same
substitution of an artifact for a measurement that #3311 made. No backfill,
for the same reason: existing rows genuinely do not know.

`retrieval_telemetry`'s `sources` gains `suppression` with `measured_calls`,
`calls_with_suppression` and `zero_because_already_shown`; subtract the last
from `zero_result_calls` for the true ranker declines. The MCP tool docstring
says to read the two together and warns against reading the null as a zero.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-03 21:12:38 -04:00
bvandeusen aea7b63b62 Merge pull request 'fix(telemetry): both rule arms logged only their hits, so the clear-rate could only read 100% (#3497)' (#138) from dev into main
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 30s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m5s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 17s
2026-09-03 07:19:08 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 48804c437d fix(tests): the write-path telemetry test asserted the defect, not the split (#3497)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 5s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 28s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 34s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m8s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 28s
`assert_called_once` held only because the rule arm skipped its retrieval_logs
row when it found nothing. With the arm logging every call, the test now
asserts what it was always about — exactly one `write_path` row, no
`auto_inject`, and the rule arm keeping its own separate source.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-03 06:59:52 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 154a5de13e fix(telemetry): both rule arms logged only their hits, so the clear-rate could only read 100% (#3497)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 22s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Failing after 48s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Skipped
`write_path_rule` reported `zero_result_calls: 0` and `cleared_threshold:
133/133` — a perfect record no other surface comes near (`write_path` 421
zeroes of 613, `reuse_slot` 124/199, `auto_inject` 114/326). #3311 read that
as a measurement and milestone 333 was scoped on it.

It was an artifact. Both arms called `record_retrieval` inside a guard on
having results — the write-path arm behind `if fresh:`, the pre-tool arm
below `if not fresh: return out` — so a call that found nothing wrote no row.
The statistic was a fact about the shape of the code, true at any threshold
whatsoever.

The call log moves out of the guard in both arms. The surfacing log stays in
it: nothing was shown, so no surfacing occurred. `results=fresh` is kept
deliberately — the note arms pass exclusions into `semantic_search_notes`, so
what they log is already post-exclusion, and logging `hits` here would make
this row mean something other than every other row in the same readout.

The defect bites hardest on the pre-tool arm, which fires on every Bash call:
with no rows at all, a ranker that declined is indistinguishable from a hook
that never fired — the silent failure the arm exists to stop.

Tests cover both arms behaviourally (found nothing; found only what the
session already held; searched nothing at all, which must stay silent) plus a
structural guard, because this was one level of indentation and it appeared
independently in two places.

#3311 and the `rule_usage` docstring corrected rather than quietly rewritten.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-03 06:57:13 -04:00
bvandeusen 5b02908dfd dev → main: rules become measurable at the preload, and retrievable at the tool call (#137)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 29s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 17s
2026-09-02 23:41:09 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 2ee24b9d2b feat(rules): rules before tools — a PreToolUse arm keyed on the action (#3476)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 8s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 35s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m9s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 25s
The only just-in-time rule surface was registered on `Write|Edit` and queried
with `code or path`, so a rule could be retrieved at the moment of a code
write and nowhere else. Every rule about which tool to reach for — don't curl
the forge, don't stand up a stack, don't run the suite locally, don't branch —
was unreachable exactly when it mattered, and residency in the always-on
preload was the only surface it had. That is the pressure that grew the
resident set to 31 against #3089's ceiling of ~23; it was never a judgment
anybody made.

A reflex generates no query, so an instruction to check the rules cannot catch
one. A mechanical trigger can: the tool call IS the query, and a reflex has to
become a tool call before it can do anything.

`build_tool_rule_hint` is deliberately tool-agnostic — a name and a string —
so widening the matcher later is a hooks.json edit with no server change. The
hook starts on Bash, which is where the action reflexes live.

The two pre-tool arms share ONE session ledger of already-named rules
(`<state>/<sid>.rules.ids`). Two ledgers would mean a rule named by one arm
gets re-offered by the other, and the hint that fires most often is exactly
the one that must not repeat itself. A test asserts both scripts build the
same path, and another checks the shell hook and the Python route agree on
every query-arg name (rule 33) — a rename there fails silently, looking like
a surface that never finds anything rather than a broken one.

Deliberately silent on outage, unlike the prior-art hook: a write is
occasional, a Bash call is not, and an outage line before every command is
what gets a channel muted.

`tier="conditional"` matches the write arm and is the transition point — an
always-on rule is already resident, so re-tier one and it starts arriving here
instead of in every session's preamble. `pre_tool_rule` joins RANKED_SOURCES:
this arm chose what it showed, so a pull can settle whether the choice landed.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-02 23:31:22 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 8b9b3a1d9b feat(telemetry): the preload emits, and the always-on set stops being unfalsifiable (#3473)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 11s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 23s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 31s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m6s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 27s
The ranked rule arm became measurable in M333. The preload did not — and
that is the surface whose value is actually in question. `list_always_on_rules`,
the SessionStart block and every `rules_payload` caller handed rules over
wholesale and emitted nothing, so the resident set's token cost was certain
and its usefulness could not be tested even in principle.

Bulk deliveries now record as AMBIENT, beside the ranked count and never
inside pull-through. Folding them in would mean growing the always-on set
depressed the arm's measured precision and trimming it flattered the arm,
neither for any reason to do with the arm.

`RANKED_SOURCES` inverts the note twin's `AMBIENT_SOURCES` deliberately: there
is one ranked rule source and this change adds seven bulk ones, so naming the
rare half makes a forgotten surface default to ambient — under-counting it —
rather than padding the denominator with surfacings nobody chose.

Two lookalike call sites are deliberately left silent, with a test to keep
them that way: the write-path etag arm and `rules_etag_for` read the rules to
build or compare a MARKER and show nobody anything.

No migration — `event` and `source` are plain Text with no CHECK (rule 36
does not apply). Snippet #2858 updated to the new `rules_payload` contract.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_011cPyzNnegXHr5iRMzzy5KJ
2026-09-02 23:06:40 -04:00
bvandeusen 34cd389371 dev → main: rule usage telemetry, the plugin's derived version (#136)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 23s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 30s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m5s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 16s
2026-09-02 18:52:20 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 6627cfc2f0 feat(rules): a usage badge on the rule list, and the badge becomes canon instead of a second copy (#3319)
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 4s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 10s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 34s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m5s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 33s
Milestone 333 step 5, and rule 27 — the counter had a tuning point from step
4 and no operator-facing one until now.

The task said to reuse the snippet badge's classes rather than mint a parallel
set, citing the eight duplicated CSS families the ledger already carries
(#3207). `.usage-tag` lived in SnippetListView's SCOPED block, so "reuse" was
not available: copying it into the rule pane would have been the ninth family,
and importing it is not a thing a scoped block permits. So it was promoted
rather than copied.

Three pieces, each of which existed once and now exists once:

- `components.css` gains `.usage-tag` / `.usage-dead`, geometry and colour
  only, with the scoped original deleted rather than left behind.
- `UsageBadge.vue` holds the logic the two lists would otherwise duplicate —
  the >=3 dead-weight threshold, the empty-string-renders-nothing rule, the
  tooltip.
- `types/usage.ts` holds `RecordUsage`, one client type over two tables.
  `SnippetUsage` becomes an alias, so no existing consumer changes.

THE ADVICE IS A PROP, and that is the substance rather than the plumbing. The
counts read identically for every kind; the remedy does not. A snippet offered
and never opened should probably be rewritten or deleted — one action. A rule
in the same position has TWO possible causes and the operator has to pick:
its trigger may fire on the wrong work, in which case `when_to_apply` wants
rewording, or it may genuinely not be wanted. Baking "delete it" into the
component would give the wrong nudge half the time on the surface where being
wrong is most expensive, since a deleted rule stops binding behaviour.

The route zero-fills every row through `usage_for_rules`, one aggregate per
page — per-row would be N+1 by construction. That matters more here than for
snippets: every rule on every existing install predates `rule_usage_events`,
so the zero-filled shape IS the common case for a while, and a route that
attached the key only where it found events would leave the badge reading
undefined on almost every row.

`usage_for_rules` had no test at all — step 1 covered the write path and the
zero shape and left the aggregate uncovered, which only became load-bearing
when a list started rendering it. It now has an integration test over real
Postgres, including that a rule with no events comes back zero-filled rather
than absent.

Recorded as snippet #3460, per the design system's own instruction that the
component layer lives as snippets rather than as prose.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TcCs1CcQ1ormdnzSshKqvN
2026-09-02 18:37:55 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 238510080e feat(retrieval): the standing-rule arm gets its own bar, and asks for one rule not two (#3318)
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 11s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 7s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 31s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m4s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 35s
Milestone 333 step 4 — the split #2223 made one surface down, now made for the
third corpus. The arm inherited WRITEPATH_DEFAULT_THRESHOLD = 0.68, a number
measured against code-vs-note-PROSE and never re-derived for code-vs-RULE-TEXT.

THE DEFAULT IS ARGUED STRUCTURALLY, NOT READ OFF A HISTOGRAM (rule 115). Two
facts hold on any install, including one with six rules and no telemetry:

- The eligible corpus is tiny — conditional rules only, a handful to a few
  dozen against thousands of notes. A top-k over forty candidates always
  returns something, so "the best match cleared the bar" stops meaning "a good
  match exists". A bar calibrated for best-of-thousands is cleared by
  best-of-forty as arithmetic, not relevance.
- Rules are short imperative technical English, far more homogeneous than note
  prose. #2223 put the code-vs-prose floor at 0.55-0.63 and set 0.68 above it;
  a more homogeneous corpus has a HIGHER floor, so 0.68 is not merely
  inherited, it sits below where this corpus's noise lives.

0.72 errs deliberately toward silence on an asymmetry that is also structural:
this hint fires on EVERY write. A missed rule is recoverable — it is still in
Scribe and the agent can search it. A hint that cries wolf is not: it teaches
the reader to skip the whole block, and the true positives go with it. The
arm's own comment already said "noise on a hint that fires on every write is
how a hint gets ignored".

Pinned as an INEQUALITY, not a value: test_the_rule_bar_defaults_above_the_code_bar
asserts RULEHINT > WRITEPATH, so tuning the number stays free while inverting
the relationship — which would silently reinstate #3311 — does not.

RULEHINT_LIMIT = 1, and deliberately not a knob. With a corpus this small, k=2
means the second line is almost always the second-best noise wearing the same
confident framing as the first; halving k halves that regardless of the bar.
It stays a constant because it is a decision about how loud one hint may be,
not a per-install tuning question — and a knob nobody turns only adds a way to
misconfigure the surface.

Reachable from Settings, no restart (rule 25), with copy that says which way to
move it and points at retrieval_telemetry's rule pull-through — which step 3
made readable — to tell "arriving unread" from "never arrived".

Every config stand-in in the suite gained the key, not just the one that
noticed. The arm reads `rule_threshold` while BUILDING its search arguments, so
a missing key raises inside its fail-open except and turns the arm into a
silent no-op — indistinguishable from it running and finding nothing. That is
the same vacuous-pass shape that bit step 2, one layer down (rule 33).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TcCs1CcQ1ormdnzSshKqvN
2026-09-02 18:05:00 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5 8901c904a9 feat(telemetry): retrieval_telemetry reports rule pull-through where it reported nothing (#3317)
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 7s
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m5s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 29s
Milestone 333 step 3, the read half. Steps 1 and 2 built the table and filled
it; until now nothing read it, and `usage` — sourced entirely from
note_usage_events — described notes only while `sources` happily listed a
write_path_rule row above it. A reader takes the aggregate as covering
everything named above it. It did not.

A SEPARATE `rule_usage` BLOCK, not folded into `usage`. Two reasons, and the
second is the one that bites: the corpora differ by orders of magnitude, so a
blended ratio would be the note ratio with noise on it and the rule arm would
stay invisible inside it; and `usage` is what existing callers already read and
compare across windows, so silently changing what it counts would move a number
nobody was told had changed meaning. There is a test asserting rule events stay
out of the note block.

No `ambient` key, unlike the twin. Nothing surfaces a rule un-ranked —
list_always_on_rules and enter_project hand rules over wholesale but emit no
event — so there is no ambient class to subtract. The absence is a fact about
the data, not an oversight, and it returns when a bulk loader starts emitting.

Guarded separately, like `by_source`. This table did not exist a commit ago,
and an instance running upgraded code against un-migrated schema would
otherwise take down two readouts that work perfectly in order to report a third
that cannot. On failure the FLAG is added and the SHAPE is kept — a caller must
not have to choose between crashing on a missing key and quietly rendering
zeros it has no right to.

`pull_through` is None rather than 0.0 on an empty window, matching the note
block. A ratio of zero asserts "rules were shown and none opened"; with an
empty numerator and denominator that is a claim the data does not support, and
it is the reading that would make a brand-new install look like a broken one.

Also fixed, from #3311: the rule arm never timed its search, so it was the one
source in the readout reporting a null p90_duration_ms — a gap that reads as
"this surface is somehow not measurable" rather than "nobody passed the
number".

Both docstrings updated in the same change. The tool's is the agent-facing
contract (rule 119) and it explicitly said rule surfacings were absent and had
"no usage counter at all". Leaving that would have had a reader conclude the
arm has zero pull-through rather than a separate one.

Tests are integration for the reason the block above them is: real GROUP BYs
and count(distinct) against a table a commit old, in a module whose one
production outage was a SQL shape the database rejected inside a broad except.
A mock would agree with whatever the code does, including nothing.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TcCs1CcQ1ormdnzSshKqvN
2026-09-02 17:25:11 -04:00