CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 50s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 55s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 1m34s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 43s
The tuning loop shipped in steps 4 and 6 and logged zero events in its lifetime. `tune_retrieval`, `retrieval_telemetry` and `retrieval_surfaces` appeared on no instruction surface at all — not the skills, not the hooks, not the MCP instructions — so the decision that "the model should be the thing handling it 9 times out of 10" could not begin to happen. What was missing was not an auditor but a route. `using-scribe` now carries it, ordered: read the refused records, fix the trigger, and only then consider the dial. The order is the content. A rule's `when_to_apply` IS the text its score is computed against, so a miss is evidence about that text first; rewording one trigger changes one rule's reach, while moving a floor changes what every record on the surface does and cannot tell a badly-worded trigger from a genuinely distant one. Measured, and the reason the order is asserted rather than suggested: rule 1 scored 0.6515 and ranked 5th for the moment it governed, behind three rules that restrained the same act. Every percentile said "lower the floor"; at 0.60 the arm delivered those three restraints and still not rule 1. Rewriting the trigger to lead with the symptom put it 1st at 0.7130. Also: the create path gets a precondition. A new record is itself a retrieval-affecting act, so before writing one, what_might_apply asks what already covers that moment — fifty candidates and no bar, because a bar is what lets the existing record hide. `_INSTRUCTIONS` gets one index line, not the route: 1,986 of 2,000 characters, since Claude Code cuts the rest mid-word (#2562). Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01821k5B3Ysecp9fNYs92Kuy