Proposing records one after another serialises their reviews and the
operator's asks; retyping the effort's findings into each record makes them
long and gives the review more to send back.
Research 053's identity part took six versions and about two hours: options
that broke the mesh's own rules were offered and argued back, a version was
proposed after every answer, and reviews returned findings a pre-check
would have caught. A lab run was planned where an in-process test answered.
The operator found 04 odd on 2026-10-15: it went from a settled design straight to building,
with no work breakdown, and contradicted playbook 07 on pull requests. 01 now starts from the
operator's idea with setup questions, findings and a direction the operator confirms; 02
graduates that direction into one record per reversible choice and hands the design on; 04
breaks it into milestones usable on their own, one issue per repository part, each milestone
one feature step of 07. 01 notes the knowledge base's insight-only rule for an active effort
until issue 844 is delivered.
A feature waited a day for its last issue, each small issue paid for its context again, and
waits nobody saw cost the most time. The operator set the flow on 2026-10-15: prepared context
per repository, one to two hours of local development on unit tests, one review of at most three
rounds back to the same agents, one push for the integration checks, then the delivery plan;
steps for a larger feature; a separate playbook for small fixes; models per step; a wait list
with bounds; a prepared clear at each phase end.
A temporary-directory quota failure, a delivery group's manifest-check
ordering, and an agent that stops or finishes without committing each cost
time during that feature because the playbook did not yet say what to do.
Writing them down so the next feature avoids the same detours.
On 2026-10-15 issues spanning one repository finished in two to four minutes, while those spanning two or
three ran for thirty to sixty, mostly merging the feature head and checking again as other agents landed.
The operator asked for agents that finish in five to ten minutes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
They lived in a file on one machine that only one session's agents read. They are how every feature's
agents work, so they belong with the method; a feature keeps only its local facts (paths, branch, locks).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The operator, 2026-10-15: the smaller model is as good as free against the weekly allowance, so the
limit that matters is how many agents the lead can settle and follow (three to five); subagents on the
larger model stay at two at most and as rare as possible.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A reviewer that does not know its round keeps finding the next smaller thing: one decision record went
through nine rounds on 2026-10-15, each spending the operator's shared weekly allowance. The operator
asked for three to five rounds, the round told to the reviewer, and the allowance in every report.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Five agents at once, each stopping on an undecided design question and restarting, spent a
week's allowance in a night. Also write down the lessons of feature 57: never land on a red
check, a new manifest word lands with the controller that reads it, and review the tree that
is pushed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A push starts the forge's checks, which build the modules and run every
test for up to a quarter of an hour, so a review finding fixed after the
push costs another full run (the operator, 2026-10-14).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A finished issue's agent is gone, so left in fixing it goes stale; the lead
takes it over until the feature is delivered. One repository is one
delivery, not a group; readiness comes from depends-on links (review
comment 12466).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Feature 57 was first worked as a pull request per issue into protected
branches and lost most of a day waiting on merge checks. Record the issue
as the unit, a review and checks once at the end, landing by fast-forward
under a lock, and the lessons met on the way.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
A merge check now judges the head merged into a named trunk commit and its
verdict goes out of date when the trunk moves; the designs and the glossary say
so, with the tests that hold it.
ADR 0313 makes the span from the move to fixing to delivered the operator's
target; the delivery budget stays a measure inside it, and its leaf figure is
three minutes since ADR 0304.
ADR 0302 made Media a domain: content, kind, media release, library,
media file, media-importer, download client, engine and grab now have
one meaning each. Release already meant two things, so the Media sense
is qualified in the homonyms.
mesh/repo-check pass: THE CHANGE ALTERS ITS OWN CHECK (merge-check.sh): main's version judged it; the change's judges the pull requests after it merges; it…
mesh/repo-check pass: THE CHANGE ALTERS ITS OWN CHECK (merge-check.sh): main's version judged it; the change's judges the pull requests after it merges; it…
ADR 0290 rule 9: once the import is checked record by record, hq keeps no copy.
The records and efforts are removed; every link or path to them reads "ADR NNNN" or
"research NNN"; a design's decisions: lists "ADR NNNN". 02-DECISIONS keeps a pointer
README with the reading order's six topics, which the knowledge base reads through the
records module; 01-RESEARCH keeps a pointer README. The checks drop the rules that
judged records (the knowledge base holds each at propose; checks/README.md says where)
and refuse a record written here again. Playbooks 01 and 02 and the skills write and
read records with the knowledge base's verbs.
The operator could not tell from a notification whether its cause was
known, tracked and being fixed. An issue tracks a condition by its key;
the tracker answers which issues track which conditions, and the router
says it in every message about the condition. Amends to-be 53 and 45,
playbook 03 and the glossary, and points ADR 0253 at the new line.
Nodes, assignments, walks, builds and settings could be seen only by polling verbs, and a setting
changed with no event. Each becomes a record mirror: a bucket written from the store after the commit
and only when the value differs, one event per write, compared with the store on every self-check run
(D17, mirror-drifted, healer H6). The write-only-on-a-change rule from issue 326 now holds for every
bucket; the conditions bucket breaks it and issue 420 tracks that. The effort stays active for G1, G3
and the views.
Graduates research 039. The tool runner (and the controller for its own verbs) asks the operator
through the existing operator-channel asks and runs the exact call once on the warrant, reusing the
act digest and warrant check of ADR 0259 and the shown-in-shape form of ADRs 0274 and 0277, so
risky agent calls stop resting on the agent's restraint. Amends to-be 46 and hands it off.
Two agents could start on one issue without seeing each other, and an issue
could be resolved without anyone having said they started its fix. Adds the
status fixing, the issue's worker (by, who@node) with take-over and a stale
bound, and resolved only from fixing; settles what to-be 53 left out as
claims, under the new glossary word worker. Amends to-be 53, playbook 03 and
the hq-diagnose and hq-status skills, with pointer notes on ADR 0275 and 0281.
A module whose only unhealthy part waited for the operator's secret failed
its gate, held every later walk and told the operator there was nothing to
do. The record adds a waits answer and a waiting state, checked by the
controller, read by the gate as waits for a person, and said as a
needs-operator condition naming the act; and secret families so each SMB
source's password is one hidden line at the desk prompt.
From the independent review: a core delivery could wait on a leaf judgement past
its ten minutes, the window figure's split was not stated beside it, and the
one-repository rule was credited to the wrong issue.
jschoubben
jochen
mesh-toolsandClaude Opus 5.5
mesh-adminandClaude Opus 5.5