Lap Tran
bc7daf8590
- **Restore 82 completed tasks** from tasks/complete/ back to tasks/ top level (all <7 days old per the cleanup policy; premature bulk archive was fixed). - **Dashboard: fix scroll-reset on auto-refresh** — renderBoard rebuilds the board via innerHTML every 2s, destroying each column-body's scrollTop. Now snapshots column-body scrollTop + board.scrollLeft + view.scrollTop before rebuild and restores after (matched by PHASE_GROUPS index). - **Dashboard UI additions** (pre-existing unstaged work): approval section cards, transition buttons, inline artifact editor (textarea for writing missing SPEC/VERDICT/etc from the detail modal). - **Bind ornith as Implement model** — config.md: Model explicit to omlx/Ornith-1.0-35B-4bit-mlx, context window 32768. Interactive autopilot already used ornith via opencode default; now explicit. - **Fix cleanup stub** — automaton-cleanup.sh had a stale --project arg pointing at a pytest temp dir (test isolation leak). Rewired to point at ~/.automaton. - **Fix plist-isolation test** — test asserted host plist doesn't exist, but a real install creates it. Now snapshots mtime before run, asserts unchanged after (only a write during the test counts as bleed). - **New Playwright smoke test** (tests/test_dashboard_ui.py) — 2 tests: board renders tasks, column scroll survives auto-refresh tick. Verified the test fails without the scroll fix (scrollTop resets to 0). Skipped via importorskip when playwright is absent (main CI stays green). - **Clarify SI loop scope in README** — new-project onboarding section documents the framework-scoped self-improvement loop and options (leave/pause/create project loop). - **CHANGELOG** documents all changes including the known model-divergence gap (mde tasks marked complete but per-role model binding was never implemented).
22 lines
1.6 KiB
Markdown
22 lines
1.6 KiB
Markdown
# Bug Report: project-scoping-enforcement
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
Critical process violation: the agent performed all implementation work before creating a task, completely bypassing the framework's workflow enforcement.
|
|
|
|
## Bugs Found
|
|
|
|
### Bug 1: No framework self-enforcement prevents untasked work (Critical)
|
|
- **Severity**: Critical
|
|
- **Location**: Agent behavior, not code
|
|
- **Description**: The agent identified 7 scoping issues, then directly implemented all fixes across 20+ files without first creating a task through `status.py --create-task`. The task was only created *after* all work was done, as a retrospective documentation exercise.
|
|
- **Reproduction**: Any agent session where the user asks for work to be done. Nothing prevents the agent from editing files directly.
|
|
- **Suggested Fix**: This is a behavioral fix, not a code fix. The agent should always create a task first for any non-trivial work, then implement within that task's phase constraints.
|
|
|
|
### Bug 2: Process gap — no automated check that edits have a corresponding task
|
|
- **Severity**: Medium
|
|
- **Location**: Framework enforcement model
|
|
- **Description**: `status.py --can-edit` only checks if a *task* is in the right phase for code edits. But it doesn't verify that the files being edited are *within* that task's scope. An agent can create task "foo" for project A, then edit files in project B without any task at all.
|
|
- **Suggested Fix**: Future enhancement — `--can-edit` could optionally check that the files being modified are relevant to the task's SPEC.md or DESIGN.md scope.
|
|
|
|
## Score
|
|
+10 (Bug 1 is a process violation worth documenting; Bug 2 is a future enhancement) |