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>
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.
A bed run from .work/<slug>/mesh-lab derives mesh-tools and mesh-sdk by
sibling path and fails at once when the directory holds only the touched
repos. Detached worktrees on main, never symlinks.
Settles the design repository now that the self-upgrade build is on main:
- Records the two decisions that shipped without a record — ADR 0077 (the
controller/foundation/node vocabulary) and ADR 0078 (the store and broker are
ordinary modules); accepts ADR 0075 and 0076, which shipped work rests on.
- Fills issue 051's amended-design and wires ADR 0078 into 07-the-foundation.
- Sweeps the repo rename (mesh-control -> mesh-controller) into the mutable docs
now that the forge repo is renamed; updates the glossary note and repos.md.
- Fixes the six broken links from the design-doc renames, indexes the glossary,
regenerates the decisions reading order.
Both checks (records.py, index.py) are green. Statuses stay honest: the build is
on main and lab-proven but not deployed as the production mesh, so the to-be docs
remain in-progress and the as-is layer (the hal mesh) is unchanged — graduation
to implemented + as-is belongs to deployment, not merge.
https://claude.ai/code/session_01D6qtiYU3P9jk3pnAXyAFyx
mesh-tools
jschoubben
jochen
mesh-adminandClaude Opus 5.5