2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5	70761b16d9	test(telemetry): the rule-arm fixture never reached the arm — it returned at the guard (#3316) ... The product code was right; the test was wrong, and wrong in a way that made two assertions fail and two others pass vacuously. `build_write_path_hint` returns early when a write matched nothing at all — no staleness, no synced record, no prior-art menu, no shape signal. The rule arm sits deliberately on the FAR side of that guard, because it runs a semantic search and hoisting it would mean an embedding query on every write in the session. My fixture stubbed every other arm to empty, so it hit the early return and the rule arm never ran: `record_rule_surfaced` was called zero times, and "the recorder was not called" is also what two of the four tests were asserting for their own reasons. The fixture now supplies one prior-art hit — 0.72 against a 0.6 threshold, so it clears the band and the top_k slice — with a comment saying the hit is the arm's precondition rather than scenery. And the gate got its own test, because the fixture now depends on it: a write matching nothing must NOT reach the arm. Without that, a future change to the guard would make every assertion in this file pass without exercising anything. #3311 is explicit that the gate stays until the arm's precision is fixed, so the test says to go read that issue rather than update the assertion. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TcCs1CcQ1ormdnzSshKqvN	2026-09-02 17:17:59 -04:00
bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5	8f7f447fda	feat(telemetry): the rule arm records what it showed, and get_rule records the read (#3316) ... Milestone 333 step 2. Step 1 built the table; a counter nobody calls reads zero and looks exactly like a surface nobody uses, which is #2663's shape. SURFACED — the standing-rule arm in build_write_path_hint, beside the record_retrieval it already made. Two tables, and the split is not arbitrary: retrieval_logs is one row per CALL keyed on the score distribution a threshold is tuned from; rule_usage_events is one row per RULE per event, the grain "was this hint ever acted on" needs and the grain a JSONB result_ids array cannot be indexed at. The comment there said rule ids had nowhere to go — that note_usage_events remaps ids on restore, so a rule id would return attached to whatever note took that number. Still true of the NOTE table, and precisely why step 1 built its own. Rewritten to say the gap is closed rather than leaving a stale rationale that would have someone re-derive the same dead end. Records `fresh`, i.e. AFTER exclude_rule_ids. A rule the session already holds was considered and not shown; counting it would inflate the denominator with claims the agent never saw, and the ratio would then fall for a reason that has nothing to do with whether hints land. PULLED — two doors, both after their access check so a refused read is not a pull. mcp_get_rule is the one that matters: the arm's own message ends "Read it with get_rule(N)", so that call is the exact action a landed hint produces. rest_rule carries the other prefix, and the prefix is load-bearing — "is this rule dead weight?" is served by any pull, "did that injected hint land?" by agent pulls only. NOT a pull: rule_history. It loads the rule for its title and its own output says "The current wording is on the rule itself — get_rule(N)", so counting it would credit a read of the history as a read of the rule and double-count anyone who then follows that pointer. list_always_on_rules and enter_project are likewise bulk resident loads, not somebody choosing to open one record. tests/test_rule_usage_wiring.py is cross-cutting on purpose: the surfaced end is in plugin_context, the pull end in two other modules, and "both ends meet" is a property no module-shaped file asserts. It covers the exclusion boundary, that a failing recorder cannot break the write, that a refused read records nothing, and two completeness guards — every door records, and the bulk loaders still do not. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01TcCs1CcQ1ormdnzSshKqvN	2026-09-02 17:15:03 -04:00