bvandeusenandClaude Opus 5
57781770c3
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 7s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 20s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 33s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 42s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 26s
Implements #2242, from the operator's question: would it make more sense to search by the concept of the snippet than by the code itself? It would, measurably. A snippet's embedded text is f"{title}\n{body}", and a snippet's body is composed markdown — When to use / Signature / Location, then the fenced code — so `when_to_use` appears TWICE in the vector and the document is prose-forward. The semantic arm was interrogating it with raw code carrying no prose at all. Measured on the deployed instance against snippet #2222: query built from score best unrelated separation raw code body 0.743 0.630 0.11 name + docstring 0.823 0.602 0.22 hand-written concept prose 0.835 0.583 0.25 A 12-word description beats a near-verbatim reimplementation of the function, and code-as-query RAISES the noise floor. It's also the cleanest explanation for the fragment miss recorded on #2223: a short excerpt carries almost no prose to match a document that is mostly prose. So build the query from what the code says it's FOR — declarations plus the first docstring / JSDoc / leading comment block — shaped as "name(params) — what it does", mirroring a snippet's own title, which is the form that measured 0.823. Server-side rather than in the hook: no manifest bump, so installed 0.1.20 plugins get this immediately; multi-language parsing in bash would be miserable; and it's unit-testable here. Two rules worth calling out, both measured rather than chosen: - NO DOC, NO REWRITE. A bare identifier is not a concept and scored 0.671 vs the code body's 0.743. Separation from noise is identical either way (0.113), but the absolute drops under the 0.68 bar, so preferring a bare name would convert a comfortable hit into a miss. Undocumented code keeps the raw payload. - The 48-char floor still judges the RAW payload, before the rewrite. A concept query is allowed to be shorter than the floor — that is the point, the best queries are short — but a sub-floor edit stays silent even with a docstring. Applying the floor after extraction would discard the best queries. Regex, not a parser: this is on a PreToolUse critical path and an Edit's new_string is rarely a valid module, so a miss must cost only a fallback. Every unrecognised language (Vue SFC, config files) degrades to exactly the previous behaviour. Telemetry now logs the concept query rather than the code, since retrieval_logs is what the threshold gets tuned from and the two aren't comparable. 0.68 is left alone: signal rises to 0.82 while noise FALLS to 0.58, so the bar sits mid-gap instead of near the edge. To be re-measured against the deployed instance rather than assumed. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01UaYUaouG9jjhATyuxCKrQs