# CleverAgents Autonomous Development Agent System Specification

!!! abstract "Purpose"

    This document is the **authoritative specification** for the CleverAgents autonomous development agent system. It describes, in precise natural language, the intended behavior, interactions, permissions, workflows, coordination mechanisms, and design rationale for every agent that participates in the automated development lifecycle. This specification serves as the **source of truth** from which agent definition files (`.opencode/agents/*.md`) are derived; when an agent's behavior diverges from this document, this document is correct and the agent definition must be updated.

!!! warning "Normative Status"

    All statements in this document are **normative** unless explicitly marked otherwise. The words "must", "shall", and "will" indicate mandatory behavior. The words "should" and "may" indicate recommended and optional behavior respectively.

---

## 1. System Overview

### 1.1 Design Philosophy

The CleverAgents autonomous development system is a **multi-agent architecture** that builds software products end-to-end with minimal human intervention. It is designed around five foundational principles:

1. **Pool-Supervisor Parallelism**: A single top-level orchestrator (the Product Builder) launches exactly eighteen long-running supervisor agents. Each supervisor manages its own pool of workers internally, creating a two-tier hierarchy that eliminates batch-and-wait bottlenecks.

2. **Forgejo-Centric Coordination**: All inter-agent coordination occurs exclusively through the Forgejo issue tracker. Agents never pass data directly to one another; instead, they read and write Forgejo issues, pull requests, comments, and labels. This makes the system inherently crash-recoverable because the entire state is persisted in Forgejo.

3. **Clone Isolation**: No agent ever modifies the primary working directory (`/app`). Every agent that touches the filesystem creates an isolated clone in `/tmp/`, works within it, pushes results to the remote, and deletes the clone on exit. This prevents conflicts between parallel agents.

4. **Progressive Escalation**: Implementation work begins with the cheapest viable model tier (Haiku) and automatically escalates through Codex, Sonnet, and Opus as failures accumulate. This optimizes cost while ensuring complex tasks eventually receive sufficient reasoning power.

5. **Automation Tracking**: Every supervisor creates structured tracking issues on Forgejo with standardized prefixes and cycle numbers. These issues serve as health signals, coordination points, and an audit trail.

6. **Defense-in-Depth Redundancy**: Critical system responsibilities are covered by two, three, or even four independent agents. No single agent's failure creates a gap in system functionality. The complete responsibility matrix with redundancy analysis is documented in [Section 22](#22-division-of-responsibilities-and-redundancy-model).

### 1.2 Architecture Diagram

The following diagram illustrates the complete agent hierarchy, showing how the Product Builder launches supervisors, how supervisors launch workers, and how agents coordinate through Forgejo.

```kroki-blockdiag
blockdiag {
  orientation = portrait;
  node_width = 200;
  node_height = 60;

  group {
    label = "Tier 0: Orchestrator";
    color = "#E8F5E9";
    "Product Builder";
  }

  group {
    label = "Tier 1: Pool Supervisors (7)";
    color = "#E3F2FD";
    "Implementation Pool" [color = "#1565C0", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "PR Review Pool" [color = "#1565C0", textcolor = "#fff"];

    "PR Merge" [color = "#1565C0", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "UAT Test Pool" [color = "#1565C0", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Bug Hunt Pool" [color = "#1565C0", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Test Infra Pool" [color = "#1565C0", textcolor = "#fff"];
  }

  group {
    label = "Tier 1: Singleton Supervisors (11)";
    color = "#FFF3E0";
    "Architecture" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Epic Planning" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Human Liaison" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Agent Evolution" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Architecture Guard" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Spec Evolution" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Grooming" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Documentation" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Timeline Updates" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Project Owner" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "System Watchdog" [color = "#E65100", textcolor = "#fff"];
  }

  group {
    label = "Tier 2: Workers";
    color = "#FCE4EC";
    "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" [color = "#C62828", textcolor = "#fff"];
  
    "PR Reviewer" [color = "#C62828", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "UAT Worker" [color = "#C62828", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Bug Hunter Worker" [color = "#C62828", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Test Infra Worker" [color = "#C62828", textcolor = "#fff"];
  }

  group {
    label = "Tier 3: Specialized Subagents";
    color = "#F3E5F5";
    "Implementer" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Behave Tester" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Robot Tester" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Lint Fixer" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Typecheck Fixer" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Test Fixer" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Coverage Improver" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Unit Test Runner" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "Integration Test Runner" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
    "ASV Benchmarker" [color = "#6A1B9A", textcolor = "#fff"];
  }

  "Product Builder" -> "Implementation Pool";
  "Product Builder" -> "PR Review Pool";

  "Product Builder" -> "PR Merge";
  "Product Builder" -> "UAT Test Pool";
  "Product Builder" -> "Bug Hunt Pool";
  "Product Builder" -> "Test Infra Pool";
  "Product Builder" -> "Architecture";
  "Product Builder" -> "Epic Planning";
  "Product Builder" -> "Human Liaison";
  "Product Builder" -> "Agent Evolution";
  "Product Builder" -> "Architecture Guard";
  "Product Builder" -> "Spec Evolution";
  "Product Builder" -> "Grooming";
  "Product Builder" -> "Documentation";
  "Product Builder" -> "Timeline Updates";
  "Product Builder" -> "Project Owner";
  "Product Builder" -> "System Watchdog";

  "Implementation Pool" -> "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)";
  "PR Review Pool" -> "PR Reviewer";

  "UAT Test Pool" -> "UAT Worker";
  "Bug Hunt Pool" -> "Bug Hunter Worker";
  "Test Infra Pool" -> "Test Infra Worker";

  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Implementer";
  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Behave Tester";
  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Robot Tester";
  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Lint Fixer";
  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Typecheck Fixer";
  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Test Fixer";
  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Coverage Improver";
  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Unit Test Runner";
  "Implementation Worker\n(issue-impl mode)" -> "Integration Test Runner";
}
```

### 1.3 Worker Allocation Tiers

The system allocates parallel workers according to a tiered formula derived from the environment variable `CA_MAX_PARALLEL_WORKERS` (denoted N, default 4):

| Tier | Formula | Supervisors | Rationale |
|------|---------|------------|-----------|
| **Full** (N) | `N` | Implementation Pool | Closes issues; maximum throughput needed |
| **Half** (N/2) | `max(1, N // 2)` | PR Review Pool | Must keep pace with implementation but not 1:1 |
| **Quarter** (N/4) | `max(1, N // 4)` | UAT Test, Bug Hunt, Test Infra | Discovery agents; capping prevents scope explosion |
| **Single** (1) | `1` | 11 singleton supervisors (Architecture through Watchdog, excluding PR Merge) | Strategic work requiring single-threaded coherence; one async worker at a time |
| **Blocking** (0 async) | `0` | PR Merge Pool | Calls `pr-merge-worker` as a blocking subagent via the Task tool; no async worker sessions (see Section 8.3) |

!!! note "Worker Dispatch Model"

    Almost every supervisor in the system dispatches workers as async sessions via the Async Agent Manager. Workers are short-lived — they perform a discrete task (implement an issue, review a PR, scan a module, update a document) and then exit. The supervisor's job is to identify work, dispatch workers, and keep its pool full by launching new workers as old ones complete. This separation ensures crash isolation (a failed worker doesn't take down the supervisor), fresh context per task, and independent health monitoring by both the supervisor and the Product Builder.

    **Exception — PR Merge Pool**: The PR Merge Pool Supervisor calls `pr-merge-worker` as a **blocking subagent** (via the Task tool) rather than dispatching it as an async session. The supervisor blocks until the worker finishes, then continues its cycle. This means there are no `[AUTO-PRMRG-<N>]` async sessions. The Product Builder and System Watchdog must skip worker health checks for this supervisor — its health is determined solely by whether the supervisor session itself (`[AUTO-PRMRG-SUP]`) is active. When the supervisor is busy calling its worker, it appears as a normal busy session.

**Capacity examples** (concurrent async worker sessions, not counting the 18 supervisor sessions themselves):

| N | Implementation | PR Review | UAT | Bug Hunt | Test Infra | Single-worker (×11) | PR Merge (blocking) | Total Async Workers |
|---|---------------|-----------|-----|----------|------------|---------------------|---------------------|---------------------|
| 4 | 4 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 11 | 0 | 20 |
| 8 | 8 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 29 |
| 16 | 16 | 8 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 11 | 0 | 47 |

Total concurrent sessions = 18 supervisors + async worker count from the table above. For N=4: 18 + 20 = 38 sessions. (PR Merge worker runs inside the supervisor's session, not as a separate session.)

---

## 2. Agent Definition Format

Every agent in the system is defined by a single markdown file in `.opencode/agents/`. This section specifies the file format so that new agents can be created from this specification alone.

### 2.1 File Structure

Each agent definition file has two parts:

1. **YAML Frontmatter** — enclosed between `---` delimiters at the top of the file. Contains metadata and permissions.
2. **Markdown Body** — everything after the closing `---`. This is the agent's **system prompt**: the instructions the LLM receives when the agent is invoked.

### 2.2 Frontmatter Schema

| Field | Type | Required | Default | Description |
|-------|------|----------|---------|-------------|
| `description` | string | Yes | — | Brief description of the agent's purpose. Shown in agent selection UI. |
| `mode` | enum | No | `all` | `primary` (user-invocable only), `subagent` (programmatic-only), `all` (both) |
| `model` | string | No | (system default) | LLM model in `provider/model-id` format (e.g., `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6`, `openai/gpt-5-codex`, `google/gemini-2.5-pro`) |
| `temperature` | float | No | (system default) | Response randomness, 0.0 (deterministic) to 1.0 (creative) |
| `color` | string | No | — | Hex color (e.g., `"#1565C0"`) or theme color name (e.g., `primary`, `info`, `warning`) |
| `hidden` | boolean | No | `false` | If `true`, agent is hidden from the user-facing selection UI. Used for subagents. |
| `permission` | object | No | (all allowed) | Tool access control block (see Section 4.3) |

### 2.3 Permission Block Syntax

The permission block controls which tools the agent may use. Each top-level key is a tool category:

```yaml
permission:
  edit: allow | deny                # File editing tool
  bash:
    "*": allow | deny               # Default for all bash commands
    "pattern": allow | deny         # Glob pattern override
  task:
    "*": allow | deny               # Default for all subagent calls
    "agent-name": allow | deny      # Specific subagent override
  forgejo:
    "*": allow | deny               # Default for all Forgejo MCP tools
    "tool_name": allow | deny       # Specific tool override
  webfetch: allow | deny            # Internet access
```

**Evaluation order**: Specific patterns override the wildcard `"*"`. More specific patterns override less specific ones. Deny takes precedence when ambiguous.

**Bash glob patterns**: Bash permissions use shell glob matching against the full command string. For example, `"sleep *": allow` permits any command starting with `sleep`.

**Common permission patterns used across all agents**:

```yaml
# Universal label creation prohibition (every agent must have these)
bash:
  "*api/v1/orgs/*/labels*": deny
  "*api/v1/repos/*/labels*": deny
forgejo:
  "forgejo_create_label": deny
  "forgejo_create_org_label": deny
  "forgejo_create_repo_label": deny
  "forgejo_add_issue_labels": deny   # Label APPLICATION delegated to Label Manager
```

### 2.3.1 Markdown Body as System Prompt

The markdown body is sent to the LLM as the system prompt. It should contain:

1. **Role description**: What the agent is and what it does
2. **Repository context**: Owner, repo name (typically `cleveragents/cleveragents-core`)
3. **Credential handling**: How to access environment variables
4. **Behavioral rules**: MUST/NEVER/ALWAYS constraints in bold or ALL CAPS
5. **Workflow pseudocode**: Step-by-step algorithms for the agent's main loop
6. **Error handling**: Recovery protocols for expected failure modes
7. **Output format**: What the agent returns to its caller
8. **Signature block**: The bot signature template (Section 5.7)

**Inherited model pattern**: Some agents (all specialists in Tier 3) omit the `model` field. They inherit the model from their tier selector caller. The spec notes these as "(inherited)" in Appendix A.

### 2.4 Directory Layout

```
.opencode/
├── agents/
│   ├── config/
│   │   ├── models.yaml       # Aspirational model-tier assignments (Section 20.2)
│   │   └── resources.yaml    # Worker allocation, timeouts, retry policies
│   ├── shared/               # Reusable protocol modules (Section 13)
│   │   ├── coordination_protocols.md
│   │   ├── credential_security.md
│   │   ├── error_handling.md
│   │   ├── logging.md
│   │   ├── merge_safety.md
│   │   ├── performance_monitoring.md
│   │   ├── session_state.md
│   │   ├── tracking_discovery_guide.md
│   │   └── bug_hunter_tracking_update.md
│   ├── <agent-name>.md       # Active agent definitions (95 files)
│   └── <deprecated-name>.md  # Deprecated stubs (15 files, Section 17)
├── scripts/                  # Historical migration utilities (not active)
│   ├── apply_tracking_updates.py
│   ├── update_tracking_agents.sh
│   └── validate_remediation.sh
└── .gitignore                # Excludes node_modules, package.json, lock files
```

**Active agent files**: 95 files containing YAML frontmatter and system prompts.
**Deprecated stubs**: 15 files containing only a deprecation notice; they exist to prevent OpenCode from displaying "agent not found" errors for old invocations.
**Shared modules**: 9 files that define reusable protocols (coordination, credentials, error handling, logging, merge safety, monitoring, session state, tracking coordination, and a bug hunter tracking migration note).
**Config files**: 2 YAML files that serve as aspirational reference (Section 20.2).
**Scripts**: 3 historical utility scripts from the tracking system migration; not part of the active agent system.

---

## 3. Glossary of Key Terms

| Term | Definition |
|------|-----------|
| **OpenCode** | The AI agent execution platform that hosts and runs all agents. Provides session management, tool access, and the prompt_async API at `localhost:4096`. |
| **Forgejo** | Self-hosted Git forge (similar to GitHub/GitLab) used for source control, issue tracking, PR management, and inter-agent coordination. All state is persisted here. |
| **MCP** | Model Context Protocol. The standard protocol through which agents access external tools (Forgejo API, filesystem, etc.) via MCP tool adapters. |
| **nox** | Python task runner (similar to tox/make). All build, test, lint, and typecheck commands must be routed through nox sessions. Defined in `noxfile.py`. |
| **Behave** | Python BDD (Behavior-Driven Development) testing framework using Gherkin syntax (Given/When/Then). Used for all unit tests in `features/`. |
| **Robot Framework** | Keyword-driven integration testing framework. Used for all integration tests in `robot/`. No mocking allowed. |
| **ASV** | Airspeed Velocity. Python benchmarking framework. Performance benchmarks live in `benchmarks/`. |
| **Pyright** | Static type checker for Python. Used via `nox -e typecheck`. No `# type: ignore` comments allowed. |
| **Commitizen** | Tool enforcing Conventional Changelog commit message format (e.g., `feat(module): description`). |
| **Kroki** | Diagram rendering service. Used in mkdocs documentation for blockdiag, activitydiag, and PlantUML diagrams. |
| **HAL9000** | The primary Forgejo bot account used by most automated agents for implementation, PR creation, issue management, and merges. A separate reviewer bot account handles PR reviews (Section 6.17). Named after the AI from 2001: A Space Odyssey. |
| **Pool Supervisor** | A long-running agent that manages a pool of parallel workers, dispatching and monitoring them. |
| **Singleton Supervisor** | A long-running agent that performs its work directly without spawning workers. |
| **Progressive Escalation** | The pattern of starting work at the cheapest model tier and automatically promoting to more expensive tiers on failure. |
| **Tracking Issue** | A Forgejo issue with the `Automation Tracking` label, created by supervisors to report status and coordinate. |
| **Announcement Issue** | A persistent Forgejo issue used for cross-agent communication of important events. |

---

## 4. Asynchronous Execution Model

### 4.1 Why prompt_async

The system uses the OpenCode Server HTTP API's `prompt_async` endpoint rather than the synchronous Task tool for launching supervisors. The reason is fundamental: the Task tool blocks the calling agent until the subagent completes. Since supervisors are designed to run indefinitely (they are services, not batch jobs), launching eighteen supervisors via the Task tool would block the Product Builder forever, eliminating its ability to monitor, detect failures, or re-launch dead supervisors.

The `prompt_async` endpoint (`POST /session/:id/prompt_async`) sends a message to a session without waiting for the response, returning `204 No Content` immediately. This gives true fire-and-forget semantics. The Product Builder then enters a bash-driven monitoring loop, polling session status every sixty seconds and re-launching any dead supervisor instantly.

### 4.2 The Async Agent Manager

All asynchronous operations are centralized through a single agent: the **Async Agent Manager**. This agent is the only component in the system permitted to make direct HTTP calls to the OpenCode Server API at `localhost:4096`. All other agents that need to launch, monitor, or clean up asynchronous sessions must invoke the Async Agent Manager as a subagent.

This centralization exists for three reasons:

1. **Security**: Restricting direct API access to a single agent prevents accidental or malicious session manipulation by other agents.
2. **Consistency**: Session naming conventions, tag prefixes, retry logic, and error handling are implemented in one place.
3. **Debuggability**: All async operations flow through a single audit point.

The Async Agent Manager supports the following operations:

- **Start Async Agent**: Creates a session with tagged naming (`[TAG] display-name`), launches the agent asynchronously, and returns the session ID.
- **Get Session Status**: Returns the status of a specific session, sessions matching a tag pattern, or all sessions.
- **Get Session Messages**: Retrieves recent messages from a session with pagination support.
- **Search Sessions**: Searches sessions by tag, agent type, status, or age.
- **Close/Cleanup Session**: Terminates sessions gracefully or forcefully.
- **Monitor Session Health**: Detects idle, stuck, or finished sessions with configurable thresholds.

#### 4.2.1 Session Naming Convention

Every session created through the Async Agent Manager follows a strict naming convention:

```
[TAG] display-name
```

The registered tag prefixes are:

| Tag | Agent | Purpose |
|-----|-------|---------|
| `AUTO-IMP-SUP` | implementation-pool-supervisor | Implementation pool supervisor |
| `AUTO-REV-SUP` | pr-review-pool-supervisor | PR review pool supervisor |

| `AUTO-PRMRG-SUP` | pr-merge-pool-supervisor | PR merge pool supervisor |
| `AUTO-UAT-SUP` | uat-test-pool-supervisor | UAT testing pool supervisor |
| `AUTO-BUG-SUP` | bug-hunt-pool-supervisor | Bug hunting pool supervisor |
| `AUTO-INF-SUP` | test-infra-pool-supervisor | Test infrastructure pool supervisor |
| `AUTO-ARCH` | architecture-pool-supervisor | Architecture designer |
| `AUTO-EPIC` | epic-planning-pool-supervisor | Epic planner |
| `AUTO-HUMAN` | human-liaison-pool-supervisor | Human liaison |
| `AUTO-EVLV` | agent-evolution-pool-supervisor | Agent evolver |
| `AUTO-GUARD` | architecture-guard-pool-supervisor | Architecture guard |
| `AUTO-SPEC` | spec-update-pool-supervisor | Specification updater |
| `AUTO-GROOM` | grooming-pool-supervisor | Groomer |
| `AUTO-DOCS` | documentation-pool-supervisor | Documentation writer |
| `AUTO-TIME` | timeline-update-pool-supervisor | Timeline updater |
| `AUTO-OWNR` | project-owner-pool-supervisor | Project owner/triager |
| `AUTO-WDOG` | system-watchdog-pool-supervisor | System watchdog |
| `AUTO-ONEOFF` | (various) | One-off dispatched agents |
| `AUTO-IMP-ISSUE-<N>` | implementation-worker | Implementation worker (issue #N) |
| `AUTO-IMP-PR-<N>` | implementation-worker | Implementation worker (PR #N fix) |
| `AUTO-REV-<N>` | pr-reviewer | PR reviewer worker |
| `AUTO-UAT-<N>` | uat-test-worker | UAT test worker |
| `AUTO-BUG-<N>` | bug-hunt-worker | Bug hunt worker |
| `AUTO-INF-<N>` | test-infra-worker | Test infra worker |
| ~~`AUTO-PRMRG-<N>`~~ | ~~pr-merge-worker~~ | ~~PR merge/rebase worker~~ *(Removed — pr-merge-worker is now called as a blocking subagent, not an async session. See Section 8.3.)* |
| `AUTO-ARCH-<N>` | architecture-worker | Architecture spec worker |
| `AUTO-EPIC-<N>` | epic-planning-worker | Epic planning worker |
| `AUTO-HUMAN-<N>` | human-liaison-worker | Human liaison worker |
| `AUTO-EVLV-<N>` | agent-evolution-worker | Agent evolution worker |
| `AUTO-GUARD-<N>` | architecture-guard-worker | Architecture guard worker |
| `AUTO-SPEC-<N>` | spec-update-worker | Spec update worker |
| `AUTO-GROOM-<N>` | grooming-worker | Grooming worker |
| `AUTO-DOCS-<N>` | documentation-worker | Documentation worker |
| `AUTO-TIME-<N>` | timeline-update-worker | Timeline update worker |
| `AUTO-OWNR-<N>` | project-owner-worker | Project owner worker |
| `AUTO-WDOG-<N>` | system-watchdog-worker | System watchdog worker |

### 4.3 The Monitoring Loop

After launching all eighteen supervisors, the Product Builder enters its monitoring loop, which constitutes ninety-nine percent of its runtime. The loop operates at two cadences: a **fast cycle** (every sixty seconds) for health checking and an **hourly cycle** for status reporting.

#### 4.3.1 Fast Cycle (every 60 seconds)

1. **Sleep sixty seconds** using `bash("sleep 60", timeout=120000)`. This is a genuine blocking wait; the Product Builder genuinely pauses.

2. **Check each supervisor** by searching for its session tag via the Async Agent Manager. Verify the session exists and is in a busy state. Any supervisor whose session has completed, errored, or disappeared is immediately re-launched.

3. **Answer questions.** If a supervisor's session is waiting for input (it asked a question), read the messages to understand the question and provide an answer so it can continue.

#### 4.3.2 Deep Inspection (every 5 fast cycles, ~5 minutes)

Every fifth fast cycle, perform deeper checks on each supervisor and its workers:

1. **Supervisor inspection**: Read the last several messages from each supervisor's session, including the agent's internal thinking. Evaluate whether the supervisor is making progress and behaving correctly. Look for repeated errors, no work activity for fifteen or more minutes, looping behavior, or the agent doing work outside its responsibilities. If the supervisor appears stuck or misbehaving, stop it and launch a fresh one.

2. **Worker health check**: For each pool supervisor, search for sessions matching the supervisor's worker tag pattern (see Section 4.2.1). Count active workers and compare against the expected count for that supervisor's tier. If a pool supervisor has been running for more than five minutes but has zero workers, investigate by reading the supervisor's messages. Check individual worker sessions for problems (errored, stuck, completed but not cleaned up). **Exception — PR Merge Pool (`AUTO-PRMRG-SUP`)**: This supervisor calls `pr-merge-worker` as a blocking subagent (not async). There are no `[AUTO-PRMRG-<N>]` async worker sessions to search for. Skip the worker health check for this supervisor entirely — its health is determined solely by whether the supervisor session itself is active.

#### 4.3.3 Hourly Status Cycle (~60 fast cycles)

Approximately once per hour, perform these additional steps:

1. **Completion verification**: Invoke the Product Verifier to assess product completeness — milestone status, open issues and PRs, test suite results, quality gate compliance.

2. **Convergence check**: Based on the verifier's results, determine whether the product is approaching or has reached completion (all milestones done, all issues closed, all PRs merged, all quality gates passing).

3. **Create status tracking ticket**: Create a new automation tracking issue via the Automation Tracking Manager with comprehensive status including all eighteen supervisor statuses, worker counts per pool, completion results, convergence assessment, and corrective actions taken.

```kroki-activitydiag
activitydiag {
  "Launch 18 Supervisors" -> "Sleep 60s";
  "Sleep 60s" -> "Check Each Supervisor (by tag)";
  "Check Each Supervisor (by tag)" -> "Any Dead or Waiting?";
  "Any Dead or Waiting?" -> "Re-launch Dead / Answer Questions" [label = "yes"];
  "Any Dead or Waiting?" -> "Deep Inspection Due?" [label = "no"];
  "Re-launch Dead / Answer Questions" -> "Deep Inspection Due?";
  "Deep Inspection Due?" -> "Inspect Supervisors + Workers" [label = "every 5 cycles"];
  "Deep Inspection Due?" -> "Hourly Cycle Due?" [label = "not yet"];
  "Inspect Supervisors + Workers" -> "Hourly Cycle Due?";
  "Hourly Cycle Due?" -> "Run Completion Verification" [label = "every ~60 cycles"];
  "Hourly Cycle Due?" -> "Sleep 60s" [label = "not yet"];
  "Run Completion Verification" -> "Create Status Tracking Ticket";
  "Create Status Tracking Ticket" -> "Sleep 60s";
}
```

---

## 5. Automation Tracking System

### 5.1 Overview

Every supervisor in the system creates **automation tracking issues** on Forgejo to report its status, announce important events, and coordinate with other agents. This system replaces direct inter-agent communication with a persistent, auditable, crash-recoverable coordination mechanism.

All tracking operations are centralized through the **Automation Tracking Manager** subagent. No agent creates or manages tracking issues directly; they all delegate to this centralized manager to ensure consistency.

### 5.2 Status Issues

**Status issues** are periodic health reports. Every supervisor and the Product Builder creates exactly **one open status issue at a time**. The title format is:

```
[AGENT-PREFIX] Status: <Tracking Type> (Cycle N)
```

The `Status:` prefix is mandatory — it distinguishes status issues from announcement issues.

**Examples:**
- `[AUTO-PROD-BLDR] Status: Product Builder Status (Cycle 3)`
- `[AUTO-IMP-POOL] Status: Implementation Pool Tracking (Cycle 12)`
- `[AUTO-WATCHDOG] Status: System Health Report (Cycle 7)`

**Required labels:** `Automation Tracking`. Status issues do NOT carry priority labels (they are routine health reports, not events requiring attention).

#### 5.2.1 Status Issue Lifecycle: One-at-a-Time Protocol

!!! danger "Critical Invariant"

    At any point in time, each supervisor MUST have **at most one** open status issue. The Product Builder also maintains exactly one. Workers do not create status issues.

**Every cycle, the creating agent MUST:**

1. **Close ALL existing status issues** from itself — not just the "previous" one, but every open issue whose title starts with `[{PREFIX}] Status:`. This catches orphaned status issues from previous sessions, crashed agents, or any other source. The search MUST use `state: "open"` and `labels: "Automation Tracking"` with no pagination limits.

2. **Only after ALL are closed**, create the new status issue with the next cycle number.

This two-step protocol (close-all-then-create) is implemented in the Automation Tracking Manager's `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` operation. The ATM closes orphaned issues by posting a comment `"Superseded by Cycle N"` and then closing them via `forgejo_issue_state_change`.

**Why close-all?** Agents crash, sessions restart, and the OpenCode server may recycle. A new session has no memory of what its predecessor created. By unconditionally closing ALL open status issues matching its prefix, an agent guarantees the one-at-a-time invariant even after crashes, restarts, or duplicate launches.

### 5.3 Announcement Issues

**Announcement issues** are event-driven notifications that persist until explicitly resolved. They represent conditions or events that other agents (and humans) should be aware of. The title format is:

```
[AGENT-PREFIX] Announce: <message summary>
```

**Examples:**
- `[AUTO-WATCHDOG] Announce: Quality Gate Violation`
- `[AUTO-IMP-POOL] Announce: Worker Capacity Alert`
- `[AUTO-ARCH] Announce: Spec Change Required`

**Required labels:** `Automation Tracking` **plus** a priority label indicating severity:
- `Priority/Critical` — requires immediate attention from all agents
- `Priority/High` — affects multiple agents, should be read promptly
- `Priority/Medium` — informational, should be read on next cycle
- `Priority/Low` — background information, read when convenient

#### 5.3.1 Announcement Issue Lifecycle

Announcements differ from status issues in three ways:

1. **They persist across cycles** — creating a new status issue does NOT close existing announcements.
2. **Multiple announcements can coexist** — an agent can have several open announcements simultaneously if multiple conditions are active.
3. **They are closed when resolved** — the agent that created an announcement MUST periodically review its own open announcements (via `REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS`) and close any whose condition is no longer relevant, valid, or correct.

**Every agent that creates announcements MUST also review them.** Specifically, every supervisor that calls `CREATE_ANNOUNCEMENT_ISSUE` must also call `REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS` at least once every 3 cycles to close stale announcements. Failing to do so causes announcement accumulation that degrades the signal quality for consuming agents.

### 5.3.2 Tracking Issue Consumption Protocol

!!! info "How agents decide what to read and how deeply"

    Not all tracking issues are equally relevant to all agents. The consumption protocol defines a triage system based on three axes: **who posted it** (source agent), **what kind** (Status vs Announce), and **how urgent** (priority label). Each agent reads tracking issues at a depth proportional to their relevance.

**Consumption rules for each agent:**

| Consumer Agent | Reads Status Issues From | Reads Announcements From | Minimum Priority | Read Depth |
|---------------|------------------------|-------------------------|-----------------|------------|
| **System Watchdog** | All supervisors | All agents | All | Full (body + comments) — it is the system health monitor |
| **Product Builder** | All supervisors (via monitoring loop) | All agents | Medium+ | Full — it is the top-level orchestrator |
| **Human Liaison** | None (delegates to humans) | All agents | High+ | Full — surfaces important events to humans |
| **Implementation Pool** | None | Watchdog, Liaison, Groomer | High+ | Summary only — adjusts worker priorities |
| **PR Review Pool** | None | Watchdog, Liaison | Critical only | Summary only — adjusts review priorities |
| **PR Merge Pool** | None | Watchdog | Critical only | Summary only — pauses merging if critical |
| **Backlog Grooming** | None | Watchdog, Liaison, Owner | Medium+ | Summary only — adjusts grooming focus |
| **All other supervisors** | None | Watchdog | Critical only | Title + priority label only |

**Read depth levels:**

- **Title + priority label only**: Read the issue title and priority label. No API calls to fetch body or comments. Fastest; used for low-relevance triage.
- **Summary only**: Read the issue title, labels, and first paragraph of the body. One API call. Used when the agent needs to know the nature of the event but not the details.
- **Full (body + comments)**: Read the complete issue body and all comments. Multiple API calls. Used by the Watchdog and Product Builder for comprehensive situational awareness.

**Priority-based triage:**

When an agent calls `READ_ANNOUNCEMENTS`, it provides a `min_priority` parameter. The Automation Tracking Manager returns only announcements at or above that priority level. This prevents low-priority noise from cluttering high-priority processing loops.

### 5.3.3 Startup State Recovery Protocol

!!! danger "Critical: Every supervisor MUST recover state before deleting old tracking issues"

    When a supervisor starts (or restarts after a crash), its **very first action** must be to read its most recent tracking issue to understand where it left off. Only AFTER recovering state may it proceed to delete old status issues and create a new one.

**Mandatory startup sequence for every supervisor:**

```
# Step 1: RECOVER STATE (before anything else)
recovered_state = task automation-tracking-manager "READ_TRACKING_STATE" \
  --agent-prefix "{PREFIX}" \
  --tracking-type "{TRACKING_TYPE}" \
  --repo-owner "$owner" \
  --repo-name "$repo"

# Extract recovery information
last_cycle = recovered_state.cycle_number
offline_minutes = recovered_state.offline_duration_minutes
last_body = recovered_state.issue_body
last_comments = recovered_state.comments

# Step 2: ANALYZE RECOVERED STATE
# Parse the last tracking body for agent-specific state:
# - What work items were active (PRs, issues, branches)
# - What was queued but not started
# - What had failed and might need retry
# - Health indicators from the last cycle

# Step 3: NOW delete old status issues and create new one
result = task automation-tracking-manager "CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE" \
  --agent-prefix "{PREFIX}" \
  --tracking-type "{TRACKING_TYPE}" \
  --body "$initial_tracking_body" \
  --repo-owner "$owner" \
  --repo-name "$repo"

# Step 4: Use recovered state to inform first cycle
# e.g., check specific PRs/branches from last session before scanning for new work
```

**Why this order matters:** `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` closes ALL existing status issues. If the agent creates first and reads second, it reads its own brand-new empty issue instead of the state from its previous session. The state is lost.

**Agent-specific recovery behaviors:**

| Agent | Recovery Action |
|-------|----------------|
| **Implementation Pool** | Parse worker table for PR numbers and issue numbers. Check each PR/issue on Forgejo to determine if it was completed, is still open, or needs a new worker. Resume in-progress work before scanning for new work. |
| **PR Review Pool** | Parse recently-reviewed PR list. Check if those PRs still need review attention (new commits since review). |
| **PR Merge Pool** | Parse merge candidate list. Re-check those PRs for merge readiness. |
| **System Watchdog** | Parse health indicators. Compare against current state to detect changes during offline period. |
| **Product Builder** | Parse supervisor session list. Cross-reference with current active sessions to detect which supervisors need re-launching. |
| **All other supervisors** | Parse cycle number and summary. Use offline duration to adjust first-cycle urgency (longer offline = more aggressive scanning). |

**Offline duration affects behavior:** An agent that has been offline for 5 minutes treats the situation as a normal restart. An agent offline for 2+ hours should assume significant state drift and perform a full re-scan of its domain before resuming normal operations.

#### 5.3.4 Estimated Cycle Interval (Rolling Average)

Every status issue MUST include an `**Estimated Cycle Interval**: Nmin` field in its header. This tells the System Watchdog and Product Builder how often the agent is expected to update, enabling them to detect frozen agents.

**This calculation is centralized in the Automation Tracking Manager** (per the Subagent Specialization Principle, Section 6.0). Agents do NOT calculate the interval themselves. Instead, they pass `sleep_interval_default` to `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` and the ATM handles the rest:

```bash
task automation-tracking-manager "CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE" \
  --agent-prefix "AUTO-WATCHDOG" \
  --tracking-type "System Health Report" \
  --body "$tracking_body" \
  --sleep-interval-default 5 \   # Agent's sleep duration in minutes
  --repo-owner "$owner" \
  --repo-name "$repo"
# ATM automatically calculates and injects the Estimated Cycle Interval
```

**ATM internal calculation (rolling average with 90/10 weighting):**

```
# If no previous tracking issue exists:
estimated_interval = sleep_interval_default

# If previous tracking issue found:
old_interval = parse "Estimated Cycle Interval" from previous issue body
actual_interval = (now - previous_issue.created_at) in minutes
estimated_interval = round(old_interval * 0.90 + actual_interval * 0.10)
```

**How the Watchdog uses it:** If a status issue's age exceeds `2 × estimated_interval`, the agent is likely frozen. The Watchdog should investigate the agent's session health before restarting it. The 2× threshold accounts for natural variance (network delays, long operations, heavy Forgejo API load).

**Why a rolling average?** A simple static timeout would either be too tight (causing false positives during occasional slow cycles) or too loose (failing to detect genuine freezes). The rolling average adapts to each agent's actual cadence while smoothing out outliers. The 90/10 weighting means occasional slow cycles barely affect the estimate, but a sustained slowdown gradually shifts it.

#### 5.3.5 Dual Status Issue Cleanup

Two independent mechanisms ensure the one-at-a-time invariant for status issues:

1. **Primary cleanup (agent-side):** Every agent, via `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE`, closes ALL open status issues with its prefix before creating the new one. This is the normal path.

2. **Redundant cleanup (groomer-side):** The Backlog Grooming Supervisor periodically scans for violations of the one-at-a-time invariant. If it finds more than one open status issue from the same agent prefix, it closes all but the newest. This catches edge cases where:
   - Two instances of the same agent launched simultaneously (race condition)
   - An agent crashed after creating a new issue but before closing the old one
   - The Forgejo API returned success for close but didn't actually close the issue

This dual mechanism is defense-in-depth. Under normal operation, the agent-side cleanup handles everything. The groomer is a safety net.

#### 5.3.6 Cycle Number Continuity Across Sessions

Cycle numbers MUST be globally unique per agent prefix — no two status issues (open or closed) from the same agent may share a cycle number. This is enforced by the `GET_NEXT_CYCLE_NUMBER` operation, which searches ALL issues (`state: "all"`, including closed) and returns `max(existing_cycle_numbers) + 1`.

When an agent starts a new session, it does NOT reset to Cycle 1. It reads the highest cycle number from any previous status issue and continues from there. This enables:
- Monotonic cycle numbering across crashes, restarts, and session recycling
- Easy identification of the most recent status issue (highest cycle number wins)
- Audit trail continuity (gaps in cycle numbers indicate periods when the agent was down)

### 5.4 Tracking Operations

The Automation Tracking Manager provides eleven operations:

| Operation | Purpose |
|-----------|---------|
| `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` | Close old tracking issue, determine next cycle number, create new issue |
| `UPDATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` | Add a comment to the current cycle's tracking issue |
| `CLOSE_TRACKING_ISSUE` | Find and close the current tracking issue |
| `READ_TRACKING_STATE` | Read the latest tracking issue and extract state data |
| `GET_NEXT_CYCLE_NUMBER` | Determine the next sequential cycle number |
| `CREATE_ANNOUNCEMENT_ISSUE` | Create a persistent cross-cycle announcement |
| `CLOSE_ANNOUNCEMENT_ISSUE` | Close a specific announcement when it is resolved |
| `LIST_TRACKING_ISSUES` | List all tracking issues for a given agent prefix |
| `READ_ANNOUNCEMENTS` | Read open announcements from specified agents with priority filtering |
| `REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS` | Review own announcements for continued relevance |
| `CYCLE_ANNOUNCEMENT_REVIEW` | Combined per-cycle: read others' announcements + review and close own stale announcements |

### 5.5 Agent Prefix Registry

| Prefix | Agent |
|--------|-------|
| `AUTO-SESSION` | Session Persister |
| `AUTO-WATCHDOG` | System Watchdog |
| `AUTO-GROOMER` | Grooming Supervisor |
| `AUTO-LIAISON` | Human Liaison |
| `AUTO-IMP-POOL` | Implementation Pool Supervisor |
| `AUTO-REV-POOL` | PR Review Pool Supervisor |
| `AUTO-UAT-POOL` | UAT Test Pool Supervisor |
| `AUTO-BUG-SUP` | Bug Hunt Pool Supervisor |
| `AUTO-INF-POOL` | Test Infrastructure Pool Supervisor |
| `AUTO-ARCH` | Architecture Supervisor |
| `AUTO-EPIC` | Epic Planning Supervisor |
| `AUTO-EVLV` | Agent Evolution Supervisor |
| `AUTO-GUARD` | Architecture Guard |
| `AUTO-SPEC` | Specification Update Supervisor |
| `AUTO-TIME` | Timeline Update Supervisor |
| `AUTO-DOCS` | Documentation Supervisor |
| `AUTO-PROJ-OWN` | Project Owner Supervisor |
| `AUTO-PROD-BLDR` | Product Builder |
| `AUTO-IMP-WRK` | Implementation Worker |

| `AUTO-MERGE` | PR Merge Supervisor |

### 5.5.1 Session Tags vs Tracking Prefixes: Two Naming Schemes

!!! warning "Important Distinction"

    The system uses **two different naming schemes** for the same agents. Session tags (Section 4.2.1) identify OpenCode sessions; tracking prefixes (Section 5.5) identify Forgejo tracking issues. For eight agents, these names are **different**. Agents and operators must use the correct scheme for the correct context.

The following table maps between the two schemes for agents where they differ:

| Agent | Session Tag (OpenCode) | Tracking Prefix (Forgejo) |
|-------|----------------------|--------------------------|
| Implementation Pool | `AUTO-IMP-SUP` | `AUTO-IMP-POOL` |
| PR Review Pool | `AUTO-REV-SUP` | `AUTO-REV-POOL` |
| UAT Test Pool | `AUTO-UAT-SUP` | `AUTO-UAT-POOL` |
| Bug Hunt Pool | `AUTO-BUG-SUP` | `AUTO-BUG-SUP` |
| Test Infrastructure Pool | `AUTO-INF-SUP` | `AUTO-INF-POOL` |
| Human Liaison | `AUTO-HUMAN` | `AUTO-LIAISON` |
| Grooming | `AUTO-GROOM` | `AUTO-GROOMER` |
| Project Owner | `AUTO-OWNR` | `AUTO-PROJ-OWN` |
| System Watchdog | `AUTO-WDOG` | `AUTO-WATCHDOG` |
| PR Merge | `AUTO-PRMRG-SUP` | `AUTO-MERGE` |

For the remaining seven supervisors (Architecture, Epic Planning, Agent Evolution, Architecture Guard, Spec Update, Documentation, Timeline), both schemes use the same prefix.

**When to use which:**
- **Session tags**: When querying the OpenCode Server API, launching async agents, or searching for running sessions.
- **Tracking prefixes**: When creating or searching for Forgejo tracking issues, reading announcements, or filtering the `Automation Tracking` label.

**Notable absences:**
- `AUTO-PROD-BLDR` and `AUTO-SESSION` exist only as tracking prefixes (the Product Builder and Session Persister are not launched via the Async Agent Manager).
- `AUTO-ONEOFF` exists only as a session tag (one-off dispatched agents don't create tracking issues).

- Worker-level session tags (e.g., `AUTO-IMP-ISSUE-<N>`, `AUTO-IMP-PR-<N>`, `AUTO-REV-<N>`, `AUTO-UAT-<N>`, `AUTO-BUG-<N>`, `AUTO-INF-<N>`, and all other `AUTO-*-<N>` worker patterns) have no tracking prefix counterpart except `AUTO-IMP-WRK`. Implementation workers use `AUTO-IMP-ISSUE-<N>` when implementing a new issue and `AUTO-IMP-PR-<N>` when fixing an existing PR. All other workers follow the pattern `AUTO-{SUPERVISOR_PREFIX}-<N>`. **Exception**: `AUTO-PRMRG-<N>` no longer exists as a session tag — `pr-merge-worker` is called as a blocking subagent by the PR Merge Pool Supervisor (see Section 8.3).

### 5.6 Tracking Issue Body Template

Every status tracking issue body MUST include these standardized fields in the header. Additional agent-specific content follows after.

```markdown
# [Agent Display Name] Status -- YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS

**Agent**: <agent-definition-filename>
**Cycle**: N
**Estimated Cycle Interval**: Nmin
**Status**: active | idle | error

## Summary

<One paragraph describing current state>

## Detailed Status

<Agent-specific detailed status section with tables, metrics, etc.>

## Health Indicators

- **Key Metric 1**: value
- **Key Metric 2**: value

## Next Actions

- <Planned next steps>
- Next status update in ~N cycles

---
**Automated by CleverAgents Bot**
Supervisor: <Display Name> | Agent: <agent-filename>
```

### 5.7 Bot Signature Block

Every piece of content that any agent creates on Forgejo (issue bodies, comments, PR descriptions, review comments) must end with this signature block:

```markdown
---
**Automated by CleverAgents Bot**
Supervisor: <Supervisor Display Name> | Agent: <agent-filename>
```

The signature block serves three purposes:

1. **Attribution**: Clearly identifies automated content for human readers.
2. **Filtering**: Enables agents to distinguish bot-generated content from human content.
3. **Tracing**: Identifies which specific agent and supervisor produced the content.

The signature must appear at the very end of the content, preceded by a horizontal rule (`---`).

---

## 6. Universal Agent Constraints

The following constraints apply to every agent in the system without exception.

### 6.0 Subagent Specialization Principle

!!! info "Architectural Rule: Centralize, Don't Duplicate"

    The system MUST use specialized subagents with restrictive permissions wherever possible. Functionality that multiple agents need MUST be centralized in a single subagent rather than duplicated across agent definitions. When identical logic appears in more than two agents, it is a code smell that should be refactored into a subagent.

**Examples of correct centralization:**
- **Label operations** → Forgejo Label Manager (not duplicated in each agent)
- **Tracking issue lifecycle** → Automation Tracking Manager (not duplicated in each agent)
- **Cycle interval calculation** → ATM's `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` with `sleep_interval_default` (not duplicated in each agent)
- **Announcement review cycle** → ATM's `CYCLE_ANNOUNCEMENT_REVIEW` operation (not duplicated in each agent)
- **Merge verification** → Shared Merge Safety module (not duplicated in each merging agent)

**Why this matters:** Duplicated logic drifts. When a bug is fixed in one copy, the other copies remain broken. Centralized subagents ensure fixes propagate everywhere simultaneously.

### 6.1 Label Creation Prohibition

No agent in the system is permitted to create new labels. All labels exist at the organization level and are pre-configured during project bootstrapping. This constraint is enforced through three mechanisms:

1. **Permission denial**: Every agent's permission block explicitly denies `forgejo_create_label`, `forgejo_create_org_label`, and `forgejo_create_repo_label`.
2. **Bash URL blocking**: Every agent's bash permissions deny any command containing label creation API URL patterns (`*api/v1/orgs/*/labels*`, `*api/v1/repos/*/labels*`).
3. **Label Manager delegation**: Agents that need to apply labels to issues must do so through the **Forgejo Label Manager** subagent, which itself cannot create labels but can apply existing organization-level labels.

### 6.2 Clone Isolation Protocol

Every agent that touches the filesystem must create its own isolated clone:

1. Create a unique directory: `/tmp/<agent-type>-<instance-id>-<timestamp>/`
2. Clone the repository into this directory with HTTPS authentication.
3. Configure git identity (name, email) within the clone.
4. Perform all work within the clone.
5. Push results to the remote repository.
6. Delete the clone directory on exit.

The Product Builder itself does not need a clone because it only orchestrates via the Async Agent Manager, the Task tool, and the Forgejo API. All file work is delegated to workers.

### 6.3 Bash Sleep for Genuine Waiting

Long-running agents (supervisors) must use bash sleep commands for genuine blocking waits between polling cycles. They must never return to their caller to "wait" because returning means exiting. The bash timeout parameter must always be set to at least 1.5 times the sleep duration.

Workers, by contrast, must never sleep or loop indefinitely. A worker performs a discrete task (implement an issue, review a PR, scan a module, write a document section) and then exits. The supervisor is responsible for launching new workers to keep its pool full.

### 6.4 CONTRIBUTING.md Compliance

Every agent that writes code, creates issues, or reviews pull requests must strictly adhere to the project's CONTRIBUTING.md. Key rules enforced:

- **File organization**: Source in `src/cleveragents/`, unit tests in `features/`, integration tests in `robot/`, mocks in `features/mocks/`
- **Testing**: BDD with Behave for unit tests, Robot Framework for integration tests. Never xUnit. Coverage threshold of 97%.
- **Commit messages**: Conventional Changelog format via Commitizen.
- **Code standards**: Full static typing, no `# type: ignore`, proper error handling patterns.
- **Tool routing**: ALL build, test, lint, and typecheck commands must be routed through `nox` sessions. Agents must never install software directly (no `pip install`, no `npm install`). The only approved commands are `nox -e lint`, `nox -e typecheck`, `nox -e unit_tests`, `nox -e integration_tests`, `nox -s coverage_report`, etc.
- **PR requirements**: Closing keywords, dependency links, milestone assignment, type labels.

### 6.5 Agent Visibility: Hidden vs User-Facing

Of the 110 agent definition files (95 active + 15 deprecated stubs), only **10 are user-facing** (visible in the OpenCode agent selection UI). The remaining active agents have `hidden: true` in their frontmatter, meaning they exist solely as subagents invoked by other agents or the Async Agent Manager.

**User-facing agents** (the only agents a human operator should invoke directly):

| Agent | Purpose |
|-------|---------|
| `product-builder` | Launch the full autonomous development system |
| `build` | General-purpose development (replaces default build agent) |
| `build-opencode` | Edit `.opencode/` agent definition files |
| `fix-pr` | Manually fix a specific pull request |
| `plan` | Create implementation plans |
| `pr-manager` | Manually manage pull requests |
| `implementation-pool-supervisor` | Standalone implementation pool (can run without Product Builder) |
| `implementation-worker` | Standalone implementation worker (for single-issue work) |
| `session-cleanup` | Clean up stale async sessions |

All other agents (`hidden: true`) must never be invoked directly by a human. They are designed to be called programmatically with specific parameters.

### 6.6 File Edit Permission Model

Agents are divided into three categories based on their file edit permissions:

**Agents with `edit: allow`** (22 agents -- these can modify files):

| Category | Agents |
|----------|--------|
| **Code writers** | `implementer`, `behave-tester`, `robot-tester`, `lint-fixer`, `typecheck-fixer`, `test-fixer`, `coverage-improver`, `unit-test-runner`, `integration-test-runner`, `asv-benchmarker` |
| **Worker orchestrators** | `implementation-worker`, `subtask-loop`, `pr-ci-test-fixer` |
| **File-writing supervisors** | `architecture-pool-supervisor`, `documentation-pool-supervisor`, `spec-update-pool-supervisor`, `timeline-update-pool-supervisor`, `agent-evolution-pool-supervisor` |
| **Bootstrap & primary** | `project-bootstrapper`, `build`, `build-opencode` |

**Agents with `edit: deny`** (42 agents -- these can never modify files):

All review agents, all issue management agents, all PR management agents (except PR CI Test Fixer), all session management agents, all tracking/label agents, and all read-only analysis agents.

**Agents with no explicit edit permission** (31 agents -- defaults apply):

All deprecated agents, all tier selectors, and several infrastructure agents. The OpenCode default permission for `edit` applies.

**Design principle**: An agent has `edit: allow` if and only if its core function requires writing or modifying files. Orchestrators that delegate all file work to subagents have `edit: deny` to prevent accidental file corruption.

### 6.7 Internet Access Restriction

Only three agents have `webfetch: allow` permission (internet access): `build`, `build-opencode`, and `plan`. All three are **user-facing primary agents** invoked directly by humans.

No autonomous agent (no supervisor, no worker, no subagent) has internet access. This is a deliberate security design choice: autonomous agents must work entirely from local files, the Forgejo API, and the OpenCode Server API. They must never fetch external resources, download dependencies, or access external services.

### 6.8 Reference Material Loading

The Product Builder loads all project reference materials (`CONTRIBUTING.md`, `docs/specification.md`, open announcements, and per-supervisor tracking state) during its startup sequence (Section 7.6, Step 4) and synthesizes a customized briefing for each supervisor. This briefing is included in each supervisor's launch prompt.

Supervisors do not invoke the Ref Reader subagent themselves. Instead, they rely on the briefing received from the Product Builder and pass relevant portions of it to their workers. This eliminates redundant reference loading across supervisors and ensures consistent interpretation of project standards.

Workers receive the relevant rules and guidelines from their supervisor's prompt, so they also do not need to read reference materials independently.

### 6.9 Credential Flow: Top-Down Through Prompts

Only the Product Builder reads environment variables directly (via `echo $VAR`). All other agents — supervisors, workers, and subagents — receive credentials exclusively through their prompts, passed down the agent hierarchy:

1. **Product Builder** reads environment variables (`FORGEJO_PAT`, `GIT_USER_NAME`, `GIT_USER_EMAIL`, `FORGEJO_USERNAME`, `FORGEJO_PASSWORD`, `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT`, `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME`, `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD`, `CA_MAX_PARALLEL_WORKERS`) and includes the relevant subset in each supervisor's launch prompt.

2. **Supervisors** receive credentials from the Product Builder's prompt and pass the relevant subset to each worker they dispatch. For example, the PR Review supervisor passes the reviewer credentials (not the primary credentials) to its workers.

3. **Workers** receive credentials from their supervisor's prompt and use them directly. They never read environment variables.

No supervisor or worker has the `"echo $*": allow` bash permission. This ensures credentials are controlled at the top level and distributed on an as-needed basis. If a credential changes, only the Product Builder's startup needs to be re-run — all downstream agents receive the updated values through the prompt chain.

### 6.10 Complete Label Taxonomy

All labels exist at the organization level. No agent may create new labels. The complete label set is:

**State Labels (exactly one per issue):**

| Label | Meaning | Terminal? |
|-------|---------|-----------|
| `State/Unverified` | Newly created, not yet triaged | No |
| `State/Verified` | Triaged and approved for work | No |
| `State/In Progress` | Actively being implemented | No |
| `State/Paused` | Work suspended (must have `Blocked` label) | No |
| `State/In Review` | PR created and under review | No |
| `State/Completed` | PR merged, issue closed | Yes |
| `State/Wont Do` | Deliberately not implementing | Yes |

**Type Labels (exactly one per issue):**

| Label | Purpose |
|-------|---------|
| `Type/Bug` | Defect in existing functionality |
| `Type/Feature` | New capability |
| `Type/Task` | Technical work not directly visible to users |
| `Type/Testing` | Test infrastructure or test-only changes |
| `Type/Epic` | Parent grouping of related issues |
| `Type/Legendary` | Top-level grouping of related epics |
| `Type/Documentation` | Documentation-only changes |
| `Type/Refactor` | Code restructuring without behavior change |
| `Type/Automation` | Agent system or CI automation changes |

**Priority Labels (exactly one per non-Unverified issue):**

| Label | Urgency |
|-------|---------|
| `Priority/Critical` | Blocks other work, must fix immediately |
| `Priority/High` | Important, schedule promptly |
| `Priority/Medium` | Normal priority |
| `Priority/Low` | Do when convenient |
| `Priority/Backlog` | Someday; not scheduled |
| `Priority/CI-Blocker` | Breaks CI pipeline; absolute highest priority |

**MoSCoW Labels (Project Owner exclusive):**

| Label | Meaning |
|-------|---------|
| `MoSCoW/Must Have` | Required for milestone completion |
| `MoSCoW/Should Have` | Important but milestone can ship without |
| `MoSCoW/Could Have` | Nice to have |

**Story Points:** `Points/1`, `Points/2`, `Points/3`, `Points/5`, `Points/8`, `Points/13`

**Special Labels:** `Blocked`, `Duplicate`, `Signed-off`, `Automation Tracking`, `needs feedback`

#### 6.9.1 Special Label Lifecycles

The five special labels have distinct lifecycles that cross agent boundaries:

**`needs feedback`** — Signals that automated work has stalled and a human decision is required.

| Event | Applied By | Removed By |
|-------|-----------|------------|
| Proposal issue awaiting human approval | Architecture Supervisor, Agent Evolution, Spec Evolution | Human developer (signals approval) |
| PR awaiting human review of significant change | Architecture Supervisor, Agent Evolution, Spec Evolution | Human developer |
| Implementation worker stuck after 3+ failed fix attempts at max escalation tier | Implementation Pool Supervisor, System Watchdog | Human developer (after `needs feedback` label and comment) |
| Project Owner skips triaging an issue | Project Owner (skips it for Human Liaison) | Human Liaison (after triaging) |

**Merge gate**: PRs with `needs feedback` cannot be merged (Section 8.3.2, criterion 4).

**`Blocked`** — Signals that an issue cannot proceed due to an unresolved dependency.

| Event | Applied By | Removed By |
|-------|-----------|------------|
| Issue depends on an incomplete issue | Issue State Updater (when transitioning to `State/Paused`) | Issue State Updater (when the blocking issue is completed) |
| Manual block by a human | Human developer | Human developer |

**Transition rule**: Applying `Blocked` requires simultaneously transitioning to `State/Paused`. Removing `Blocked` requires simultaneously transitioning from `State/Paused` to `State/In Progress`.

**`Duplicate`** — Signals that an issue is a duplicate of another.

| Event | Applied By | Removed By |
|-------|-----------|------------|
| Backlog groomer detects duplicate (pass 1) | Backlog Grooming Supervisor | Never removed (issue is closed) |

The groomer always comments with a reference to the original issue before closing the duplicate. Only issues (never PRs) can be marked as duplicates.

**`Signed-off`** — Signals that a human has explicitly approved an automated action or decision.

| Event | Applied By | Removed By |
|-------|-----------|------------|
| Human approves an agent's proposal | Human developer | Never removed |

This label is applied manually by humans to indicate they have reviewed and approved agent-created content (specification changes, architecture decisions, agent evolution proposals). It is never applied by automated agents.

**`Automation Tracking`** — Identifies tracking and announcement issues created by the automation system.

| Event | Applied By | Removed By |
|-------|-----------|------------|
| New tracking issue created | Automation Tracking Manager (via Forgejo Label Manager) | Never removed (issue is closed by next cycle) |
| New announcement created | Automation Tracking Manager (via Forgejo Label Manager) | Never removed (issue is closed when resolved) |

This label is the key filter for agents reading system state: querying for issues with `Automation Tracking` returns all active tracking and announcement issues.

### 6.11 Issue State Transitions

Issues must follow these valid state transitions. The Issue State Updater agent enforces these rules:

```kroki-plantuml
@startuml
!theme plain
skinparam state {
  BackgroundColor<<terminal>> #90EE90
}

[*] --> Unverified : issue created
Unverified --> Verified : triaged and approved
Unverified --> WontDo <<terminal>> : out of scope
Verified --> InProgress : worker claims issue
InProgress --> Paused : blocked by dependency\n(adds Blocked label)
Paused --> InProgress : blocker resolved\n(removes Blocked label)
InProgress --> InReview : PR created
InReview --> Completed <<terminal>> : PR merged
Unverified -[dashed]-> WontDo <<terminal>>
Verified -[dashed]-> WontDo <<terminal>>
InProgress -[dashed]-> WontDo <<terminal>>
InProgress -[dashed]-> Completed <<terminal>>

state "State/Unverified" as Unverified
state "State/Verified" as Verified
state "State/In Progress" as InProgress
state "State/Paused" as Paused
state "State/In Review" as InReview
state "State/Completed" as Completed <<terminal>>
state "State/Wont Do" as WontDo <<terminal>>
@enduml
```

**Transition rules:**
- An issue must have exactly one State label at all times.
- Transitioning to `State/Paused` requires adding the `Blocked` label.
- Transitioning from `State/Paused` requires that the blocking issue is resolved.
- Transitioning to terminal states (`State/Completed`, `State/Wont Do`) closes the issue.
- Transitioning to `State/In Review` requires that an open PR exists referencing the issue.

### 6.12 Dependency Direction Rules

Forgejo dependency links follow a strict directional convention:

- **Child issue BLOCKS parent Epic**: An implementation issue is a dependency that blocks its parent Epic.
- **Epic BLOCKS parent Legendary**: An Epic is a dependency that blocks its parent Legendary.
- **PR BLOCKS linked issue**: A pull request is a dependency that blocks the issue it closes.

This means: to find children of an Epic, query the Epic's "blocked by" dependencies. To find the parent of an issue, query its "blocks" dependencies. Reversing these directions is a compliance violation that the System Watchdog and State Reconciler will detect and correct.

### 6.13 Work Item Claiming Protocol

When an Implementation Worker begins work on an issue, it must claim the work item to prevent other workers from starting on the same issue. The protocol uses Forgejo comments with structured prefixes:

**Constants:**
- Claim duration: 2 hours
- Heartbeat interval: 10 minutes

**Claim Comment Format:**
```
[CLAIM: agent=<agent-name>, session=<session-id>, timestamp=<ISO-8601>]
Claiming this issue for implementation.
```

**Heartbeat Comment Format:**
```
[HEARTBEAT: agent=<agent-name>, session=<session-id>, timestamp=<ISO-8601>]
Still working on this issue.
```

**Release Comment Format:**
```
[RELEASE: agent=<agent-name>, session=<session-id>, timestamp=<ISO-8601>, reason=<completed|failed|timeout>]
Releasing claim on this issue.
```

**Rules:**
1. No work without a claim. Before starting any work, post a `[CLAIM:` comment.
2. Respect existing claims. Check for unexpired claims before claiming.
3. Send regular heartbeats every 10 minutes using `[HEARTBEAT:`.
4. Always release claims using `[RELEASE:` (use try/finally to ensure this).
5. Stale claims (>2 hours without heartbeat) may be overridden.

### 6.14 TDD Issue Test Tags System

When a bug issue is filed, the testing agents write tests that are expected to fail (proving the bug exists) before the implementation fix is applied. This follows the Test-Driven Development workflow using three special tags:

**For Behave (unit tests) -- uses `@` prefix:**

| Tag | Purpose |
|-----|---------|
| `@tdd_issue` | Marks a scenario as part of TDD workflow |
| `@tdd_issue_<N>` | Links the scenario to Forgejo issue #N |
| `@tdd_expected_fail` | Indicates the test is expected to fail until the bug is fixed |

**For Robot Framework (integration tests) -- no `@` prefix:**

| Tag | Purpose |
|-----|---------|
| `tdd_issue` | Marks a test case as part of TDD workflow |
| `tdd_issue_<N>` | Links the test case to Forgejo issue #N |
| `tdd_expected_fail` | Indicates the test is expected to fail |

**TDD Lifecycle:**
1. **Bug filed**: Bug issue created with Type/Bug label.
2. **Tests written**: Behave Tester or Robot Tester writes tests tagged with all three tags. Tests are expected to fail.
3. **Bug fixed**: Implementer fixes the bug. Tests now pass.
4. **Tags cleaned**: Implementer removes only the `@tdd_expected_fail` tag. The `@tdd_issue` and `@tdd_issue_<N>` tags remain permanently as documentation.

**Test Fixer special handling:**
- If a test has `@tdd_expected_fail` and is FAILING: The bug still exists. Do not modify the test.
- If a test has `@tdd_expected_fail` and is PASSING: The bug was fixed. Remove only `@tdd_expected_fail`.

**Coverage Improver rule:** Never write TDD-tagged tests just for coverage. Never modify existing TDD tests.

### 6.15 Standard Issue Body Format

Every issue created by the system follows this body format:

```markdown
## Metadata

| Key | Value |
|-----|-------|
| Branch | `<branch-name>` |
| Commit Message | `<type>(scope): description` |
| Parent Epic | #<epic-number> |

## Subtasks

- [ ] Subtask 1 description
- [ ] Subtask 2 description
- [ ] Subtask 3 description

## Definition of Done

- [ ] All subtasks completed
- [ ] Unit tests written (Behave, >=97% coverage)
- [ ] Integration tests written (Robot Framework)
- [ ] All quality gates pass (lint, typecheck, unit, integration, coverage)
- [ ] PR created and approved
- [ ] PR merged to master
```

### 6.16 Standard PR Description Format

Pull requests created by the system follow this format:

```markdown
## Summary

<Brief description of what this PR implements>

## Changes

- <Change 1>
- <Change 2>

## Design Decisions

- <Decision 1 with rationale>

## Testing

- Unit tests: <count> scenarios in <files>
- Integration tests: <count> test cases in <files>
- Coverage: <percentage>%

## Modules Affected

- `src/cleveragents/<module>/`

## Related Issues

Closes #<issue-number>

## Checklist

- [x] Code follows CONTRIBUTING.md
- [x] Tests pass locally
- [x] Coverage >= 97%
- [x] No `# type: ignore`
- [x] Commit message follows Conventional Changelog

---
**Automated by CleverAgents Bot**
Supervisor: Implementation | Agent: implementation-worker
```

### 6.17 Priority Ordering Rules

When the Issue Finder queries open issues, it returns them in this priority order:

1. **Priority/CI-Blocker** issues have ABSOLUTE priority over everything else, regardless of milestone.
2. **Type/Bug + Priority/Critical** issues across ALL milestones come before any other issue type.
3. **Lowest milestone first**: Within the same priority level, issues in earlier milestones are preferred. Never work on milestone N+1 while Critical/Must-Have issues in milestone N remain open.
4. **State/In Progress before State/Verified**: Resume incomplete work before starting new work.
5. **Priority label**: Critical > High > Medium > Low > Backlog.
6. **MoSCoW tiebreaker**: Must Have > Should Have > Could Have.
7. **Unblocking factor**: Issues that unblock the most other issues are preferred.

### 6.18 Dual-Account Architecture and Approval Detection

!!! success "Solved: The Shared Bot Account Problem"

    The system uses **two separate Forgejo bot accounts**: a **primary account** (`FORGEJO_USERNAME` / `FORGEJO_PAT` / `FORGEJO_PASSWORD`) for implementation, PR creation, issue management, and merges; and a **reviewer account** (`FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME` / `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` / `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD`) exclusively for PR reviews. Since the reviewer is a different Forgejo user than the PR author, formal `APPROVED` reviews work natively.

**Environment Variables:**

| Variable | Purpose | Used By |
|----------|---------|---------|
| `FORGEJO_PAT` | Primary bot API token | All agents except PR Reviewer |
| `FORGEJO_USERNAME` | Primary bot identity | All agents (PR creation, issues, ownership detection) |
| `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` | Reviewer bot API token | PR Reviewer (curl for write ops) |
| `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME` | Reviewer bot identity | PR Reviewer (attribution) |
| `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD` | Reviewer bot web login | PR Reviewer's ci-log-fetcher calls |

**Separation of concerns:**
- The **primary account** creates PRs, manages issues, pushes code, applies labels, and merges PRs.
- The **reviewer account** ONLY posts reviews and review-related comments. It does not create PRs, issues, or push code.
- The PR Review Pool Supervisor receives both sets of credentials from the Product Builder and passes all three reviewer credentials (`PAT`, `USERNAME`, `PASSWORD`) to each PR Reviewer instance it dispatches.

#### 6.17.0 MCP Token Limitation and the curl Workaround

!!! warning "Critical Implementation Constraint"

    The Forgejo MCP tools (e.g., `forgejo_create_pull_review`, `forgejo_create_issue_comment`) authenticate using a single token configured at the MCP server level. **There is no way to override the token on a per-call basis.** This means all MCP tool calls authenticate as the primary bot account, regardless of which agent invokes them.

**Consequence for the PR Reviewer:** The PR Reviewer cannot use `forgejo_create_pull_review` or `forgejo_create_issue_comment` MCP tools — those would create reviews as the primary bot (the PR author), which Forgejo would reject as self-approval. Instead:

- **READ operations** (get PR details, list reviews, get diff, list comments): Use Forgejo MCP tools normally. Reads don't care which account authenticates.
- **WRITE operations** (post formal review, post backup comment): Use `curl` with the `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` header. This is the ONLY way to authenticate as the reviewer account.

The PR Reviewer's permission block enforces this split:
- `bash: "curl *": allow` — enables curl-based API calls
- `forgejo_create_pull_review: deny` — blocks the MCP tool (would use wrong token)
- `forgejo_create_issue_comment: deny` — blocks the MCP tool (would use wrong token)

| Operation | Tool | Authentication |
|-----------|------|---------------|
| Get PR details | `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index` (MCP) | Primary bot (fine for reads) |
| List reviews | `forgejo_list_pull_reviews` (MCP) | Primary bot (fine for reads) |
| Post formal review | `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` | Reviewer bot ✓ |
| Post backup comment | `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` | Reviewer bot ✓ |
| Fetch CI logs | `ci-log-fetcher` with reviewer credential overrides | Reviewer bot ✓ |

#### 6.17.1 Three-Tier Approval Detection

Every agent that checks for approval must inspect three sources, in order of preference:

| Tier | Source | Mechanism | Priority |
|------|--------|-----------|----------|
| **1** | Formal Reviews | Reviews with `state == "APPROVED"` from `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME` | **Primary path** — works natively because reviewer ≠ author |
| **2** | Review Bodies | Reviews with `state in ("COMMENT", "PENDING")` whose `body` contains approval keywords | Fallback for edge cases |
| **3** | Issue Comments | Issue comments containing approval keywords | Durable backup signal |

Any single tier matching is sufficient to constitute a valid approval. All three tiers are checked by:
- The **PR Merge Pool Supervisor** (`check_pr_approval()`)
- The **Implementation Worker** (`has_required_approvals()`, two instances)
- The **Shared Merge Safety** utilities (`check_flexible_approval()`)

**Approval keywords** (case-insensitive, recognized across all three tiers):

```
lgtm, approved, decision: approved, ready to merge, looks good,
ship it, merge it, good to go
```

Plus emoji variants: `✅`, `:white_check_mark:`, `👍`, `:+1:`

**Blocking review detection** must also account for all three tiers: a `REQUEST_CHANGES` review only blocks a merge if it is more recent than the latest approval signal from any tier. This prevents stale rejections from blocking PRs that have been re-approved.

#### 6.17.2 Dual-Account Review Protocol

The **PR Reviewer** agent operates under the reviewer bot account and implements a dual-account protocol:

1. **Step 1 -- Post a formal review** via `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` to the Forgejo pulls reviews API. This authenticates as the reviewer account (not the PR author), so Forgejo accepts the formal `APPROVED` state. **This is the primary approval signal.** (Note: the MCP tool `forgejo_create_pull_review` cannot be used because it authenticates as the primary bot — see Section 6.17.0.)

2. **Step 2 -- Post a backup issue comment** via `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` to the Forgejo issues comments API. This provides a durable backup visible regardless of Forgejo review UI state.

**Why both steps?** The formal review (Step 1) is the standard Forgejo mechanism. The issue comment (Step 2) ensures the decision is always visible and parseable, even if Forgejo review APIs behave unexpectedly.

```kroki-activitydiag
activitydiag {
  "Review PR (read via MCP)" -> "Decision: APPROVE or REQUEST CHANGES";
  "Decision: APPROVE or REQUEST CHANGES" -> "Step 1: Post Formal Review\n(curl with FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT)";
  "Step 1: Post Formal Review\n(curl with FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT)" -> "Step 2: Post Backup Comment\n(curl with FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT)";
  "Step 2: Post Backup Comment\n(curl with FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT)" -> "Review Complete";
}
```

---

#### 6.17.3 Approval Count Policy

All pull requests require exactly **one approval** before merge. This is enforced at three levels:

1. **Branch protection**: The Project Bootstrapper configures `required_approvals: 1`.
2. **Merge gate**: The PR Merge Pool Supervisor and `safe_merge_pr()` require at least one approval from any of the three tiers.
3. **Watchdog enforcement**: The System Watchdog audits branch protection and flags `required_approvals < 1` as a HIGH severity finding.

The system uses dual bot accounts: PRs are created by `FORGEJO_USERNAME` and reviewed by `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME`. Formal APPROVED reviews are the primary approval mechanism.

### 6.19 Merge Safety Protocol

All merge operations must use the shared merge safety utilities (`shared/merge_safety.md`). Direct calls to `forgejo_merge_pull_request` without pre-merge safety checks are forbidden.

The `safe_merge_pr()` function enforces:

1. **PR is open and not already merged**
2. **CI status is passing** (verified via web scraping when API is unavailable)
3. **Required approvals met** via the 3-tier flexible approval detection (Section 6.17.1)
4. **No unresolved change requests** (REQUEST_CHANGES more recent than latest approval signal from any tier)
5. **No merge conflicts**
6. **force_merge is stripped** if provided (never force-merge)
7. **Post-merge verification**: After calling `forgejo_merge_pull_request`, the function calls `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index` and confirms `merged == true` and `state == "closed"`. Returns failure if verification fails, even if the merge API claimed success. See Section 8.3.4 for the full rationale.
8. **Default merge style**: squash with branch deletion

### 6.20 Label Application Delegation

All agents in the system have `forgejo_add_issue_labels: deny` in their permission block, with exactly two exceptions:

1. **Forgejo Label Manager** — the designated label applicator, which handles the label-name-to-organization-ID mapping correctly.
2. **Issue State Updater** — which needs direct label access to perform atomic state transitions (removing old `State/*` labels and applying new ones).

Every other agent that needs to apply labels must delegate to the Forgejo Label Manager subagent. This prevents "invalid label ID" errors that occur when agents attempt to apply labels by name rather than by the organization-level label ID.

This rule is enforced universally across all 77 non-exception agent permission blocks.

### 6.21 Forgejo API Pagination Requirement

!!! warning "Critical: Forgejo List APIs Are Paginated"

    The Forgejo REST API returns at most **50 items per page** by default for all list endpoints (`/repos/{owner}/{repo}/issues`, `/repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls`, etc.). Any agent that queries a list endpoint MUST paginate through ALL pages. Failure to paginate causes silent data loss: the agent believes it has retrieved all items when it has only retrieved the first page.

**Mandatory Pagination Pattern:**

```
all_items = []
page = 1
while True:
    page_items = forgejo_list_*(owner, repo, state="open", page=page, limit=50)
    if not page_items:
        break
    all_items.extend(page_items)
    if len(page_items) < 50:  # Last page (partial)
        break
    page += 1
```

**Rules:**
1. Never call a Forgejo list API without pagination when the result set could exceed 50 items.
2. Continue fetching until a page returns fewer items than the page size (indicating it is the last page) or returns an empty result.
3. Log the total count after pagination for debugging (e.g., `Found {N} total open PRs to analyze`).

**Agents most affected by this requirement:** The Implementation Pool Supervisor (which must analyze every open PR) and the Backlog Grooming Supervisor (which scans all open issues). Both operate on potentially large result sets where missing items has severe consequences.

### 6.22 PR Ownership Detection

When an agent needs to determine whether a pull request was created by the autonomous system (and therefore requires automated shepherding) versus created by a human developer (and should be left for human workflows), ownership must be determined by the PR author's login identity:

```
if pr.user.login == FORGEJO_USERNAME:
    # This is OUR PR — it needs an automated worker
else:
    # This is an external/human PR — skip automated dispatch
```

**Forbidden ownership checks:**
- Checking `pr.body` for `"Closes #"` or `"Fixes #"` text — many valid bot PRs do not contain these exact strings
- Checking PR labels for bot-specific markers — labels can be added or removed independently
- Checking the branch name pattern — branch names are not a reliable ownership signal

This rule applies to: the Implementation Pool Supervisor (PR dispatch), the PR Review Pool Supervisor (review queue filtering), and the Backlog Grooming Supervisor (PR health checks).

---

## 7. Product Builder (Tier 0 Orchestrator)

### 7.1 Identity

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `product-builder.md` |
| **Mode** | `primary` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-PROD-BLDR` |

### 7.2 Purpose

The Product Builder is the top-level orchestrator of the entire autonomous development system. It acts as a **process supervisor** (analogous to systemd), not a worker. Its responsibilities are:

1. **Clean up** stale sessions from previous runs
2. **Assess** project state and bootstrap if needed
3. **Launch** all supervisors via the Async Agent Manager
4. **Monitor** their health continuously, keeping them running and answering their questions
5. **Verify** product completion periodically and report status

The Product Builder never stops running until the user explicitly tells it to stop. If the product is verified complete, it reports this in its status tracking ticket but continues monitoring.

### 7.3 What the Product Builder Must Never Do

- Implement issues itself
- Edit code directly
- Create or merge pull requests
- Review code
- Use the Task tool for launching supervisors (must use Async Agent Manager)
- Make direct HTTP calls to the OpenCode Server (must use Async Agent Manager)
- Tell supervisors what to do or pass data between them (supervisors self-coordinate through Forgejo)

### 7.4 Permissions Rationale

| Permission | Setting | Rationale |
|------------|---------|-----------|
| `edit` | deny | Never edits files directly |
| `webfetch` | deny | No internet access needed |
| `bash.*` | deny (with exceptions) | Only `echo`, `sleep`, `jq`, and `git remote` allowed |
| `task.async-agent-manager` | allow | The sole mechanism for launching and monitoring supervisors |
| `task.project-bootstrapper` | allow | One-shot bootstrap of project structure |
| `task.ref-reader` | allow | Load project reference materials for supervisor briefings |
| `task.product-verifier` | allow | Verify product completion |
| `task.automation-tracking-manager` | allow | Manage tracking issues and read announcements |
| `forgejo.*` | deny | All Forgejo interactions delegated to subagents |

### 7.5 Execution Flow

```kroki-activitydiag
activitydiag {
  "Gather Required Info" -> "Clean Up Old Sessions";
  "Clean Up Old Sessions" -> "Assess Project State";
  "Assess Project State" -> "Bootstrap Needed?";
  "Bootstrap Needed?" -> "Bootstrap" [label = "yes"];
  "Bootstrap Needed?" -> "Load Refs & Prepare Briefings" [label = "no"];
  "Bootstrap" -> "Load Refs & Prepare Briefings";
  "Load Refs & Prepare Briefings" -> "Initial Completion Check";
  "Initial Completion Check" -> "Launch All Supervisors";
  "Launch All Supervisors" -> "Verify All Running";
  "Verify All Running" -> "Create Initial Status Ticket";
  "Create Initial Status Ticket" -> "Monitoring Loop (see Section 4.3)";
}
```

### 7.6 Startup Sequence

#### Step 1: Clean Up Old Sessions

On every new session, the Product Builder finds and stops all sessions whose title starts with `[AUTO-`, then deletes them. This ensures a clean slate. Supervisors recover their own state from Forgejo tracking issues (via the Startup State Recovery Protocol, Section 5.3.3), so nothing is lost.

!!! note "No Session Adoption"

    Previous versions of the Product Builder adopted existing sessions from prior runs. The current design always starts fresh because: (a) all persistent state lives on Forgejo, (b) supervisors implement their own crash recovery via tracking issues, and (c) a clean slate avoids stale session problems.

#### Step 2: Assess Project State

The Product Builder checks whether the project needs bootstrapping by verifying that `pyproject.toml`, `noxfile.py`, `.forgejo/workflows/` (CI pipeline), and `CONTRIBUTING.md` all exist. The Product Verifier (Step 5) provides a thorough assessment of Forgejo state.

#### Step 3: Bootstrap If Needed

If any files from Step 2 are missing, the Product Builder invokes the **Project Bootstrapper** subagent to set up project structure, CI, labels, milestones, and branch protection. This step is skipped entirely if all infrastructure exists.

#### Step 4: Load Reference Materials and Prepare Supervisor Briefings

The Product Builder loads all project reference materials via the **Ref Reader** subagent (`CONTRIBUTING.md`, `docs/specification.md`) and retrieves open announcements and per-supervisor tracking state via the **Automation Tracking Manager**. It then synthesizes a customized briefing for each supervisor, extracting the portions of the reference material relevant to that supervisor's role. These briefings are included in each supervisor's launch prompt (Step 6). See Section 6.8 for details.

#### Step 5: Initial Completion Check

The Product Builder invokes the **Product Verifier** to get a baseline assessment of product completeness (milestones, issues, PRs, tests, quality gates). This is informational and recorded in the initial status ticket.

#### Step 6: Launch All Supervisors

Each supervisor is launched via the Async Agent Manager with its agent name, session tag, display name, and a prompt containing all configuration parameters (repository info, credentials, worker count, and the customized briefing from Step 4). Worker counts are computed from `CA_MAX_PARALLEL_WORKERS` using the tiered allocation formula (Section 1.3) and passed to each supervisor as a runtime parameter.

The PR Review Pool Supervisor receives the **reviewer credentials** (`FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT`, `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME`, `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD`) instead of the primary bot credentials (Section 6.17).

#### Step 7: Verify All Supervisors Running

Immediately after launching, the Product Builder verifies each supervisor is alive by searching for its session tag and checking it is in a busy state. Any failed launches are retried.

#### Step 8: Create Initial Status Ticket

An initial status tracking ticket is created via the Automation Tracking Manager with comprehensive status: session start time, product vision, all supervisor statuses, completion check results, and worker allocation values.

### 7.7 Subagent Interactions

```kroki-blockdiag
blockdiag {
  "Product Builder" -> "async-agent-manager" [label = "launch/monitor supervisors"];
  "Product Builder" -> "project-bootstrapper" [label = "one-shot: bootstrap"];
  "Product Builder" -> "product-verifier" [label = "hourly: completion check"];
  "Product Builder" -> "ref-reader" [label = "one-shot: load context"];
  "Product Builder" -> "automation-tracking-manager" [label = "hourly: status tickets"];
}
```

### 7.8 Worker Tag Patterns

Pool supervisors launch workers whose session tags follow predictable patterns. The Product Builder uses these patterns to find and count workers independently of the supervisor:

| Supervisor Tag | Worker Tag Pattern | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| `[AUTO-IMP-SUP]` | `[AUTO-IMP-ISSUE-<N>]` or `[AUTO-IMP-PR-<N>]` | `[AUTO-IMP-ISSUE-42]`, `[AUTO-IMP-PR-15]` |
| `[AUTO-REV-SUP]` | `[AUTO-REV-<N>]` | `[AUTO-REV-1]` |
| `[AUTO-UAT-SUP]` | `[AUTO-UAT-<N>]` | `[AUTO-UAT-1]` |
| `[AUTO-BUG-SUP]` | `[AUTO-BUG-<N>]` | `[AUTO-BUG-1]` |
| `[AUTO-INF-SUP]` | `[AUTO-INF-<N>]` | `[AUTO-INF-1]` |

Implementation workers use `[AUTO-IMP-ISSUE-<N>]` when implementing a new issue (where N is the issue number) and `[AUTO-IMP-PR-<N>]` when fixing an existing PR (where N is the PR number). This naming prevents collisions and makes it easy to identify what each worker is doing.

### 7.9 Product Builder Responsibilities

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-01: Supervisor Liveness](#221-r-01-supervisor-liveness-and-health-monitoring) | **Primary**: 60-second health checks, immediate re-launch of dead supervisors; deep inspection every 5 cycles including message reading and question answering; worker health monitoring via tag patterns | Layer 1 + Layer 2 | [22.1](#221-r-01-supervisor-liveness-and-health-monitoring) |
| [R-04: Issue Implementation](#224-r-04-issue-implementation) | Orchestrates by launching Implementation Pool Supervisor | Dispatch chain | [22.4](#224-r-04-issue-implementation) |
| [R-12: Merge Safety](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) | Invokes Project Bootstrapper for initial branch protection setup | Setup chain | [22.12](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) |
| [R-20: Automation Tracking](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) | Creates hourly tracking issues with comprehensive status; reads supervisor status for convergence | Layer 2 (self-cleanup) | [22.20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) |
| [R-67: Product Verification](#2267-r-67-product-completion-verification) | Invokes Product Verifier hourly for completion check | Dispatch | [22.67](#2267-r-67-product-completion-verification) |
| [R-80: Non-Return Guarantee](#2280-r-80-non-return-guarantee-enforcement) | Never stops unless user explicitly requests it; product completion is reported but does not trigger exit | Self-constraint | [22.80](#2280-r-80-non-return-guarantee-enforcement) |
| [R-81: Worker Allocation](#2281-r-81-tiered-worker-allocation-formula) | Computes N/N÷2/N÷4/1 allocation and passes to each supervisor as a runtime parameter | Configuration | [22.81](#2281-r-81-tiered-worker-allocation-formula) |
| [R-121: Bootstrap Skip](#22121-r-121-phase-a-bootstrap-skip-condition) | Skips bootstrap if pyproject.toml + noxfile.py + CI + CONTRIBUTING.md all exist | Phase gate | [22.121](#22121-r-121-phase-a-bootstrap-skip-condition) |
| [R-122: prompt_async](#22122-r-122-prompt-async-mandatory-for-supervisor-launch) | Supervisors via prompt_async (fire-and-forget); Task tool FORBIDDEN (would block forever) | Architectural | [22.122](#22122-r-122-prompt-async-mandatory-for-supervisor-launch) |
| [R-123: 18 Mandatory](#22123-r-123-all-18-supervisors-mandatory-verification) | Post-launch verification: ALL 18 must have active sessions; re-launch any missing | Verification | [22.123](#22123-r-123-all-18-supervisors-mandatory-verification) |
| [R-124: Convergence](#22124-r-124-convergence-check-algorithm) | Hourly convergence check via Product Verifier; reports status in tracking ticket | Lifecycle gate | [22.124](#22124-r-124-convergence-check-algorithm) |
| [R-125: Never Edits](#22125-r-125-product-builder-never-edits-or-merges-directly) | FORBIDDEN: implement, edit code, create PR, merge PR, review PR, fix CI — always re-launch supervisor | Prohibition | [22.125](#22125-r-125-product-builder-never-edits-or-merges-directly) |
| [R-126: No Duplicates](#22126-r-126-no-duplicate-supervisor-instances) | One instance per supervisor type; checks for existing session before launch | Layer 1 (prevention) | [22.126](#22126-r-126-no-duplicate-supervisor-instances) |
| [R-21: Crash Recovery](#2221-r-21-crash-recovery-and-state-persistence) | Clean-slate startup (stops all `[AUTO-*]` sessions, launches fresh); supervisors recover their own state from Forgejo tracking issues | Product Builder + Supervisor levels | [22.21](#2221-r-21-crash-recovery-and-state-persistence) |

---

### 7.9 Universal Supervisor Responsibilities (All 18 Supervisors)

!!! info "Shared Baseline"

    The following responsibilities apply to **every one of the 18 supervisors** (7 pool + 11 singleton). Individual supervisor tables in Sections 8 and 9 list only their **unique** responsibilities on top of this shared baseline. The Product Builder (Section 7.9) shares most of these but has its own variants.

| Responsibility | What Every Supervisor Must Do | Section |
|---------------|------------------------------|---------|
| [R-141: Startup Sequence](#22141-r-141-supervisor-mandatory-startup-sequence) | Execute 4-step startup: READ_TRACKING_STATE → parse recovered state → CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE → begin main loop | [22.141](#22141-r-141-supervisor-mandatory-startup-sequence) |
| [R-142: State Recovery](#22142-r-142-startup-state-recovery-before-tracking-creation) | Read most recent tracking issue BEFORE creating new one; parse previous cycle's work items, health indicators | [22.142](#22142-r-142-startup-state-recovery-before-tracking-creation) |
| [R-20: Tracking Coordination](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) | Create status tracking issues via ATM every N cycles; update with current state | [22.20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) |
| [R-143: Dual Cleanup](#22143-r-143-dual-status-issue-cleanup-defense-in-depth) | Close ALL own old status issues before creating new one (via ATM's close-all protocol) | [22.143](#22143-r-143-dual-status-issue-cleanup-defense-in-depth) |
| [R-133: Announcement Consumption](#22133-r-133-announcement-consumption-priority-protocol) | Read announcements from relevant agents at appropriate priority depth per the consumption table | [22.133](#22133-r-133-announcement-consumption-priority-protocol) |
| [R-43: Announcement Lifecycle](#2243-r-43-announcement-lifecycle-management) | Review own announcements every 3 cycles; close resolved ones | [22.43](#2243-r-43-announcement-lifecycle-management) |
| [R-44: Context Self-Management](#2244-r-44-context-window-self-management) | Periodically discard accumulated tool outputs; retain only persistent state | [22.44](#2244-r-44-context-window-self-management) |
| [R-113: Resource Cleanup](#22113-r-113-guaranteed-resource-cleanup-via-cleanupmanager) | Guarantee resource release (claims, clones, temps) via try/finally | [22.113](#22113-r-113-guaranteed-resource-cleanup-via-cleanupmanager) |
| [R-114: Credential Validation](#22114-r-114-startup-credential-validation-gate) | Validate all required credentials at startup before any work | [22.114](#22114-r-114-startup-credential-validation-gate) |
| [R-63: Bot Signature](#2263-r-63-bot-signature-standardization) | Append standardized bot signature to ALL Forgejo content | [22.63](#2263-r-63-bot-signature-standardization) |
| [R-41: Worker Dispatch](#2241-r-41-worker-dispatch-and-sliding-window-management) | *Pool supervisors only*: maintain sliding window of N workers; fill slots immediately from priority queue | [22.41](#2241-r-41-worker-dispatch-and-sliding-window-management) |
| [R-78: Structured Logging](#2278-r-78-structured-logging-protocol) | Use `[AGENT:][SESSION:][ACTION:][LEVEL:]` format for all logs | [22.78](#2278-r-78-structured-logging-protocol) |
| [R-79: Performance Monitoring](#2279-r-79-performance-monitoring-and-health-scoring) | Track operation durations, success rates, resource usage; adaptive timeouts | [22.79](#2279-r-79-performance-monitoring-and-health-scoring) |
| [R-77: Push Conflict Recovery](#2277-r-77-push-conflict-recovery-protocol) | *Cloning agents only*: rebase-and-retry on push rejection; reclone after 5 failures | [22.77](#2277-r-77-push-conflict-recovery-protocol) |
| [R-127: No Label Creation](#22127-r-127-label-creation-prohibition-enforcement) | Never create labels; delegate to Forgejo Label Manager | [22.127](#22127-r-127-label-creation-prohibition-enforcement) |
| [R-134: No Internet](#22134-r-134-internet-access-restriction) | No webfetch access; work from local files, Forgejo API, and OpenCode API only | [22.134](#22134-r-134-internet-access-restriction) |

---

## 8. Pool Supervisors (Tier 1)

### 8.1 Implementation Pool Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `implementation-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `all` (primary + subagent) |
| **Model** | Not specified (inherits from launcher) |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-IMP-POOL` |
| **Worker Count** | N (full allocation) |
| **Workers** | `implementation-worker` |
| **Polling Interval** | 2 seconds (optimized) |

#### 8.1.1 Purpose

The Implementation Pool Supervisor is the primary engine for closing issues. It finds failing PRs and open issues, then dispatches parallel implementation workers to handle them. It enforces an absolute PR-first priority: no new issues are worked on until every PR has an active worker or is blocked by human feedback.

#### 8.1.2 PR-First Priority Gate

!!! danger "Mandatory First Action: Analyze ALL Open PRs"

    Before doing ANYTHING else — before loading references, before finding issues, before dispatching any workers — the Implementation Pool Supervisor MUST call `forgejo_list_repo_pull_requests(owner, repo, state="open")` with NO limit parameter, read the FULL result (including from saved output files when tool output is truncated), and analyze every PR for work needed. Only after this analysis is complete may the supervisor proceed. This rule exists because a previous failure mode had the supervisor treating truncated tool output as complete data and dispatching issue workers while 30+ PRs were waiting.

**Tool output truncation rule**: When a tool response shows `...N bytes truncated... Full output saved to: /path/to/file`, the supervisor MUST read that file with `jq` or `Read` before proceeding. Never treat truncated tool output as analyzed data.

The dispatch logic operates on a strict hierarchy:

1. **Priority/CI-Blocker issues** (highest): These break the CI pipeline and create deadlocks. They are the only exception to the PR-first rule.
2. **PRs needing work** (second): All open PRs that need fixes, review responses, or conflict resolution. Issue dispatch is BLOCKED until the `pr_work_queue` length is exactly 0.
3. **New issues** (lowest): Only when all PRs have workers assigned.

**Three Mandatory PR Dispatch Rules:**

6. **ALL HAL9000 PRs need workers** — Every open PR created by the bot account needs a worker assigned to shepherd it to merge. No PR is ever skipped because it is "too new" or has no reviews yet. The `analyze_pr_state()` function always returns `needs_work: True` for bot PRs; the only question is what *type* of work is needed.

7. **NEVER classify HAL9000 PRs as "external"** — The "external-pr" classification applies exclusively to PRs created by human users. Ownership is determined by `pr.user.login == FORGEJO_USERNAME` (Section 6.21), never by the presence of closing keywords in the PR body.

8. **PAGINATION IS REQUIRED** — The Forgejo API returns at most 50 PRs per page. The `check_pr_work_needed()` function must paginate through ALL pages per Section 6.20.

PR work is scored by priority:

| Work Type | Score | Trigger Condition |
|-----------|-------|-------------------|
| Ready to merge | 95 | Has approval, CI passing, no conflicts |
| Review feedback (REQUEST_CHANGES) | 90 | Reviewer requested changes |
| Review feedback (COMMENT reviews) | 85 | Reviewer left comment-only reviews without formal decision |
| CI fix needed | 85 | CI checks are failing |
| Merge conflicts | 80 | Has approval but merge conflicts detected |
| Awaiting review | 60 | No reviews yet — PR needs monitoring and shepherding |
| Age bonus | +0 to +10 | `min(age_days * 2, 10)` — older PRs get a slight priority boost |

#### 8.1.3 Sliding Window Dispatch

The supervisor maintains a sliding window of N active workers. When a worker completes, its slot is immediately filled from the priority queue. Workers are launched via the Async Agent Manager (never via the Task tool) to ensure non-blocking dispatch.

#### 8.1.4 Worker Adoption

On startup, the supervisor checks for existing worker sessions from a previous run. If found, it adopts them into its tracking instead of launching duplicates. This enables crash recovery without losing work in progress.

#### 8.1.5 Activity Diagram

```kroki-activitydiag
activitydiag {
  "Startup" -> "Load References" -> "Find Issues" -> "Adopt Existing Workers";
  "Adopt Existing Workers" -> "Main Loop";
  "Main Loop" -> "Check PR Work Needed";
  "Check PR Work Needed" -> "PRs Need Work?";
  "PRs Need Work?" -> "Dispatch PR Workers" [label = "yes"];
  "PRs Need Work?" -> "Check Issue Queue" [label = "no"];
  "Dispatch PR Workers" -> "Check Worker Health";
  "Check Issue Queue" -> "Slots Available?";
  "Slots Available?" -> "Dispatch Issue Workers" [label = "yes"];
  "Slots Available?" -> "Check Worker Health" [label = "no"];
  "Dispatch Issue Workers" -> "Check Worker Health";
  "Check Worker Health" -> "Clean Dead Workers" -> "Enforce Limits" -> "Post Status" -> "Sleep 2s" -> "Main Loop";
}
```

#### 8.1.6 Permissions Rationale

| Permission | Setting | Rationale |
|------------|---------|-----------|
| `edit` | deny | Supervisor never edits files; delegates to workers |
| `task.implementation-worker` | deny | Workers launched via async-agent-manager, not Task tool |
| `task.async-agent-manager` | allow | Required for launching workers asynchronously |

#### 8.1.7 Implementation Pool Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-49: PR Ownership & Scoring](#2249-r-49-pr-ownership-detection-and-work-scoring) | Classifies PRs by `pr.user.login`; scores by work type (95/90/85/80/60) + age bonus | Single | [22.49](#2249-r-49-pr-ownership-detection-and-work-scoring) |
| [R-98: Dispatch Ordering](#2298-r-98-issue-dispatch-priority-ordering-rules) | 7-level priority: CI-Blocker → Critical bugs → lowest milestone → In Progress → Priority → MoSCoW → unblock score | Single | [22.98](#2298-r-98-issue-dispatch-priority-ordering-rules) |
| [R-04: Issue Implementation](#224-r-04-issue-implementation) | **Primary dispatcher**: finds verified issues, manages sliding window of N workers, enforces PR-first priority gate | Dispatch | [22.4](#224-r-04-issue-implementation) |
| [R-50: Worker Adoption](#2250-r-50-worker-session-adoption-and-lifecycle) | Scans for existing worker sessions on startup; validates status; adopts into tracking | Layer 1 | [22.50](#2250-r-50-worker-session-adoption-and-lifecycle) |
| [R-51: Pagination & Truncation](#2251-r-51-forgejo-api-pagination-and-truncation-recovery) | Paginates ALL PR pages; reads truncated output files; logs verification counts | Most affected | [22.51](#2251-r-51-forgejo-api-pagination-and-truncation-recovery) |
| [R-07: PR Fixing](#227-r-07-pr-fixing-and-ci-remediation) | PR-first priority gate guarantees every bot PR has an active worker before any new issues | Layer 1 | [22.7](#227-r-07-pr-fixing-and-ci-remediation) |
| [R-08: PR Merging](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) | Dispatches workers with `ready-to-merge` work type for approved PRs | Layer 2 (backup) | [22.8](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) |
| [R-20: Automation Tracking](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) | Creates tracking issues; reads announcements from watchdog, architecture, groomer | Layer 2 (self-cleanup) | [22.20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) |
| [R-21: Crash Recovery](#2221-r-21-crash-recovery-and-state-persistence) | Adopts existing worker sessions; parses previous tracking for active PRs/issues | Worker level | [22.21](#2221-r-21-crash-recovery-and-state-persistence) |

---

### 8.2 PR Review Pool Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `pr-review-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-REV-POOL` |
| **Worker Count** | N/2 (half allocation) |
| **Workers** | `pr-reviewer` |
| **Polling Interval** | 30 seconds |

#### 8.2.1 Purpose

Continuously polls for pull requests needing code review and dispatches parallel PR Reviewer instances. Focuses purely on code quality assessment. Does not handle fixes, merges, or PR lifecycle management.

#### 8.2.2 Review Determination

A PR needs review when:
- No reviews exist and PR is older than 2 hours (initial review)
- Changes were requested but new commits were pushed (changes addressed)
- No review activity for 24+ hours and no approval (stale review)
- Approved but not merged for 1+ hours (stuck investigation)

CI-failing PRs are skipped (let the implementation worker fix CI first).

#### 8.2.3 Dynamic Review Focus

Each review session receives specific focus areas that rotate through ten categories:
1. Architecture alignment, module boundaries, interface contracts
2. Error handling patterns, edge cases, boundary conditions
3. Test coverage quality, scenario completeness, maintainability
4. API consistency, naming conventions, code patterns
5. Security concerns, input validation, access control
6. Performance implications, resource usage, scalability
7. Code maintainability, readability, documentation
8. Concurrency safety, race conditions, deadlock risks
9. Resource management, memory leaks, cleanup patterns
10. Specification compliance, requirements coverage, behavior correctness

Every third cycle creates a custom mix for serendipitous discovery.

#### 8.2.4 PR Review Pool Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-05: Code Review](#225-r-05-code-review-and-quality-assessment) | **Primary dispatcher**: polls for unreviewed PRs, dispatches N/2 parallel PR Reviewer instances with rotating focus areas | Layer 1 | [22.5](#225-r-05-code-review-and-quality-assessment) |
| [R-52: Dual-Account Auth](#2252-r-52-dual-account-review-authentication) | Passes all 3 reviewer credentials (PAT, username, password) to each dispatched PR Reviewer instance | Credential distribution | [22.52](#2252-r-52-dual-account-review-authentication) |
| [R-53: Anti-Pattern Detection](#2253-r-53-anti-pattern-and-code-smell-detection) | Assigns rotating focus areas (10 categories) to each reviewer instance, ensuring diverse detection | Layer 1 (rotation) | [22.53](#2253-r-53-anti-pattern-and-code-smell-detection) |
| [R-101: Flaky Test Detection](#22101-r-101-flaky-test-16-pattern-detection) | Reviewers check for 16 specific non-deterministic test patterns; REQUEST_CHANGES immediately on match | Layer 1 (per-PR) | [22.101](#22101-r-101-flaky-test-16-pattern-detection) |
| [R-135: File Organization](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement) | Checks files in correct directories per CONTRIBUTING.md | Layer 2 (review) | [22.135](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement) |
| [R-136: No type:ignore](#22136-r-136-static-typing-and-type-ignore-prohibition) | Scans diff for `type: ignore`; requests changes if found | Layer 2 (review) | [22.136](#22136-r-136-static-typing-and-type-ignore-prohibition) |
| [R-137: 500-Line Limit](#22137-r-137-maximum-file-size-enforcement-500-lines) | Checks file sizes in diff; requests changes for files exceeding 500 lines | Layer 2 (review) | [22.137](#22137-r-137-maximum-file-size-enforcement-500-lines) |
| [R-138: Framework Selection](#22138-r-138-testing-framework-selection-rules) | Rejects xUnit-style tests; verifies correct framework per test level | Layer 2 (review) | [22.138](#22138-r-138-testing-framework-selection-rules) |
| [R-140: Commit Format](#22140-r-140-conventional-changelog-commit-format) | Checks Conventional Changelog format in PR commits | Layer 2 (review) | [22.140](#22140-r-140-conventional-changelog-commit-format) |
| [R-20: Automation Tracking](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) | Creates tracking issues; reads critical announcements from watchdog/liaison | Layer 2 (self-cleanup) | [22.20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) |

---

### 8.3 PR Merge Pool Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `pr-merge-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-MERGE` |
| **Polling Interval** | 5 minutes |

#### 8.3.1 Purpose

A singleton supervisor that continuously monitors pull requests for merge readiness. It verifies all merge criteria are met, automatically rebases PRs without conflicts, and merges using fast-forward when possible. Unlike other supervisors, the PR Merge Pool calls `pr-merge-worker` as a **blocking subagent** (via the Task tool) rather than dispatching it as an async session. The supervisor blocks until the worker finishes, then continues its cycle. This means there are no `[AUTO-PRMRG-<N>]` async sessions — the Product Builder and System Watchdog must skip worker health checks for this supervisor.

#### 8.3.2 Merge Criteria

All of the following must be true:
1. Has at least one valid approval signal detected via the **3-Tier Approval Detection** system (Section 6.17.1)
2. All CI checks pass with no pending checks
3. No merge conflicts (`mergeable != false`)
4. **Branch is up-to-date** with the base branch (`merge_base == base.sha`). If the branch is behind, it must be rebased before merging. Forgejo silently fails to merge branches that are behind, even when `mergeable` is `true`. This check is mandatory before every merge attempt.
5. Not labeled `needs feedback` or `Blocked`
6. No blocking `REQUEST_CHANGES` reviews more recent than the latest approval signal (from any of the three tiers)
7. Linked issues in correct state (`State/In Review`)

Both bot accounts are recognized as valid approvers. See Section 6.17 for the dual-account architecture.

#### 8.3.3 Approval Detection via 3-Tier System

The supervisor uses the `check_pr_approval()` function which implements the 3-Tier Approval Detection specified in Section 6.17.1. The function returns a structured result including `has_approval`, `approval_type` (one of `formal_review`, `review_body_approval`, or `comment_approval`), the `approver` identity, and the `approval_source` description.

The `has_blocking_reviews()` function compares the timestamp of the latest `REQUEST_CHANGES` review against the timestamp of the latest approval signal from all three tiers. A blocking review only prevents merge if it is more recent than the newest approval from any source.

#### 8.3.4 Mandatory Merge Verification Protocol

!!! danger "The forgejo_merge_pull_request MCP Tool Cannot Be Trusted"

    The `forgejo_merge_pull_request` MCP tool returns "Pull request merged successfully" even when the merge **did not actually happen**. This occurs because Forgejo silently rejects merges when the branch is behind the base branch, but the MCP tool does not detect this failure. This caused false "Automatically merged" comments on PRs that were never actually merged (e.g., issues #6726, #6695, #5276, #6571).

Every merge attempt must follow this exact sequence:

1. **Pre-merge staleness check**: Call `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index` and compare `merge_base` against `base.sha`. If they differ, the branch is behind and must be rebased before merging (see Section 8.3.5).
2. **Attempt merge**: Call `forgejo_merge_pull_request`.
3. **Mandatory post-merge verification**: Immediately call `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index` and check that `merged == true` AND `state == "closed"`.
4. **Only on verified success**: Post the "Automatically merged (verified)" comment with the `✓ Merge verified via API (PR state: closed, merged: true)` line.
5. **On verification failure** (merged is false or state is open): The merge silently failed. Attempt automatic rebase and schedule retry for the next cycle. Never post a merge success comment.

This verification protocol is enforced in three locations:
- The PR Merge Pool Supervisor's `merge_pr()` function
- The shared `safe_merge_pr()` utility (Section 13.6)
- The Implementation Worker's ready-to-merge workflow

**The System Watchdog now monitors for "merged successfully" comments on PRs that are still open** as an additional safety net.

#### 8.3.5 Pre-Merge Rebase Protocol

When a branch is behind the base branch (`merge_base != base.sha`), the PR Merge supervisor calls `pr-merge-worker` as a **blocking subagent** via the Task tool. The worker handles the rebase operation based on whether conflicts exist:

| Condition | Action |
|-----------|--------|
| Behind, no conflicts | Worker creates an isolated clone via `repo-isolator`, rebases via `git rebase`, force-pushes with lease via `git-commit-helper`, cleans up the clone, waits for CI to pass, then attempts a fast-forward merge if the PR is mergeable. |
| Behind, with conflicts | Worker resolves conflicts by reviewing recent git history, or posts comment requesting manual rebase if unresolvable. |
| Up-to-date | Supervisor proceeds directly to merge (no worker needed). |

**Blocking call semantics**: The supervisor blocks while the worker runs — including during the worker's CI polling wait. Only after the worker finishes does the supervisor continue to the next PR. This is intentional since only one rebase operation happens at a time.

**Critical rule**: After a successful rebase, the worker waits for CI to complete before attempting merge. The worker polls every 60 seconds for CI completion and only merges with fast-forward if CI passes and the PR is mergeable.

**Supervisor subagents**: `automation-tracking-manager`, `repo-isolator`, `git-commit-helper`, `pr-merge-worker` (blocking)

**Worker subagents** (used by `pr-merge-worker`): `repo-isolator`, `git-commit-helper`

#### 8.3.6 PR Merge Pool Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-99: 7 Merge Criteria](#2299-r-99-pr-merge-seven-criteria-checklist) | ALL seven criteria verified before every merge: approval, CI, conflicts, staleness, needs-feedback, blocked, issue state | Protocol | [22.99](#2299-r-99-pr-merge-seven-criteria-checklist) |
| [R-100: Blocking Detection](#22100-r-100-blocking-review-temporal-detection) | REQUEST_CHANGES only blocks if more recent than latest approval from any of the 3 tiers | Protocol | [22.100](#22100-r-100-blocking-review-temporal-detection) |
| [R-54: 3-Tier Approval](#2254-r-54-three-tier-approval-detection) | `check_pr_approval()` implements 3-tier detection: formal reviews → review bodies → issue comments | Consumer | [22.54](#2254-r-54-three-tier-approval-detection) |
| [R-08: PR Merging](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) | **Primary merger**: polls every 5 minutes for merge-ready PRs, verifies 7 merge criteria, handles pre-merge rebase | Layer 1 | [22.8](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) |
| [R-55: Post-Merge Verification](#2255-r-55-post-merge-state-verification) | After every merge: `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index` to confirm `merged == true` AND `state == "closed"` | Layer 1 (inline) | [22.55](#2255-r-55-post-merge-state-verification) |
| [R-30: Branch Management](#2230-r-30-branch-management-and-rebase) | Pre-merge staleness check (merge_base vs base.sha); automatic rebase for behind-but-no-conflict PRs | Layer 2 | [22.30](#2230-r-30-branch-management-and-rebase) |
| [R-12: Merge Safety](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) | Implements `safe_merge_pr()` with all 7 mandatory rules | Layer 2 (enforcement) | [22.12](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) |
| [R-139: 97% Coverage](#22139-r-139-coverage-threshold-enforcement-97-percent) | CI coverage check at merge gate; failing coverage blocks merge | Layer 2 (merge gate) | [22.139](#22139-r-139-coverage-threshold-enforcement-97-percent) |
| [R-28: Issue Closure](#2228-r-28-issue-closure-and-post-merge-cleanup) | After verified merge: updates linked issues to State/Completed | Layer 1b (immediate) | [22.28](#2228-r-28-issue-closure-and-post-merge-cleanup) |
| [R-20: Automation Tracking](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) | Creates tracking issues; reads critical announcements from watchdog | Layer 2 (self-cleanup) | [22.20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) |

---

### 8.4 PR Fix Pool Supervisor (Removed)

!!! note "Absorbed into Implementation Pool Supervisor"

    The PR Fix Pool Supervisor has been removed. Its responsibilities are now handled by the **Implementation Pool Supervisor** (Section 8.1), which has PR-first priority and dispatches `implementation-worker` agents for both new issues and PR fixes. PR fix behavior is covered by the implementation pool's progressive escalation model (four model tiers with human escalation at the top). Workers use the `ci-log-fetcher` subagent directly to understand CI failures.

---

### 8.5 UAT Test Pool Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `uat-test-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.3 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-UAT-POOL` |
| **Worker Count** | N/4 (quarter allocation) |

#### 8.5.1 Purpose

Discovers testable feature areas from the specification, dispatches parallel workers to test each area against the spec, files bug issues for gaps, and captures successful workflows as documentation examples.

#### 8.5.2 Supervisor-Worker Separation

The supervisor discovers testable feature areas and dispatches `uat-test-worker` agents, each assigned one feature area. Workers clone the repo, test their assigned feature, file bugs for failures, and exit. The supervisor keeps the pool full by launching new workers as old ones complete.

#### 8.5.3 Milestone Scope Guard

Only critical bugs get assigned to the active milestone. Non-critical issues go to the backlog with no milestone. This prevents scope explosion in converging milestones.

#### 8.5.4 UAT Test Pool Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-16: Bug Detection](#2216-r-16-bug-detection-and-proactive-quality-assurance) | Tests feature areas against specification; files bug issues for gaps and spec deviations | Layer 2 (spec compliance) | [22.16](#2216-r-16-bug-detection-and-proactive-quality-assurance) |
| [R-66: Finding Validation](#2266-r-66-finding-validation-gate-before-issue-filing) | Checks open PRs for keywords matching feature area before filing bugs | Layer (UAT gate) | [22.66](#2266-r-66-finding-validation-gate-before-issue-filing) |
| [R-86: Open PR Awareness](#2286-r-86-open-pr-awareness-before-bug-filing) | Skips bug filing if open PR already addresses the gap | Layer 1 | [22.86](#2286-r-86-open-pr-awareness-before-bug-filing) |
| [R-88: Feature Retest](#2288-r-88-uat-feature-area-retest-on-code-changes) | Maps changed files to feature areas; invalidates tested_areas set to force retest | Single | [22.88](#2288-r-88-uat-feature-area-retest-on-code-changes) |
| [R-17: Documentation](#2217-r-17-documentation-and-timeline-maintenance) | Generates showcase documentation from successful end-to-end test runs | Supplementary | [22.17](#2217-r-17-documentation-and-timeline-maintenance) |
| [R-19: Scope Management](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) | Milestone Scope Guard: only critical bugs to active milestone, non-critical to backlog | Layer 3b (prevention at testing) | [22.19](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) |
| [R-15: Backlog Hygiene](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) | Worker coordination via Forgejo comments to avoid duplicate testing | Layer 2c (self-dedup) | [22.15](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) |

---

### 8.6 Bug Hunt Pool Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `bug-hunt-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `google/gemini-2.5-pro` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-BUG-SUP` |
| **Worker Count** | N/4 (quarter allocation) |

#### 8.6.1 Purpose

Proactive bug detection through deep code analysis combined with specification comparison. Maps all source modules and dispatches parallel workers, each scanning one module through nine analysis passes.

#### 8.6.2 Nine Analysis Passes

1. Error handling analysis
2. Concurrency analysis
3. Security analysis
4. Boundary condition analysis
5. Resource management analysis
6. Type safety analysis
7. Specification alignment analysis
8. Code consistency analysis
9. Data flow analysis

#### 8.6.3 Model Choice Rationale

Uses `google/gemini-2.5-pro` for its massive context window, which allows holding the entire codebase in mind for cross-module analysis.

#### 8.6.4 Bug Hunt Pool Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-16: Bug Detection](#2216-r-16-bug-detection-and-proactive-quality-assurance) | **Primary proactive detector**: nine analysis passes per module (error handling, concurrency, security, boundaries, resources, types, spec alignment, consistency, data flow) | Layer 1 (code analysis) | [22.16](#2216-r-16-bug-detection-and-proactive-quality-assurance) |
| [R-66: Finding Validation](#2266-r-66-finding-validation-gate-before-issue-filing) | 5-check gate: code evidence, environment verification, actionability, codebase freshness, severity match | Layer (Bug Hunt gate) | [22.66](#2266-r-66-finding-validation-gate-before-issue-filing) |
| [R-70: TDD Awareness](#2270-r-70-tdd-workflow-awareness-in-bug-reports) | Includes TDD Note in every bug report for subsequent test-first workflow | Layer 1 (filing) | [22.70](#2270-r-70-tdd-workflow-awareness-in-bug-reports) |
| [R-86: Open PR Awareness](#2286-r-86-open-pr-awareness-before-bug-filing) | Validates finding is not already being addressed by open PR | Layer 2 | [22.86](#2286-r-86-open-pr-awareness-before-bug-filing) |
| [R-14: Codebase Coherence](#2214-r-14-codebase-coherence-and-technical-debt) | Pass 8 (code consistency) and Pass 9 (data flow) identify inconsistent patterns across modules | Layer 2 (per-module analysis) | [22.14](#2214-r-14-codebase-coherence-and-technical-debt) |
| [R-15: Backlog Hygiene](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) | Finding validation: five rules before filing any bug issue to prevent duplicates and false positives | Layer 2b (self-dedup) | [22.15](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) |

---

### 8.7 Test Infrastructure Pool Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `test-infra-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `google/gemini-2.5-pro` |
| **Temperature** | 0.2 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-INF-POOL` |
| **Worker Count** | N/4 (quarter allocation) |

#### 8.7.1 Purpose

Analyzes testing infrastructure and proposes improvements. Never disables or weakens existing checks; only proposes additions and optimizations.

#### 8.7.2 Eight Analysis Areas

1. CI execution time
2. Coverage gaps
3. Test architecture
4. Flaky tests
5. CI pipeline design
6. Test data quality
7. Missing test levels
8. Dependency security

#### 8.7.3 Duplicate Avoidance

Documented as the "#1 problem with this agent" due to historical creation of 48+ issues with massive duplication. Five mandatory checks before filing any issue: keyword search, cross-area search, closed issues search, dedup proof in issue body, and uncertainty avoidance.

#### 8.7.4 Test Infrastructure Pool Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-06: Quality Gate Enforcement](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) | Proposes improvements to CI pipeline and test infrastructure; never disables existing checks | Improvement (indirect) | [22.6](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) |
| [R-71: Never-Disable-Checks](#2271-r-71-never-disable-checks-safety-constraint) | Hard constraint: never disable coverage, type checking, linting, security. Never reduce below 97%. Never remove CI steps. | Layer 1 (self-constraint) | [22.71](#2271-r-71-never-disable-checks-safety-constraint) |
| [R-138: Framework Selection](#22138-r-138-testing-framework-selection-rules) | Verifies all three test levels exist per module; never weakens framework requirements | Layer 3 (infrastructure) | [22.138](#22138-r-138-testing-framework-selection-rules) |
| [R-66: Finding Validation](#2266-r-66-finding-validation-gate-before-issue-filing) | Five mandatory dedup checks with `### Duplicate Check` section in every issue body | Layer (Test Infra gate) | [22.66](#2266-r-66-finding-validation-gate-before-issue-filing) |
| [R-15: Backlog Hygiene](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) | Strongest self-dedup of any agent — historical 48+ duplicates motivate 5-step protocol | Layer 2 (self-dedup) | [22.15](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) |

---

## 9. Singleton Supervisors (Tier 1)

### 9.1 Architecture Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `architecture-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.3 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-ARCH` |
| **Polling Interval** | 30 minutes |

**Purpose**: Continuously monitors for specification needs. Writes or extends `docs/specification.md`. Defines module boundaries, interfaces, data models, and patterns. Major changes go through PRs with "needs feedback" label for human approval. Described as "the most consequential agent -- bad architecture cascades everywhere."

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`, `automation-tracking-manager`

**Workflow**: Checks for triggers every 30 minutes: new milestones without spec coverage, spec ambiguities reported by implementers, human requests for clarification, or initial bootstrap (no spec exists). When the spec grows beyond approximately 3,000 lines, transitions from a single `docs/specification.md` file to a `docs/specification/` directory with one file per module. Major architectural changes go through PRs with the `needs feedback` label; minor clarifications are committed directly. When creating a PR for a major spec change, the agent assigns it to the current active milestone using `forgejo_update_pull_request` (querying available milestones via `forgejo_list_repo_milestones`); if no active milestone can be determined, milestone assignment is skipped gracefully.

**Specification Structure**: Must contain Overview, Module Definitions (boundaries, responsibilities, public interfaces), Cross-Cutting Concerns (error handling, logging, configuration), Integration Points, and Milestone Plan.

#### 9.1.1 Architecture Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-13: Specification Governance](#2213-r-13-specification-and-architecture-governance) | **Primary spec writer**: writes/extends `docs/specification.md`, defines module boundaries, interfaces, data models, patterns | Layer 1 (spec → code) | [22.13](#2213-r-13-specification-and-architecture-governance) |
| [R-73: Spec Classification](#2273-r-73-spec-change-classification-and-two-step-proposal) | Classifies changes: initial → direct commit; major → PR with `needs feedback`; minor → direct commit | Layer 1 (classification) | [22.73](#2273-r-73-spec-change-classification-and-two-step-proposal) |
| [R-03: Work Planning](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) | Provides the specification that drives epic/issue decomposition | Layer 1 (specification) | [22.3](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) |
| [R-18: Human Escalation](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) | Creates `needs feedback` PRs for major architectural changes requiring human approval | Layer 4 (proposal escalation) | [22.18](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) |

### 9.2 Epic Planning Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `epic-planning-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.2 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-EPIC` |
| **Polling Interval** | 10 minutes |

**Purpose**: Monitors for milestones without issues, epics without children, and human requests for breakdown. Decomposes architecture into Forgejo Epics and Issues with proper dependency chains. Enforces ticket hierarchy (Legendary -> Epic -> Issue) with correct dependency directions (child BLOCKS parent).

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`, `spec-reader`, `forgejo-label-manager`

**Four Phases Per Cycle**:

1. **Hierarchical Compliance Enforcement**: Find and fix orphaned issues (no parent Epic), orphaned Epics (no parent Legendary), incorrect dependency directions, and incomplete user-created Epics/Legendaries.
2. **Closure Evaluation**: Identify Legendary and Epic closure candidates where all children are completed.
3. **Specification-First Compliance**: Identify work requiring specification changes and create ADR -> Spec -> Implementation chains.
4. **Traditional Planning**: Plan empty milestones, complete Epic planning, with Milestone Scope Guard preventing new issue creation in converging milestones.

**Milestone Scope Guard**: The Epic Planner must not create new issues in milestones that are converging (most issues completed). New discovered work goes to backlog.

#### 9.2.1 Epic Planning Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-03: Work Planning](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) | **Primary decomposer**: breaks milestones into Epics and Issues with dependency chains; four phases per cycle | Layer 2 (decomposition) | [22.3](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) |
| [R-11: Dependency Integrity](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) | Creates issue→epic→legendary links with correct direction (child BLOCKS parent); fixes orphaned issues/epics; validates ALL dependency directions | Layer 1 (creation + enforcement) | [22.11](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) |
| [R-69: Orphan Remediation](#2269-r-69-orphaned-issue-and-epic-remediation) | Phase 1: scans ALL open issues/epics for missing parents; finds or creates suitable parents; fixes reversed directions | Layer 1 (enforcement) | [22.69](#2269-r-69-orphaned-issue-and-epic-remediation) |
| [R-68: Epic/Legendary Closure](#2268-r-68-epic-and-legendary-closure-evaluation) | Phase 2: evaluates closure candidates where all children completed; closes with acceptance criteria check | Layer 1 (evaluation) | [22.68](#2268-r-68-epic-and-legendary-closure-evaluation) |
| [R-40: Spec-First Enforcement](#2240-r-40-specification-first-development-enforcement) | Phase 3: identifies features requiring spec changes, creates ADR→Spec→Implementation dependency chains | Layer 1 (planning gate) | [22.40](#2240-r-40-specification-first-development-enforcement) |
| [R-38: Body & DoD Compliance](#2238-r-38-issue-body-and-dod-compliance) | Creates issues with CONTRIBUTING.md-compliant body format (Metadata, Subtasks, DoD) | Layer 1 (at creation) | [22.38](#2238-r-38-issue-body-and-dod-compliance) |
| [R-37: Milestone Assignment](#2237-r-37-milestone-assignment-and-scope-guard) | Milestone Scope Guard: skips converging milestones; new work goes to backlog | Layer 2 (planning-level guard) | [22.37](#2237-r-37-milestone-assignment-and-scope-guard) |
| [R-19: Scope Management](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) | Milestone Scope Guard: prevents new issue creation in converging milestones | Layer 2 (prevention at planning) | [22.19](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) |

### 9.3 Human Liaison Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `human-liaison-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.3 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-LIAISON` |
| **Polling Interval** | 2 minutes |

**Purpose**: Bridges human developers and the autonomous agent system. Monitors all human activity on Forgejo (new issues, comments, PR reviews, label changes) and responds intelligently. Has full triage authority. Must strictly follow CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md.

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`, `spec-reader`, `ci-log-fetcher`, `new-issue-creator`, `issue-state-updater`, `issue-analyzer`, `forgejo-label-manager`, `automation-tracking-manager`

**Ten-Step Monitoring Loop** (polls every 2 minutes via `bash("sleep 120")`):

| Step | Action | Frequency |
|------|--------|-----------|
| 0 | Read system announcements from other agents | Every 3 cycles |
| 1 | Discover new human activity (issues, comments, reviews, labels) | Every cycle |
| 2 | Handle idle detection (gap analysis, stale checks) | When idle |
| 3 | Triage new human-created issues | Every cycle |
| 4 | Respond to human comments on issues | Every cycle |
| 5 | Respond to human PR reviews | Every cycle |
| 6 | Plan implementation for newly verified issues | Every cycle |
| 7 | Epic/Legendary gap analysis | Every 10th cycle |
| 8 | Check stale conversations | Every 15th cycle |
| 9 | Refresh specification knowledge | Every 20th cycle |

**Feedback Incorporation Protocol**: When human feedback changes the nature of a ticket, the agent must update the issue description, notify the user with a diff of the changes, and confirm the updates. This prevents feedback from being lost in comment threads.

**Human Response Timeouts**: 48 hours for PR feedback, 24 hours for questions, 72 hours for blocked work, 48 hours for specification approval. The agent escalates after these timeouts.

#### 9.3.1 Human Liaison Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-105: 10-Step Loop](#22105-r-105-human-liaison-10-step-monitoring-loop) | Precise 10-step cycle: poll (4 sub-polls), idle detect, triage, respond comments, respond reviews, plan, gap analysis, stale check, refresh, context mgmt | Single | [22.105](#22105-r-105-human-liaison-10-step-monitoring-loop) |
| [R-106: Closed Issue Response](#22106-r-106-closed-issue-comment-response-patterns) | 4 patterns: answer questions, refuse reopening, create new bug for related reports, acknowledge feedback | Single | [22.106](#22106-r-106-closed-issue-comment-response-patterns) |
| [R-18: Human Communication](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) | **Primary bridge**: handles all human activity, Feedback Incorporation Protocol | Layer 1 (primary bridge) | [22.18](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) |
| [R-46: Feedback Incorporation](#2246-r-46-feedback-incorporation-protocol) | **Exclusive owner**: updates descriptions when discussion changes ticket nature, posts diff for user, confirms completion | Layer 1 (single) | [22.46](#2246-r-46-feedback-incorporation-protocol) |
| [R-47: Timeout Management](#2247-r-47-human-response-timeout-management) | Tracks 5 timeout types (48h/24h/72h/48h/24h), creates provisional decisions, escalates | Layer 1 (tracking) | [22.47](#2247-r-47-human-response-timeout-management) |
| [R-48: Developer Assignment](#2248-r-48-developer-expertise-discovery-and-assignment) | Tags developers in comments based on expertise areas when guidance is needed | Layer 2 (tagging) | [22.48](#2248-r-48-developer-expertise-discovery-and-assignment) |
| [R-02: Issue Triage](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) | Triages human-created issues with full triage authority; fastest polling interval (2 min) | Layer 2 (human issues) | [22.2](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) |
| [R-36: Story Points](#2236-r-36-story-point-estimation) | Estimates story points during triage (XS 1pt through XXL 13pt) | Layer 1 (triage-time) | [22.36](#2236-r-36-story-point-estimation) |
| [R-03: Work Planning](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) | Plans implementation for verified issues; Epic/Legendary gap analysis every 10th cycle | Layer 4 (human requests) | [22.3](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) |
| [R-40: Spec-First Enforcement](#2240-r-40-specification-first-development-enforcement) | For features requiring spec changes: creates spec issue, tracks spec PR, creates impl issues after merge | Layer 3 (feedback channel) | [22.40](#2240-r-40-specification-first-development-enforcement) |
| [R-22: Self-Improvement](#2222-r-22-self-improvement-and-agent-evolution) | Channels human feedback about agent behavior into the improvement pipeline | Layer 3 (human feedback) | [22.22](#2222-r-22-self-improvement-and-agent-evolution) |
| [R-09: Label Correctness](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) | Sets labels on issues it creates via Forgejo Label Manager | Layer 2 (initial assignment) | [22.9](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) |

```kroki-activitydiag
activitydiag {
  "Poll Forgejo" -> "New Human Activity?";
  "New Human Activity?" -> "New Issue?" [label = "yes"];
  "New Human Activity?" -> "Idle Detection" [label = "no"];
  "New Issue?" -> "Triage & Verify" [label = "yes"];
  "New Issue?" -> "New Comment?" [label = "no"];
  "New Comment?" -> "Respond to Comment" [label = "yes"];
  "New Comment?" -> "New PR Review?" [label = "no"];
  "New PR Review?" -> "Respond to Review" [label = "yes"];
  "New PR Review?" -> "Periodic Checks" [label = "no"];
  "Triage & Verify" -> "Periodic Checks";
  "Respond to Comment" -> "Periodic Checks";
  "Respond to Review" -> "Periodic Checks";
  "Idle Detection" -> "Periodic Checks";
  "Periodic Checks" -> "Sleep 2 min" -> "Poll Forgejo";
}
```

### 9.4 Agent Evolution Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `agent-evolution-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.2 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-EVLV` |
| **Polling Interval** | 30 minutes |

**Purpose**: Self-improvement meta-agent. Monitors agent effectiveness, identifies failure patterns, and proposes modifications to agent definitions. All changes go through human-approved PRs with "needs feedback" label.

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`, `session-persister`, `automation-tracking-manager`

**Two-Step Proposal Workflow**:

1. **Step 1 -- Proposal Issue**: When a systematic pattern is identified (e.g., agents repeatedly failing at a specific task), the Agent Evolver creates a proposal issue with the `needs feedback` label describing the problem, evidence, and proposed change. It does NOT immediately implement the change.

2. **Step 2 -- Implementation PR**: Only when a proposal is approved (label removed, `State/Verified` added, or human approval comment), the Agent Evolver creates a branch, modifies the agent definition file in `.opencode/agents/`, commits, pushes, and creates a PR with the `needs feedback` label for final human review.

**Seven Analysis Steps Per Cycle** (30-minute interval):
1. Gather performance data from tracking issues and PR comments
2. Identify systematic patterns (prompt improvements, workflow fixes, config adjustments, model tier adjustments, coordination improvements, capability gaps)
3. Filter out already-proposed or rejected patterns
4. Create proposal issues for new patterns
5. Check for approved proposals and implement them
6. Monitor existing improvement PRs
7. Post progress to tracking issue (every 3 cycles)

**Change Principles**: Surgical changes only, evidence-based, one pattern per PR, explain reasoning, acknowledge risks, never re-propose rejected changes.

#### 9.4.1 Agent Evolution Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-22: Self-Improvement](#2222-r-22-self-improvement-and-agent-evolution) | **Primary evolution agent**: seven analysis steps, two-step proposal workflow (proposal issue → implementation PR after human approval) | Layer 1 (proactive analysis) | [22.22](#2222-r-22-self-improvement-and-agent-evolution) |
| [R-85: Pattern Detection](#2285-r-85-agent-improvement-pattern-detection) | Eight detection categories: task-type failures, merge failures, early exits, context exhaustion, high escalation rate, duplicate work, capability gaps, subtask failures. Six improvement types. | Layer 1 (detection) | [22.85](#2285-r-85-agent-improvement-pattern-detection) |
| [R-57: Clone Isolation](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) | Creates clone to modify `.opencode/agents/` files; pushes agent definition changes via PR | Protocol user | [22.57](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) |
| [R-135: File Organization](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement) | Only modifies files in `.opencode/agents/` — never modifies source code | Self-constraint | [22.135](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement) |
| [R-18: Human Escalation](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) | Creates `needs feedback` proposals for agent definition changes | Layer 4 (proposal escalation) | [22.18](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) |

### 9.5 Architecture Guard

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `architecture-guard-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `google/gemini-2.5-pro` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-GUARD` |
| **Polling Interval** | 10 minutes |

**Purpose**: Aggressive codebase coherence checker. Scans for pattern drift, duplicate code, module coupling, API inconsistencies, and technical debt. Creates refactoring issues proactively. Uses Gemini 2.5 Pro for its massive context window.

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`

**Seven Check Categories**:
1. **Duplicate Code**: Functions or blocks with >70% similarity
2. **Inconsistent Patterns**: Different error handling styles, naming conventions, or API patterns across modules
3. **Module Coupling**: Cross-module imports that violate defined boundaries
4. **API Surface Inconsistencies**: Inconsistent parameter naming, return types, or error handling in public interfaces
5. **Technical Debt Indicators**: Functions >50 lines, deep nesting (>4 levels), TODO/FIXME comments
6. **Test Quality**: Tests that don't verify meaningful behavior, missing edge cases
7. **Specification Drift**: Implementation that has diverged from the specification

Each finding creates a `Type/Refactor` issue with `State/Unverified`. Only scans when the master SHA has changed since the last scan.

#### 9.5.1 Architecture Guard Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-14: Codebase Coherence](#2214-r-14-codebase-coherence-and-technical-debt) | **Primary coherence scanner**: seven check categories (duplicate code, inconsistent patterns, module coupling, API inconsistencies, technical debt, test quality, specification drift) | Layer 1 (proactive scanning) | [22.14](#2214-r-14-codebase-coherence-and-technical-debt) |
| [R-74: SHA-Based Idle Detection](#2274-r-74-sha-based-idle-detection-for-scanners) | Compares master SHA with last known; skips scanning when unchanged; only scans on new code | Single | [22.74](#2274-r-74-sha-based-idle-detection-for-scanners) |
| [R-13: Specification Governance](#2213-r-13-specification-and-architecture-governance) | Check 7: detects specification drift — implementation diverged from spec | Layer 3 (drift detection) | [22.13](#2213-r-13-specification-and-architecture-governance) |
| [R-16: Bug Detection](#2216-r-16-bug-detection-and-proactive-quality-assurance) | Check 6: test quality (tests not verifying meaningful behavior), Check 5: technical debt indicators | Layer 4 (architecture-level) | [22.16](#2216-r-16-bug-detection-and-proactive-quality-assurance) |

### 9.6 Specification Evolution Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `spec-update-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.2 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-SPEC` |
| **Polling Interval** | 15 minutes |

**Purpose**: Evolves the project specification based on implementation discoveries. Compares implementation against spec after merges, updates the spec where implementation found a better approach, and creates issues where implementation deviates incorrectly. Also **monitors all specification PRs** for human feedback (approval, rejection, staleness) as the domain expert for the specification lifecycle.

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`, `automation-tracking-manager`

**Two-Step Proposal Workflow** (same pattern as Agent Evolution):

1. **Step 1 -- Proposal Issue**: When a spec-implementation discrepancy is found, create a proposal issue with `needs feedback` label describing the discrepancy and proposed spec change.
2. **Step 2 -- Spec PR**: When proposal is approved, create a branch, update `docs/specification.md`, commit, and create a PR with `needs feedback` label.

**Spec PR Monitoring** (human-in-the-loop): The Specification Evolution Supervisor monitors all open specification PRs (those with the `needs feedback` label) for human activity:

- **Merged by human**: Note the approval, update internal state to reflect the new spec baseline.
- **Rejected by human** (closed without merge): Note the rejection, do not re-propose the same change.
- **Gone stale** (master has advanced): Rebase the spec branch onto master and force-push.
- **Waiting >24 hours**: Post a reminder comment requesting human review.

**Discrepancy Classification**:
- **Implementation found better approach**: Update the spec to match implementation.
- **Implementation deviates incorrectly**: Create a bug issue to fix the implementation.

**Critical Rule**: Never remove specification content that has not been implemented yet. The spec is forward-looking.

**Critical Bug Prevention**: When updating PRs via the Forgejo API, always re-send the full PR body. The Forgejo API deletes the description if the `body` field is not included in update calls.

#### 9.6.1 Specification Evolution Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-13: Specification Governance](#2213-r-13-specification-and-architecture-governance) | **Backward alignment**: compares implementation against spec after merges; updates spec where implementation found better approach; creates bug issues for incorrect deviations | Layer 2 (code → spec) | [22.13](#2213-r-13-specification-and-architecture-governance) |
| [R-73: Two-Step Proposal](#2273-r-73-spec-change-classification-and-two-step-proposal) | Proposal issue first with `needs feedback`; implementation PR only after human approval; tracks rejected proposals | Layer 2 (proposal workflow) | [22.73](#2273-r-73-spec-change-classification-and-two-step-proposal) |
| [R-74: SHA-Based Idle](#2274-r-74-sha-based-idle-detection-for-scanners) | Compares master SHA; proactive deep scan every 5th idle cycle (~75 min) | Single | [22.74](#2274-r-74-sha-based-idle-detection-for-scanners) |
| [R-92: Proactive Scan](#2292-r-92-proactive-specification-scan-protocol) | Module-by-module spec-vs-code comparison; classifies discrepancies; generates ≥1 proposal per scan | Single | [22.92](#2292-r-92-proactive-specification-scan-protocol) |
| [R-65: Spec PR Lifecycle](#2265-r-65-specification-pr-monitoring-and-lifecycle) | **Primary spec PR monitor**: tracks all spec PRs for human feedback (merged, rejected, stale); rebases when master advances; posts reminders after 24h; preserves `needs feedback` label | Layer 1 (monitoring + self-rebase) | [22.65](#2265-r-65-specification-pr-monitoring-and-lifecycle) |
| [R-59: PR Description](#2259-r-59-pr-description-preservation) | Re-sends full body on every PR update to prevent Forgejo API description deletion | Layer 2 | [22.59](#2259-r-59-pr-description-preservation) |
| [R-18: Human Escalation](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) | Creates `needs feedback` proposals for spec changes | Layer 4 (proposal escalation) | [22.18](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) |

### 9.7 Grooming Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `grooming-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Session Tag** | `AUTO-GROOM` |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-GROOMER` |
| **Polling Interval** | 5 minutes |
| **Workers** | `grooming-worker` |

**Purpose**: Continuous quality maintenance for ALL open issues and pull requests. Dispatches workers to perform a full 10-point quality analysis on individual items. Prioritizes PRs with unaddressed review feedback. Works entirely through the Forgejo API; no clone required.

**Subagents**: `async-agent-manager`, `automation-tracking-manager`

**Worker model**: Each worker takes a single issue or PR number, reads all comments and reviews, performs 10 quality checks, applies fixes, and posts a `[GROOMED]` marker comment. For PRs, the worker also syncs labels (Priority, Type, MoSCoW, milestone) from the linked issue to the PR.

**Nineteen Analysis Passes** (every 5-minute cycle):

| # | Pass | Auto-Fix? |
|---|------|-----------|
| 1 | Duplicate issue detection (issues only, NOT PRs) | Close duplicate |
| 2 | Orphan detection (no parent Epic link) | Comment |
| 3 | Stale issue detection | Comment |
| 4 | Label and milestone compliance | Auto-fix labels |
| 5 | Priority consistency check | Comment |
| 6 | Closeable issue detection (work merged) | Close |
| 7 | Definition of Done audit | Comment |
| 8 | Blocked chain analysis | Comment |
| 9 | Closed issue state reconciliation | Auto-fix labels |
| 10 | Dependency link compliance | Auto-fix links |
| 11 | Issue body compliance check | Comment |
| 12 | Epic completeness analysis | Create children |
| 13 | Legendary completeness analysis | Create children |
| 14 | Merged-PR issue closure verification | Close issue |
| 15 | Open PR dependency health | Comment |
| 16 | Stale PR detection | Every 3 cycles |
| 17 | Scope creep detection | Every 3 cycles |
| 18 | PR-Issue label synchronization | Every cycle |
| 19 | Automation tracking ticket cleanup | Every 5 cycles |

**Announcement Cleanup Protocol** (Pass 19): Tracking and announcement issues are cleaned up with priority-based age thresholds:

| Priority | Status Tracking Max Age | Announcement Max Age |
|----------|------------------------|---------------------|
| Critical | 1 hour | 72 hours |
| High | 1 hour | 48 hours |
| Medium | 1 hour | 24 hours |
| Low | 1 hour | 12 hours |

Status tracking issues (title contains `Status:`) are cleaned up aggressively (1-hour age threshold) because each new cycle creates a replacement. Announcements persist longer because they represent ongoing cross-agent coordination events. Announcements marked with `[PERSIST]` or `[KEEP_OPEN]` in their body are exempt from age-based cleanup. Duplicate tracking issues (same agent prefix, same cycle number) are consolidated by keeping the newest and closing the rest.

#### 9.7.1 Grooming Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

!!! info "Most Cross-Referenced Agent"

    The Backlog Groomer participates in more responsibilities than any other single agent. Its 19 analysis passes provide redundancy checks across nearly every system responsibility.

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-09: Label Correctness](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) | Pass 4: auto-fixes missing State/Type/Priority labels; Pass 19: PR-issue label synchronization | Layer 3 (verification & auto-fix) | [22.9](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) |
| [R-35: PR-Issue Label Sync](#2235-r-35-pr-issue-label-synchronization) | Pass 19: copies missing Priority/MoSCoW/Points labels from issue to PR, removes stale labels, syncs milestones | Layer 2 (ongoing sync) | [22.35](#2235-r-35-pr-issue-label-synchronization) |
| [R-10: Issue State Management](#2210-r-10-issue-state-lifecycle-management) | Pass 9: reconciles closed issue states; Pass 4: detects wrong-state issues; Pass 6: detects closeable issues; Pass 14: closes issues whose PRs merged | Layer 2 (reconciliation) | [22.10](#2210-r-10-issue-state-lifecycle-management) |
| [R-36: Story Points](#2236-r-36-story-point-estimation) | Pass 4: estimates points for unlabeled issues (0-2 subtasks→Points/2, 3-5→Points/3, 6-8→Points/5, 9+→Points/8) | Layer 2 (compliance fill) | [22.36](#2236-r-36-story-point-estimation) |
| [R-37: Milestone Assignment](#2237-r-37-milestone-assignment-and-scope-guard) | Pass 4: assigns milestone to Verified+ issues without one | Layer 3 (compliance fill) | [22.37](#2237-r-37-milestone-assignment-and-scope-guard) |
| [R-11: Dependency Integrity](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) | Pass 2: orphan detection; Pass 10: auto-fixes missing dependency links; Pass 16: fixes wrong-direction dependencies | Layer 2 (verification & auto-fix) | [22.11](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) |
| [R-02: Issue Triage](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) | Pass 4: fills missing labels with safe defaults (`State/Unverified`, `Priority/Backlog`) | Layer 3 (gap filler) | [22.2](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) |
| [R-03: Work Planning](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) | Passes 12-13: detects incomplete epics/legendaries, creates missing child issues | Layer 3 (gap detection) | [22.3](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) |
| [R-24: Work Claiming](#2224-r-24-work-item-claiming-and-coordination) | Pass 3: detects stale In Progress issues (>48h no activity), implying abandoned claims | Layer 2 (stale detection) | [22.24](#2224-r-24-work-item-claiming-and-coordination) |
| [R-15: Backlog Hygiene](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) | **Primary hygiene agent**: Pass 1 (duplicates), Pass 2 (orphans), Pass 3 (stale), Pass 8 (blocked chains), Pass 11 (body compliance), Pass 17 (stale PRs) | Layer 1 (comprehensive) | [22.15](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) |
| [R-38: Body & DoD Compliance](#2238-r-38-issue-body-and-dod-compliance) | Pass 11: checks for Metadata/Subtasks/DoD sections; Pass 7: audits DoD checklist accuracy | Layer 2 (verification) | [22.38](#2238-r-38-issue-body-and-dod-compliance) |
| [R-39: Blocked Chains](#2239-r-39-blocked-chain-analysis-and-resolution) | Pass 8: detects circular dependencies, orphaned blockers, impossible chains | Layer 1 (analysis) | [22.39](#2239-r-39-blocked-chain-analysis-and-resolution) |
| [R-102: Post-Merge Closure](#22102-r-102-merged-pr-issue-closure-with-dependency-cleanup) | Pass 15: removes satisfied dependency links (merged PRs, closed issues) via DELETE API before closing issues | Layer 2 (dependency cleanup) | [22.102](#22102-r-102-merged-pr-issue-closure-with-dependency-cleanup) |
| [R-103: Wrong-Direction Fix](#22103-r-103-wrong-direction-dependency-auto-fix) | Pass 16: detects issue-blocks-PR (deadlock); DELETE wrong + POST correct direction (PR blocks issue) | Layer 1 (detection & fix) | [22.103](#22103-r-103-wrong-direction-dependency-auto-fix) |
| [R-104: Priority Consistency](#22104-r-104-priority-consistency-cross-check) | Pass 5: High blocked by Low, current milestone low while next has high | Layer 1 (detection) | [22.104](#22104-r-104-priority-consistency-cross-check) |
| [R-28: Issue Closure](#2228-r-28-issue-closure-and-post-merge-cleanup) | Pass 14: closes issues whose PRs merged; Pass 6: closes issues with completed DoD; removes stale dependency links | Layer 2 (catch-up) | [22.28](#2228-r-28-issue-closure-and-post-merge-cleanup) |
| [R-19: Scope Management](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) | Pass 18: scope creep detection via creation-vs-closure rate monitoring | Layer 1 (detection) | [22.19](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) |
| [R-20: Automation Tracking](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) | Pass 19: cleans stale tracking tickets; Pass 20: deduplicates status issues | Layer 3 (redundant cleanup) | [22.20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) |
| [R-130: Issue Body Format](#22130-r-130-standard-issue-body-format-enforcement) | Pass 11: verifies Metadata, Subtasks, DoD sections; posts comment listing missing sections | Layer 2 (verification) | [22.130](#22130-r-130-standard-issue-body-format-enforcement) |
| [R-128: State Transitions](#22128-r-128-valid-state-transition-matrix-enforcement) | Pass 4/9: detects issues in impossible states; corrects to valid transitions | Layer 2 | [22.128](#22128-r-128-valid-state-transition-matrix-enforcement) |
| [R-129: Priority Ordering](#22129-r-129-priority-ordering-rules-for-milestone-work) | Pass 5: detects priority inconsistencies within and across milestones | Layer (detection) | [22.129](#22129-r-129-priority-ordering-rules-for-milestone-work) |
| [R-42: Tracking Cleanup](#2242-r-42-tracking-issue-cleanup-and-deduplication) | Pass 19/20: age-based cleanup (Critical=72h, High=48h, Medium=24h, Low=12h), deduplication (keeps newest per prefix) | Layer 3 (cross-agent cleanup) | [22.42](#2242-r-42-tracking-issue-cleanup-and-deduplication) |
| [R-43: Announcements](#2243-r-43-announcement-lifecycle-management) | Pass 19: auto-closure inquiry, 24h grace period, respects PERSIST/KEEP_OPEN markers | Layer 3 (stale cleanup) | [22.43](#2243-r-43-announcement-lifecycle-management) |
| [R-68: Epic/Legendary Closure](#2268-r-68-epic-and-legendary-closure-evaluation) | Passes 12-13: detects parents with all children closed; creates missing children or flags for closure | Layer 2 (detection) | [22.68](#2268-r-68-epic-and-legendary-closure-evaluation) |
| [R-69: Orphan Remediation](#2269-r-69-orphaned-issue-and-epic-remediation) | Pass 2: flags orphan issues not linked to any parent Epic | Layer 2 (detection) | [22.69](#2269-r-69-orphaned-issue-and-epic-remediation) |
| [R-72: Stale PR Detection](#2272-r-72-stale-pr-detection-and-remediation) | Pass 17: detects PRs with no milestone, duplicates, targeting completed issues, >72h no reviews | Layer 1 (detection) | [22.72](#2272-r-72-stale-pr-detection-and-remediation) |

### 9.8 Documentation Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `documentation-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.3 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-DOCS` |
| **Polling Interval** | 20 minutes |

**Purpose**: Generates and updates project documentation at milestone boundaries. Produces README, API docs, architecture docs, changelogs, and module docs. Always extends existing documentation, never overwrites.

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`

**Five Documentation Types**:
1. **README.md**: Overview, installation, quick start, features
2. **API Documentation** (`docs/api/`): One file per module
3. **Architecture Documentation** (`docs/architecture.md`): High-level system design
4. **Changelog** (`CHANGELOG.md`): Keep a Changelog format
5. **Module Documentation** (`docs/modules/`): Per-module deep dives

**Key Rule**: Must NOT modify `docs/timeline.md` (exclusive to the Timeline Update Supervisor). All documentation must be written for mkdocs compatibility.

#### 9.8.1 Documentation Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-17: Documentation](#2217-r-17-documentation-and-timeline-maintenance) | **Exclusive documentation owner**: generates/updates README, API docs, architecture docs, changelog, module docs. Always extends, never overwrites. | Single (exclusive domain) | [22.17](#2217-r-17-documentation-and-timeline-maintenance) |
| [R-89: Doc Generation](#2289-r-89-documentation-generation-by-type) | Five doc types: README, API (from docstrings), Architecture (from spec), Changelog (Keep a Changelog), Module docs. mkdocs-compatible. | Single | [22.89](#2289-r-89-documentation-generation-by-type) |
| [R-57: Clone Isolation](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) | Creates isolated clone for doc generation (edit:allow agent); pushes and cleans up | Protocol user | [22.57](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) |
| [R-61: Reference Loading](#2261-r-61-reference-material-caching-and-distribution) | Loads spec and project state via ref-reader before generating docs | Protocol user | [22.61](#2261-r-61-reference-material-caching-and-distribution) |

### 9.9 Timeline Update Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `timeline-update-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-TIME` |
| **Polling Interval** | 30 minutes |

**Purpose**: Keeps `docs/timeline.md` accurate and current. Makes surgical updates to nine sections including Gantt charts (PlantUML), status summaries, completion history, risk tables, and schedule adherence entries. Never deletes historical data.

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`, `automation-tracking-manager`

**Nine Sections Updated**:
1. Gantt Charts (PlantUML syntax): today marker, completion percentages, color codes, update log
2. Current Status Summary
3. Parallel Workstreams Table
4. What Has Been Completed (APPEND ONLY -- never modify historical entries)
5. What Remains To Be Done
6. Milestone Roadmap Sections
7. Schedule Risk Summary
8. Risk Mitigation Table (resolve risks with strikethrough, never delete)
9. Schedule Adherence History (APPEND ONLY -- one entry per day maximum)

**Day Number Calculation**: `(today - 2026-02-09).days + 1`

#### 9.9.1 Timeline Update Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-17: Documentation](#2217-r-17-documentation-and-timeline-maintenance) | **Exclusive timeline owner**: `docs/timeline.md` only. Nine sections including Gantt charts, status, completion history, risk tables. | Single (exclusive domain) | [22.17](#2217-r-17-documentation-and-timeline-maintenance) |
| [R-82: Surgical Edit](#2282-r-82-timeline-surgical-edit-and-append-only-protocol) | Append-only history, one entry per day, strikethrough for resolved risks, conservative data policy, PlantUML Gantt color codes | Single (exclusive protocol) | [22.82](#2282-r-82-timeline-surgical-edit-and-append-only-protocol) |
| [R-57: Clone Isolation](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) | Creates isolated clone for timeline edits; pushes via PR workflow | Protocol user | [22.57](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) |

### 9.10 Project Owner Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `project-owner-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.3 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-PROJ-OWN` |
| **Polling Interval** | 5 minutes |

**Purpose**: Autonomous strategic decision-maker. Triages unverified issues, assigns MoSCoW labels (exclusive authority), makes priority decisions, assigns developers, and periodically re-evaluates priorities. Supplements human project owners.

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`, `spec-reader`, `issue-state-updater`, `new-issue-creator`, `forgejo-label-manager`, `automation-tracking-manager`

**Seven Steps Per Cycle** (5-minute interval):
1. Analyze timeline and developer capacity (every 20th cycle)
2. Triage unverified issues (skip `needs feedback`, skip if Human Liaison already triaging)
3. Assign MoSCoW labels to verified issues missing them (exclusive authority)
4. Assign developers to unassigned critical/blocking issues
5. Strategic priority review (every 10th cycle): re-evaluate MoSCoW, check stale high-priority, elevate backlog items
6. Follow up on pending questions (every 5th cycle)
7. Refresh knowledge base (every 20th cycle)

**MoSCoW Decision Framework**:
- Must Have: Core specification requirements, blocking dependencies, security fixes
- Should Have: Usability improvements, non-blocking features, quality-of-life
- Could Have: Nice-to-have polish, advanced features, optimizations

**Developer Assignment Rule**: Default to the primary automation user (HAL9000) for most issues. Strategic delegation only when there is a strong expertise match, available capacity, and it would be significantly faster without creating coordination overhead.

#### 9.10.1 Project Owner Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-02: Issue Triage](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) | **Primary triager**: assigns MoSCoW labels (exclusive authority), sets priorities, verifies issues, transitions states | Layer 1 (strategic triage) | [22.2](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) |
| [R-107: MoSCoW Framework](#22107-r-107-moscow-decision-framework) | 11-signal framework: Must (MUST/required/blocks/demo), Should (SHOULD/quality/perf), Could (MAY/polish/refactor) | Single (exclusive) | [22.107](#22107-r-107-moscow-decision-framework) |
| [R-108: Priority Re-eval](#22108-r-108-strategic-priority-re-evaluation) | Every 10 cycles: MoSCoW drift, milestone health (>50% open + >50% time), scope health (creation/closure rates) | Single | [22.108](#22108-r-108-strategic-priority-re-evaluation) |
| [R-109: Assignment Gate](#22109-r-109-developer-assignment-decision-gate) | 4-condition gate: expertise >0.7, capacity, velocity >1.3×, no blocking risks. 5 blocking scenarios. Golden Rule. | Single | [22.109](#22109-r-109-developer-assignment-decision-gate) |
| [R-48: Developer Assignment](#2248-r-48-developer-expertise-discovery-and-assignment) | **Primary assigner**: git history analysis, expertise mapping, strategic delegation | Layer 1 (discovery & assignment) | [22.48](#2248-r-48-developer-expertise-discovery-and-assignment) |
| [R-47: Timeout Management](#2247-r-47-human-response-timeout-management) | Follows up on developer questions after 48h, triages independently after 96h | Layer 2 (follow-up) | [22.47](#2247-r-47-human-response-timeout-management) |
| [R-18: Human Communication](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) | Tags developers with questions, assigns developers to issues based on expertise, follows up on pending questions | Layer 2 (strategic questions) | [22.18](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) |
| [R-19: Scope Management](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) | Strategic priority review every 10th cycle: MoSCoW re-evaluation, milestone health check, scope health check | Governance | [22.19](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) |
| [R-09: Label Correctness](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) | Assigns MoSCoW, priority, and type labels via Forgejo Label Manager | Layer 2 (initial assignment) | [22.9](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) |

### 9.11 System Watchdog Supervisor

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `system-watchdog-pool-supervisor.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |
| **Tracking Prefix** | `AUTO-WATCHDOG` |
| **Polling Interval** | 5 minutes |

**Purpose**: The system's conscience. Continuously audits quality gates, branch protection, ticket states, priority ordering, PR pipeline health, supervisor health (zombie detection via session introspection), label compliance, ticket hierarchy, test infrastructure, and automation tracking health. Dispatches one-off fix agents for immediate corrections and creates issues for systemic problems.

#### 9.11.1 Audit Schedule

| Audit | Frequency | Severity Level |
|-------|-----------|----------------|
| Master CI Health | Every cycle | CRITICAL |
| Quality Gate Compliance | Every cycle | CRITICAL |
| Branch Protection | Every cycle | CRITICAL |
| Ticket State Integrity | Every cycle | HIGH |
| Priority/Milestone Ordering | Every cycle | HIGH |
| PR Pipeline Health | Every cycle | HIGH |
| Struggling PR Detection | Every cycle | CRITICAL |
| Supervisor Health (Zombie) | Every cycle | HIGH |
| Label/Dependency Compliance | Every cycle | MEDIUM |
| Ticket Hierarchy | Every cycle | MEDIUM |
| Test Infrastructure | Every cycle | MEDIUM |
| Improvement Generation | Every cycle | MEDIUM |
| Automation Tracking Health | Every cycle | HIGH |
| Session Spot-Check | Every cycle | HIGH |
| Deep Session Introspection | Every 6th cycle | HIGH |
| Closed Item Interactions | Every 3rd cycle | MEDIUM |
| System Health Monitoring | Every 2nd cycle | HIGH |

#### 9.11.2 Critical Audit Details

**Audit 0 -- Master CI Health Monitoring** (EMERGENCY priority): The highest-priority audit. If ANY test fails on master, the watchdog immediately:
1. Investigates specific failing tests by scraping CI logs via web authentication
2. Parses logs to identify individual failing test scenarios (Behave patterns, Robot patterns, generic pytest)
3. Creates a `Priority/CI-Blocker` issue for each failing test with skip instructions
4. Creates a follow-up `Priority/High` fix issue for the underlying problem
This audit exists because master CI failures block all future PR merges, creating a system-wide deadlock.

**Audit 5b -- Struggling PR Detection**: Detects PRs where automated agents are failing repeatedly:
- Counts bot fix attempts by analyzing comments for fix-related phrases ("fixed", "addressing", "resolved", "updated", "applied fix")
- Tracks consecutive failure patterns across watchdog cycles
- Detects repetitive commit patterns (same fix being attempted multiple times)
- After 3+ failed fix attempts, creates a request for human assistance with full attempt history
- After 5+ consecutive failures in the same watchdog cycle, flags as a "stuck in loop" pattern

**Audit 6 -- Supervisor Health / Zombie Detection**: Uses the OpenCode Server API to perform deep session introspection:
- Reads the last 5 messages from each supervisor session
- **Sleep-only pattern**: If last 3+ tool calls are all `bash sleep` with no productive actions, the agent is a zombie (likely context exhaustion)
- **Error-loop pattern**: If last 3+ tool calls all returned errors, the agent is stuck
- **Identical-call loop**: If the same tool+arguments appears 3+ times in the last 5 messages, the agent is in an infinite loop
- Missing supervisors are detected by comparing running sessions against the expected set of 18

**Audit 11 -- Automation Tracking Health**: Monitors tracking issues for stalled agents with automated recovery:
- Calculates expected update interval per agent type (e.g., Groomer every 5 minutes, Watchdog every 30 minutes)
- Agents overdue by >20% trigger recovery: session termination, root cause analysis, and diagnostic issue creation

**Audit 12/13 -- Session Spot-Check and Deep Introspection**: The quick spot-check (every cycle) scans the 3 most recent active sessions for forbidden patterns (`force_merge`, direct push to master, `type: ignore`). The deep introspection (every 6th cycle) comprehensively analyzes ALL supervisor sessions for misbehavior, progress, conversation health, context exhaustion, and cross-agent conflicts.

#### 9.11.3 Watchdog Dispatch Agents

When the System Watchdog detects violations, it dispatches one-off fix agents via the Async Agent Manager:

| Finding Type | Dispatched Agent | Action |
|-------------|-----------------|--------|
| Quality gate violation | `quality-enforcer` | Repair branch protection, create CI-Blocker issues |
| State label mismatch | `state-reconciler` | Bulk-fix state labels across all issues |
| Master CI failure | (creates issues directly) | `Priority/CI-Blocker` skip issue + `Priority/High` fix issue |
| Struggling PR | (adds label) | Adds `needs feedback` label and requests human help |

#### 9.11.4 System Watchdog Supervisor Responsibilities

*In addition to the [universal supervisor responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors):*

!!! info "System Conscience"

    The System Watchdog participates as a redundancy layer in more responsibilities than any other agent except the Backlog Groomer. Its role is always as an **auditor and detector** — it finds problems and dispatches fixers, but never fixes things directly (except creating issues).

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-01: Supervisor Liveness](#221-r-01-supervisor-liveness-and-health-monitoring) | Audit 6: zombie detection via session introspection (sleep-only, error-loop, identical-call patterns); Audit 11: staleness detection via tracking issue age | Layer 3 (behavioral analysis) | [22.1](#221-r-01-supervisor-liveness-and-health-monitoring) |
| [R-32: Master CI Emergency](#2232-r-32-master-ci-health-emergency-response) | Audit 0 (EMERGENCY): detects master CI failures, parses logs for specific failing tests, creates CI-Blocker issues | Layer 1 (detection & triage) | [22.32](#2232-r-32-master-ci-health-emergency-response) |
| [R-06: Quality Gate Enforcement](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) | Audit 1: quality gate compliance; Audit 2: branch protection verification | Layer 3 (post-merge audit) | [22.6](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) |
| [R-33: Flaky Test Detection](#2233-r-33-flaky-test-detection-and-prevention) | Audit 9: monitors CI execution times, detects recurring failures on same tests across PRs | Layer 2 (infrastructure detection) | [22.33](#2233-r-33-flaky-test-detection-and-prevention) |
| [R-07: PR Fixing](#227-r-07-pr-fixing-and-ci-remediation) | Audit 5b: detects struggling PRs with 3+ fix attempts; requests human help | Layer 3 (struggling detection) | [22.7](#227-r-07-pr-fixing-and-ci-remediation) |
| [R-55: Post-Merge Verification](#2255-r-55-post-merge-state-verification) | Monitors for "merged successfully" comments on still-open PRs (false-merge detection) | Layer 3 (audit) | [22.55](#2255-r-55-post-merge-state-verification) |
| [R-08: PR Merging](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) | Audit 5: tracks PR aging, review coverage, merge throughput | Layer (health monitoring) | [22.8](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) |
| [R-09: Label Correctness](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) | Audit 7: verifies all issues have required labels and dependency links | Layer 4 (audit) | [22.9](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) |
| [R-39: Blocked Chains](#2239-r-39-blocked-chain-analysis-and-resolution) | Audit 7/8: detects orphan issues and hierarchy violations in dependency graph | Layer 3 (audit) | [22.39](#2239-r-39-blocked-chain-analysis-and-resolution) |
| [R-10: Issue State Management](#2210-r-10-issue-state-lifecycle-management) | Audit 3: checks closed issues with wrong state, In Review without PR, multiple State labels | Layer 3 (audit) | [22.10](#2210-r-10-issue-state-lifecycle-management) |
| [R-11: Dependency Integrity](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) | Audit 8: verifies Epic→Legendary hierarchy intact, minimum children, orphan detection | Layer 3 (audit) | [22.11](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) |
| [R-12: Merge Safety](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) | Audit 2: verifies branch protection configuration; dispatches Quality Enforcer for violations | Layer 3 (audit) | [22.12](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) |
| [R-02: Issue Triage](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) | Audit 4: verifies priority/milestone ordering is correct | Layer 3b (audit) | [22.2](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) |
| [R-18: Human Escalation](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) | Audit 5b: independently requests human assistance for struggling PRs | Layer 3b (independent escalation) | [22.18](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) |
| [R-20: Automation Tracking](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) | Audit 11: monitors tracking health, detects stalled agents, triggers recovery | Layer 4 (health monitoring) | [22.20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) |
| [R-45: Cycle Interval](#2245-r-45-estimated-cycle-interval-maintenance) | Audit 11: parses estimated interval from tracking issues, detects frozen agents when age > 2× interval | Layer 2 (consumption) | [22.45](#2245-r-45-estimated-cycle-interval-maintenance) |
| [R-44: Context Management](#2244-r-44-context-window-self-management) | Audit 6: detects context-exhausted zombies via sleep-only pattern in session messages | Layer 2 (external detection) | [22.44](#2244-r-44-context-window-self-management) |
| [R-22: Self-Improvement](#2222-r-22-self-improvement-and-agent-evolution) | Deep session introspection detects misbehavior patterns; creates `needs-feedback` issues for systemic problems | Layer 2 (problem detection) | [22.22](#2222-r-22-self-improvement-and-agent-evolution) |
| [R-23: Security](#2223-r-23-security-and-credential-management) | Audit 12/13: session spot-checks for forbidden patterns (`force_merge`, `type: ignore`, direct master push) | Layer 3 (behavioral audit) | [22.23](#2223-r-23-security-and-credential-management) |
| [R-71: Never-Disable-Checks](#2271-r-71-never-disable-checks-safety-constraint) | Audits for coverage reduction, CI step removal, `type: ignore` additions | Layer 3 (audit) | [22.71](#2271-r-71-never-disable-checks-safety-constraint) |
| [R-136: No type:ignore](#22136-r-136-static-typing-and-type-ignore-prohibition) | Audit 12/13: session spot-checks for `type: ignore` in tool outputs | Layer 3 (audit) | [22.136](#22136-r-136-static-typing-and-type-ignore-prohibition) |
| [R-139: 97% Coverage](#22139-r-139-coverage-threshold-enforcement-97-percent) | Audit 1: verifies master commits have passing coverage | Layer 3 (audit) | [22.139](#22139-r-139-coverage-threshold-enforcement-97-percent) |
| [R-72: Stale PR Detection](#2272-r-72-stale-pr-detection-and-remediation) | Audit 5: detects PRs >24h without reviews, approved >6h without merge, CI failing >2h | Layer 2 (pipeline) | [22.72](#2272-r-72-stale-pr-detection-and-remediation) |
| [R-90: Alert Dispatch](#2290-r-90-watchdog-alert-response-and-dispatch) | Dispatches Quality Enforcer, State Reconciler; re-launches offending supervisors; creates needs-feedback issues | Single (dispatcher) | [22.90](#2290-r-90-watchdog-alert-response-and-dispatch) |

---

## 10. Implementation Workers (Tier 2)

### 10.1 Implementation Worker

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `implementation-worker.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `openai/gpt-5-codex` |
| **Temperature** | 0.1 |

#### 10.1.1 Purpose

Dual-mode worker that handles both PR fixing and issue implementation. One instance runs per branch/PR, in parallel with other workers.

#### 10.1.2 Mode Detection

The worker detects its mode from the prompt:
- **PR-Fix Mode** (`mode: pr-fix`): Receives PR number, work type, issue number, branch. Fixes CI failures, handles review feedback, resolves merge conflicts.
- **Issue-Impl Mode** (`mode: issue-impl`): Receives issue number. Implements the issue from scratch through to merged PR.

#### 10.1.3 Issue Implementation Workflow

```kroki-activitydiag
activitydiag {
  "Read Announcements" -> "Crash Recovery Check";
  "Crash Recovery Check" -> "Claim Issue";
  "Claim Issue" -> "Clone & Branch Setup";
  "Clone & Branch Setup" -> "Analyze Issue (parallel)" -> "Implement Subtasks (wave dispatch)";
  "Implement Subtasks (wave dispatch)" -> "Commit & Push";
  "Commit & Push" -> "Create PR";
  "Create PR" -> "Initial CI Fix";
  "Initial CI Fix" -> "PR Lifecycle Loop";
  "PR Lifecycle Loop" -> "Reviews?" -> "Handle Feedback" [label = "changes requested"];
  "Reviews?" -> "CI Passing?" [label = "approved"];
  "Handle Feedback" -> "Reviews?";
  "CI Passing?" -> "Merge PR" [label = "yes"];
  "CI Passing?" -> "Fix CI" [label = "no"];
  "Fix CI" -> "CI Passing?";
  "Merge PR" -> "Cleanup Clone";
}
```

#### 10.1.4 PR-Fix Mode Workflow

When operating in PR-fix mode, the worker follows a different workflow focused on diagnosing and resolving the specific problem:

```kroki-activitydiag
activitydiag {
  "Receive PR Assignment" -> "Clone & Checkout Branch";
  "Clone & Checkout Branch" -> "Gather Deep Context";
  "Gather Deep Context" -> "Analyze Previous Attempts";
  "Analyze Previous Attempts" -> "Stuck Pattern?";
  "Stuck Pattern?" -> "Request Human Help" [label = "yes, >3 stuck cycles"];
  "Stuck Pattern?" -> "Select Fix Strategy" [label = "no"];
  "Select Fix Strategy" -> "Execute Fix";
  "Execute Fix" -> "Run Quality Gates";
  "Run Quality Gates" -> "All Pass?";
  "All Pass?" -> "Push & Monitor" [label = "yes"];
  "All Pass?" -> "Analyze Failure" [label = "no"];
  "Analyze Failure" -> "Stuck Pattern?";
  "Push & Monitor" -> "PR Merged?" -> "Cleanup" [label = "yes"];
  "PR Merged?" -> "New Review Feedback?" [label = "no"];
  "New Review Feedback?" -> "Select Fix Strategy" [label = "yes"];
  "New Review Feedback?" -> "Sleep & Re-check" [label = "no"];
  "Sleep & Re-check" -> "PR Merged?";
}
```

**Work types handled**: `review-feedback` (implement reviewer suggestions, including COMMENT-only reviews), `ci-fix` (fix failing CI checks), `merge-conflicts` (resolve conflicts with master), `ready-to-merge` (final checks and merge using 3-tier approval detection per Section 6.17.1), `awaiting-review` (monitor and shepherd PRs that have no reviews yet).

**Deep Context Gathering** (Phase 2 of PR-fix mode): Before attempting ANY fix, the worker gathers comprehensive context:

- Specification sections relevant to the PR via `spec-reader`
- Timeline context (project phase and priorities) via `ref-reader`
- Full comment history on both the PR and its linked issue
- Full commit history with diffs to understand the implementation
- Previous fix attempts extracted from comments (approach, outcome, timestamp)
- CI failure patterns with error signatures (to detect repeated failures)
- The actual code being modified (read files, understand structure)

The worker then calls `analyze_previous_failures()` to detect repeated approaches that have already been tried, persistent CI errors that are not changing between attempts, and ineffective strategies. This analysis drives the fix strategy selection to avoid repeating failed approaches.

**Intelligent Loop Prevention** (Phase 5): The worker tracks every fix attempt with a structured history including the approach taken, the error signature before and after, and the outcome. Three detection mechanisms prevent infinite loops:

1. **Stuck detection**: If the same error signature appears in three or more consecutive fix attempts, the worker is stuck.
2. **Repeated approach detection**: If the same fix strategy has been tried before and failed, try a different approach.
3. **Escalation threshold**: After three stuck detections, the worker posts a detailed diagnostic comment documenting all attempted approaches and their outcomes, adds the `needs feedback` label, and exits gracefully to allow human intervention.

**Merge Safety**: When the work type is `ready-to-merge`, the worker follows this sequence:
1. Verify approvals via the 3-tier detection (Section 6.17.1).
2. **Check if the branch needs rebasing**: Fetch fresh PR data via `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index` and compare `merge_base` against `base.sha`. If different, rebase the branch (`git fetch` + `git rebase` + `git push --force-with-lease`), then wait 2 minutes for CI before re-checking.
3. Delegate the actual merge to `safe_merge_pr()` which now includes post-merge verification (Section 8.3.4).
4. Only post a "(verified)" success comment after `safe_merge_pr()` returns `True`.
5. If merge verification fails (branch was silently not merged), analyze the failure message for rebase-needed indicators and retry.

#### 10.1.5 CI Artifact Mapping

When debugging CI failures, agents use this mapping to locate log artifacts:

| CI Job | Artifact Name | Log File Path |
|--------|--------------|---------------|
| lint | ci-logs-lint | `build/nox-lint-output.log` |
| typecheck | ci-logs-typecheck | `build/nox-typecheck-output.log` |
| security | ci-logs-security | `build/nox-security-output.log` |
| quality | ci-logs-quality | `build/nox-quality-output.log` |
| unit_tests | ci-logs-unit-tests | `build/nox-unit-tests-output.log` |
| integration_tests | ci-logs-integration-tests | `build/nox-integration-tests-output.log` |
| e2e_tests | ci-logs-e2e-tests | `build/nox-e2e-tests-output.log` |
| coverage | ci-logs-coverage | `build/nox-coverage-output.log` |

The CI Log Fetcher agent retrieves these logs via **cookie-based web authentication** because the Forgejo Actions API is not available. The process is:

1. **Login**: POST to `https://<host>/user/login` with `user_name`, `password`, and `_csrf` token (extracted from the login page). Store session cookies in `/tmp/forgejo_cookies.txt`.
2. **Navigate**: GET the actions page for the repository using the session cookies.
3. **Extract run ID**: Parse the HTML to find the specific CI run.
4. **Download logs**: GET the log artifact using the session cookies.
5. **Cleanup**: Delete the cookie file after use.

The System Watchdog uses the same cookie-based approach for its Master CI Health audit (Section 9.11.2, Audit 0), storing cookies in `/tmp/watchdog_cookies.txt` instead. Both agents require `FORGEJO_USERNAME` and `FORGEJO_PASSWORD` environment variables.

#### 10.1.6 Issue Implementation: Work Claiming and Crash Recovery

Before starting work on an issue, the Implementation Worker must:

1. **Crash Recovery Check** (Phase 0.5): Check for an existing clone directory, an existing PR, existing commits, or uncommitted changes from a previous interrupted run. If found, resume from the appropriate phase rather than starting over.

2. **Claim the Issue** (Phase 0.5, MANDATORY): Post a `[CLAIM]` comment on the issue to prevent other workers from claiming it. Send heartbeat comments every 10 minutes. Release the claim with a `[RELEASED]` comment when done, using try/finally to guarantee release even on failure.

3. **Read Announcements** (Phase 0): Check for critical announcements from other agents (watchdog quality gate violations, architecture changes, groomer scope alerts) that might affect the work.

#### 10.1.7 Subtask Wave Dispatch

Subtasks are analyzed for dependencies and grouped into waves. Within each wave, all subtasks execute in parallel via the Subtask Loop agent. Waves execute sequentially. After each wave:

- **Conflict resolution**: If multiple subtasks in the same wave modified the same files, the worker resolves conflicts.
- **Failure propagation**: If a subtask fails and downstream subtasks depend on it, those are skipped.
- **Out-of-scope discovery**: If implementation reveals work not covered by existing subtasks, the worker creates new subtasks in future waves or creates new issues via `new-issue-creator`.

#### 10.1.8 Test Stability Requirements

The Implementation Worker enforces strict test determinism rules:

- **NEVER**: time-based dependencies, random values without seeding, file system race conditions, network dependencies in tests, order-dependent tests, uncontrolled async operations
- **ALWAYS**: fixed test data, mock external dependencies, isolated temp filesystems, seeded random generators, proper test isolation, synchronous operations in tests

#### 10.1.9 Subagent Interactions

The Implementation Worker calls more subagents than any other agent in the system:

| Subagent | Purpose |
|----------|---------|
| `ref-reader` | Load project references |
| `ci-log-fetcher` | Retrieve CI logs |
| `issue-analyzer` | Analyze issue metadata and subtasks |
| `issue-state-updater` | Transition issue states |
| `branch-setup` | Create/checkout branches |
| `spec-reader` | Extract relevant specification sections |
| `subtask-loop` | Implement subtasks with progressive escalation |
| `test-fixer` | Fix broken existing tests |
| `issue-note-writer` | Document implementation decisions |
| `subtask-checker` | Update subtask checkboxes |
| `new-issue-creator` | Create issues for discovered work |
| `commit-message-formatter` | Format commit messages |
| `git-committer` | Stage, commit, push |
| `pr-description-writer` | Write PR descriptions |
| `pr-creator` | Create pull requests |
| `pr-ci-test-fixer` | Fix CI failures |
| `forgejo-label-manager` | Manage labels |
| `automation-tracking-manager` | Tracking issues |

#### 10.1.10 Implementation Worker Responsibilities

| Responsibility | Role | Redundancy Layer | Section |
|---------------|------|-----------------|---------|
| [R-04: Issue Implementation](#224-r-04-issue-implementation) | **Primary executor**: claims issue, creates clone, implements subtasks via wave dispatch, creates PR, shepherds to merge | Execution | [22.4](#224-r-04-issue-implementation) |
| [R-93: Wave Dispatch](#2293-r-93-subtask-wave-dispatch-and-parallel-conflict-resolution) | Builds dependency graph, dispatches parallel waves, detects post-wave conflicts, auto-resolves or re-runs sequentially | Single | [22.93](#2293-r-93-subtask-wave-dispatch-and-parallel-conflict-resolution) |
| [R-24: Work Claiming](#2224-r-24-work-item-claiming-and-coordination) | Posts `[CLAIM]`/`[HEARTBEAT]`/`[RELEASE]` comments; checks for existing claims; try/finally release guarantee | Layer 1 (claiming) | [22.24](#2224-r-24-work-item-claiming-and-coordination) |
| [R-25: Test Writing](#2225-r-25-test-writing-and-tdd-lifecycle) | Removes `@tdd_expected_fail` from passing TDD tests after bug fixes; delegates test creation to testers | Layer 2 (TDD cleanup) | [22.25](#2225-r-25-test-writing-and-tdd-lifecycle) |
| [R-07: PR Fixing](#227-r-07-pr-fixing-and-ci-remediation) | In pr-fix mode: fixes CI, handles review feedback, resolves merge conflicts | Worker level | [22.7](#227-r-07-pr-fixing-and-ci-remediation) |
| [R-94: Deep Context](#2294-r-94-deep-context-gathering-before-pr-fixes) | 7-step context gathering: spec, timeline, comments, commits, previous fixes, CI logs, actual code | Single | [22.94](#2294-r-94-deep-context-gathering-before-pr-fixes) |
| [R-95: Loop Prevention](#2295-r-95-fix-attempt-loop-prevention-and-stuck-detection) | Hash-based duplicate detection, CI error signature comparison, stuck_counter escalation after 3 | Layer 1 (self-detect) | [22.95](#2295-r-95-fix-attempt-loop-prevention-and-stuck-detection) |
| [R-96: PR Lifecycle](#2296-r-96-pr-lifecycle-monitoring-loop) | Max 10 review cycles at 5-min intervals; checks merge/conflict/review/CI each cycle | Single | [22.96](#2296-r-96-pr-lifecycle-monitoring-loop) |
| [R-97: Feedback Routing](#2297-r-97-review-feedback-type-based-routing) | Parses feedback via regex into code/test/docs/style; routes to specialist subagent | Single | [22.97](#2297-r-97-review-feedback-type-based-routing) |
| [R-27: CI Log Retrieval](#2227-r-27-ci-log-retrieval-and-diagnosis) | Invokes `ci-log-fetcher` subagent for CI failure diagnosis | Layer 3 (consumer) | [22.27](#2227-r-27-ci-log-retrieval-and-diagnosis) |
| [R-54: 3-Tier Approval](#2254-r-54-three-tier-approval-detection) | `has_required_approvals()` checks formal reviews, review bodies, issue comments for approval keywords | Consumer | [22.54](#2254-r-54-three-tier-approval-detection) |
| [R-08: PR Merging](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) | In ready-to-merge mode: verifies approvals, rebases if needed, delegates to `safe_merge_pr()` | Layer 2 (backup merger) | [22.8](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) |
| [R-55: Post-Merge Verification](#2255-r-55-post-merge-state-verification) | After merge: verifies `merged == true` via API; only posts "(verified)" comment after confirmation | Layer 1 (inline) | [22.55](#2255-r-55-post-merge-state-verification) |
| [R-28: Issue Closure](#2228-r-28-issue-closure-and-post-merge-cleanup) | After verified merge: transitions issue to State/Completed, posts final comment, deletes clone | Layer 1 (immediate) | [22.28](#2228-r-28-issue-closure-and-post-merge-cleanup) |
| [R-57: Clone Isolation](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) | Creates clone at `/tmp/cleveragents-<branch>`, configures auth/remotes, deletes on exit | Protocol user | [22.57](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) |
| [R-30: Branch Management](#2230-r-30-branch-management-and-rebase) | Pre-commit rebase onto master; pre-merge rebase if behind; auto-resolves simple conflicts | Layer 3 (worker rebase) | [22.30](#2230-r-30-branch-management-and-rebase) |
| [R-34: Test Stability](#2234-r-34-test-stability-enforcement) | Enforces strict determinism rules: no timing deps, no unseeded random, no shared filesystem, no network deps | Layer 1 (rules) | [22.34](#2234-r-34-test-stability-enforcement) |
| [R-18: Human Escalation](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) | After 3 stuck detections: posts diagnostic comment, adds `needs feedback` label, exits gracefully | Layer 3 (self-escalation) | [22.18](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) |
| [R-21: Crash Recovery](#2221-r-21-crash-recovery-and-state-persistence) | Phase 0.5 crash recovery: checks for existing clone, PR, commits, uncommitted changes; resumes from appropriate phase | Worker level | [22.21](#2221-r-21-crash-recovery-and-state-persistence) |
| [R-70: TDD Workflow](#2270-r-70-tdd-workflow-awareness-in-bug-reports) | Searches for `@tdd_issue_N` tests; removes `@tdd_expected_fail` after bug fix | Layer 2 (TDD execution) | [22.70](#2270-r-70-tdd-workflow-awareness-in-bug-reports) |
| [R-84: Checkpoint Persistence](#2284-r-84-checkpoint-and-state-persistence-via-forgejo-comments) | Posts `[CHECKPOINT]` comments with phase state JSON for crash recovery | Single (per worker) | [22.84](#2284-r-84-checkpoint-and-state-persistence-via-forgejo-comments) |
| [R-135: File Organization](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement) | Delegates to specialist testers that know their target directories | Layer 1 (implementation) | [22.135](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement) |
| [R-137: 500-Line Limit](#22137-r-137-maximum-file-size-enforcement-500-lines) | "Maximum 500 lines per file" — must split files growing beyond this | Layer 1 (implementation) | [22.137](#22137-r-137-maximum-file-size-enforcement-500-lines) |
| [R-141: Startup Sequence](#22141-r-141-supervisor-mandatory-startup-sequence) | Not a supervisor but follows the issue-impl startup sequence: announcements → crash recovery → claiming | Protocol | [22.141](#22141-r-141-supervisor-mandatory-startup-sequence) |
| [R-09: Label Correctness](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) | Sets labels on issues/PRs it creates via Forgejo Label Manager delegation | Layer 2 (initial assignment) | [22.9](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) |

---

## 11. Progressive Escalation (Tier 3)

### 11.1 Tier Selector Architecture

The progressive escalation system uses four **tier selector agents** that serve as model-setting proxies:

| Tier Agent | Model | Cost |
|------------|-------|------|
| `tier-haiku` | `anthropic/claude-haiku-4-5` | Lowest |
| `tier-codex` | `openai/gpt-5-codex` | Low |
| `tier-sonnet` | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` | Medium |
| `tier-opus` | `anthropic/claude-opus-4-6` | Highest |

Each tier selector receives a `worker_type` parameter and context, then invokes the corresponding worker agent (implementer, behave-tester, robot-tester, etc.). The worker inherits the tier selector's model. The tier selectors are pure pass-through agents: they must not modify, interpret, summarize, or filter the context.

### 11.2 Escalation Schedule

The Subtask Loop manages escalation according to this schedule:

| Starting Tier | Attempt 1 | Attempt 2 | Attempt 3 | Attempt 4 | Attempt 5+ |
|---------------|-----------|-----------|-----------|-----------|------------|
| Haiku | haiku | haiku | codex | sonnet | opus (forever) |
| Codex | codex | codex | sonnet | opus | opus (forever) |
| Sonnet | sonnet | opus | opus | opus | opus (forever) |
| Opus | opus | opus | opus | opus | opus (forever) |

Transient errors (API timeouts, rate limits, network errors) trigger retries without incrementing the attempt counter. Only genuine failures (quality gate failures, review rejections) increment the counter.

### 11.3 Subtask Loop Workflow

```kroki-activitydiag
activitydiag {
  "Evaluate Difficulty" -> "Select Starting Tier";
  "Select Starting Tier" -> "Implement via Tier Selector";
  "Implement via Tier Selector" -> "Verify Meaningful Change";
  "Verify Meaningful Change" -> "Write Tests (parallel: Behave + Robot + ASV)";
  "Write Tests (parallel: Behave + Robot + ASV)" -> "Fix Broken Tests";
  "Fix Broken Tests" -> "Quality Gates (lint, typecheck, unit, integration, coverage)";
  "Quality Gates (lint, typecheck, unit, integration, coverage)" -> "All Pass?";
  "All Pass?" -> "Implementation Review" [label = "yes"];
  "All Pass?" -> "Escalate?" [label = "no, max inner passes"];
  "Implementation Review" -> "Approved?" -> "Done" [label = "yes"];
  "Approved?" -> "Escalate?" [label = "no"];
  "Escalate?" -> "Next Tier Available?" -> "Implement via Tier Selector" [label = "yes, increment attempt"];
  "Next Tier Available?" -> "Implement via Tier Selector" [label = "no, retry at max tier"];
}
```

### 11.4 Specialized Workers

These agents have no model specified in their frontmatter; they inherit the model from their tier selector caller:

| Worker | Purpose |
|--------|---------|
| **Implementer** | Writes code for subtasks. Never writes tests. |
| **Behave Tester** | Writes BDD/Gherkin unit tests in `features/`. |
| **Robot Tester** | Writes Robot Framework integration tests in `robot/`. No mocking. |
| **Lint Fixer** | Runs `nox -e lint` and fixes all linting errors. |
| **Typecheck Fixer** | Runs `nox -e typecheck` (Pyright). Never uses `# type: ignore`. |
| **Test Fixer** | Distinguishes obsolete tests from genuine bugs. |
| **Coverage Improver** | Writes tests to maintain >= 97% coverage. |
| **Unit Test Runner** | Executes Behave tests and fixes failures. |
| **Integration Test Runner** | Executes Robot tests and fixes failures. |

#### 11.3.1 Subtask Loop Responsibilities

| Responsibility | Role | Section |
|---------------|------|---------|
| [R-31: Progressive Escalation](#2231-r-31-progressive-model-escalation) | **Orchestrator**: manages haiku→codex→sonnet→opus schedule; persists state as HTML comments | [22.31](#2231-r-31-progressive-model-escalation) |
| [R-56: Meaningful Change](#2256-r-56-meaningful-change-verification) | Rejects <3 functional lines; prevents trivial implementations from passing gates | [22.56](#2256-r-56-meaningful-change-verification) |
| [R-110: Per-Gate Tier Tracking](#22110-r-110-per-gate-independent-tier-tracking) | Independent `{gate: tier}` map; 5 inner passes; selective re-run; individual gate escalation | [22.110](#22110-r-110-per-gate-independent-tier-tracking) |
| [R-111: Opus Diagnostics](#22111-r-111-periodic-diagnostics-at-opus-tier) | Posts diagnostic comments every 3 attempts after attempt 4 at opus tier | [22.111](#22111-r-111-periodic-diagnostics-at-opus-tier) |
| [R-25: Test Writing](#2225-r-25-test-writing-and-tdd-lifecycle) | Launches Behave + Robot + ASV testers in parallel; monitors with 10s polling | [22.25](#2225-r-25-test-writing-and-tdd-lifecycle) |
| [R-06: Quality Gates](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) | Runs lint, typecheck, unit, integration, coverage gates before PR creation | [22.6](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) |
| [R-62: Correctness Verification](#2262-r-62-implementation-correctness-verification) | Invokes Implementation Reviewer after quality gates pass | [22.62](#2262-r-62-implementation-correctness-verification) |
| [R-56b: Transient Errors](#2256b-r-56b-transient-error-classification-and-retry) | Retries transient errors (timeout, 429) without incrementing attempt counter | [22.56b](#2256b-r-56b-transient-error-classification-and-retry) |
| [R-144: Tier Pass-Through](#22144-r-144-tier-selector-pure-pass-through-constraint) | Invokes tier selectors that must forward context unmodified | [22.144](#22144-r-144-tier-selector-pure-pass-through-constraint) |

#### 11.4.1 Specialized Worker Responsibilities

| Worker | Responsibilities | Sections |
|--------|-----------------|---------|
| **Implementer** | [R-04](#224-r-04-issue-implementation) (code writing), [R-135](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement) (correct directories), [R-137](#22137-r-137-maximum-file-size-enforcement-500-lines) (500-line limit), [R-64](#2264-r-64-nox-routing-enforcement) (nox routing) | 22.4, 22.135, 22.137, 22.64 |
| **Behave Tester** | [R-25](#2225-r-25-test-writing-and-tdd-lifecycle) (BDD tests), [R-138](#22138-r-138-testing-framework-selection-rules) (Behave framework), [R-34](#2234-r-34-test-stability-enforcement) (determinism), [R-70](#2270-r-70-tdd-workflow-awareness-in-bug-reports) (TDD tags) | 22.25, 22.138, 22.34, 22.70 |
| **Robot Tester** | [R-25](#2225-r-25-test-writing-and-tdd-lifecycle) (integration tests), [R-138](#22138-r-138-testing-framework-selection-rules) (Robot framework, no mocking), [R-34](#2234-r-34-test-stability-enforcement) (determinism) | 22.25, 22.138, 22.34 |
| **Lint Fixer** | [R-06](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) (lint gate), [R-64](#2264-r-64-nox-routing-enforcement) (`nox -e lint`) | 22.6, 22.64 |
| **Typecheck Fixer** | [R-06](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) (typecheck gate), [R-136](#22136-r-136-static-typing-and-type-ignore-prohibition) (no `type: ignore`), [R-64](#2264-r-64-nox-routing-enforcement) (`nox -e typecheck`) | 22.6, 22.136, 22.64 |
| **Coverage Improver** | [R-139](#22139-r-139-coverage-threshold-enforcement-97-percent) (≥97% threshold), [R-06](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) (coverage gate) | 22.139, 22.6 |
| **Test Fixer** | [R-06](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) (test fixing), [R-34](#2234-r-34-test-stability-enforcement) (distinguishes obsolete from genuine bugs) | 22.6, 22.34 |
| **Unit/Integration Test Runner** | [R-06](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) (test execution), [R-64](#2264-r-64-nox-routing-enforcement) (`nox -e unit_tests`/`integration_tests`) | 22.6, 22.64 |

---

## 12. Supporting Agents

### 12.1 PR Management Agents

| Agent | Purpose | Model |
|-------|---------|-------|
| **PR Manager** | Unified interface for all PR operations | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **PR Creator** | Creates PRs with proper metadata and dependencies | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **PR Editor** | Safely edits PRs; always preserves description | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **PR Status Analyzer** | Multi-dimensional PR status analysis | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **PR CI Test Fixer** | Fixes CI failures, amends commit, force-pushes | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **PR Description Writer** | Generates detailed PR descriptions | `claude-haiku-4-5` |
| **PR Reviewer** | Independent code review with dual-account review protocol (Section 6.17.2) | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |

#### 12.1.1 Critical PR Management Behavioral Rules

The following rules are critical to the correct functioning of the PR management agents and have been the source of significant bugs historically:

**PR Editor: Description Preservation Protocol**

!!! warning "The #1 Bug Prevented"

    The Forgejo API deletes the PR description if the `body` field is not included in update calls. Every single PR update -- even if it only changes a label or milestone -- must fetch the current PR, extract its description, and include it in the update payload. The PR Editor enforces this as its primary invariant: before any edit, it fetches the current PR data, prepares the update with ALL existing fields preserved, and only then applies the change.

**PR Creator: Label Inheritance from Issue**

When creating a PR, the PR Creator inherits comprehensive labels from the associated issue:
- All `Type/*` labels (e.g., `Type/Bug`, `Type/Feature`)
- All `Priority/*` labels (e.g., `Priority/High`)
- All `MoSCoW/*` labels (e.g., `MoSCoW/Must Have`)
- All `Points/*` labels (e.g., `Points/5`)
- Adds `State/In Review` to the PR

Label inheritance is performed via the Forgejo Label Manager subagent. The PR Creator also creates the dependency link (PR BLOCKS issue, per Section 6.11) and transitions the issue to `State/In Review` via the Issue State Updater.

**PR CI Test Fixer: Amend-and-Force-Push Workflow**

The PR CI Test Fixer is the **only agent** that amends commits and force-pushes. It follows this specific protocol:
1. Fix the code in the isolated clone
2. Stage changes and amend the existing commit (`git commit --amend`)
3. Force-push with lease (`git push --force-with-lease`) to BOTH `origin` and `upstream` remotes
4. Wait for new CI checks to run
5. Repeat until all checks pass

This agent must never create new commits (which would pollute the PR with fix-up commits). It must always amend the existing commit.

**Git Committer: Dual-Remote Push**

The Git Committer pushes to two remotes in sequence:
1. `git push -u origin <branch>` (the fork/working remote)
2. `git push upstream <branch>` (the canonical repository)

Both pushes are required. If either fails, the error is reported with full details including the remote URL, branch name, and error message.

#### 12.1.2 PR Reviewer Detailed Specification

The PR Reviewer warrants detailed specification because of its critical dual-account review protocol (Section 6.17.2) and flaky test detection capabilities.

**Review Process**:
1. **Gather Deep Context** (new): Before reviewing, check previous review history, related PRs, and full linked issue context to avoid redundant feedback.
2. Read PR metadata and diff via Forgejo API.
3. Check CI status and fetch logs via `ci-log-fetcher` if failing.
4. Load specification context via `ref-reader`.
5. Review against standard criteria plus assigned focus areas.
6. **Flaky Test Detection**: Analyze test patterns for non-determinism (time dependencies, unseeded randomness, race conditions, shared state, order dependence). Perform CI pattern analysis and multi-PR analysis to detect intermittent failures.
7. **Watch for Anti-Patterns**: Detect repetitive fix attempts, type system workarounds (`# type: ignore`), test quality issues (trivial assertions), and architectural drift.
8. Make APPROVE or REQUEST_CHANGES decision using the **Dual-Account Review Protocol** (Section 6.17.2): post formal review via `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT`, then post backup issue comment via `curl`.

**Flaky Test Red Flags**: The reviewer specifically watches for patterns that cause intermittent CI failures:
- `time.sleep()` or `time.time()` in test code without mocking
- `random.choice()` / `random.randint()` without seed
- Shared file system paths between tests
- Tests that pass locally but fail in CI
- Tests with timing-sensitive assertions

**Permissions Rationale**: The PR Reviewer has `edit: deny` and `bash: "*": deny` with `"curl *": allow`. It reads PR data via Forgejo MCP tools (which authenticate as the primary bot — fine for reads) and posts reviews/comments via `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` (which authenticates as the reviewer bot — required for formal APPROVED reviews). The MCP write tools `forgejo_create_pull_review` and `forgejo_create_issue_comment` are explicitly denied because they would authenticate as the wrong account (see Section 6.17.0).

#### 12.1.3 PR Management Agent Responsibilities

| Agent | Responsibilities | Sections |
|-------|-----------------|---------|
| **PR Creator** | [R-26](#2226-r-26-pr-creation-and-metadata-inheritance) (label inheritance, dependency link, state transition), [R-35](#2235-r-35-pr-issue-label-synchronization) (initial label sync), [R-131](#22131-r-131-standard-pr-body-format-enforcement) (body format), [R-127](#22127-r-127-label-creation-prohibition-enforcement) (via Label Manager delegation) | 22.26, 22.35, 22.131, 22.127 |
| **PR CI Test Fixer** | [R-91](#2291-r-91-amend-only-commit-protocol-for-ci-fixes) (amend-only, force-push-with-lease), [R-27](#2227-r-27-ci-log-retrieval-and-diagnosis) (CI log consumption), [R-06](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) (post-PR quality fixes), [R-59](#2259-r-59-pr-description-preservation) (body preservation on amend) | 22.91, 22.27, 22.6, 22.59 |
| **PR Editor** | [R-59](#2259-r-59-pr-description-preservation) (**primary enforcer**: fetch-before-edit for body preservation), [R-127](#22127-r-127-label-creation-prohibition-enforcement) (labels via Label Manager only) | 22.59, 22.127 |
| **PR Reviewer** | [R-05](#225-r-05-code-review-and-quality-assessment), [R-52](#2252-r-52-dual-account-review-authentication), [R-53](#2253-r-53-anti-pattern-and-code-smell-detection), [R-101](#22101-r-101-flaky-test-16-pattern-detection), [R-135](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement), [R-136](#22136-r-136-static-typing-and-type-ignore-prohibition), [R-137](#22137-r-137-maximum-file-size-enforcement-500-lines), [R-138](#22138-r-138-testing-framework-selection-rules), [R-140](#22140-r-140-conventional-changelog-commit-format) | 22.5, 22.52, 22.53, 22.101, 22.135–22.140 |
| **PR Status Analyzer** | [R-118](#22118-r-118-pr-status-analyzer-5-dimension-framework) (5-dimension analysis) | 22.118 |

### 12.2 Issue Management Agents

| Agent | Purpose | Model |
|-------|---------|-------|
| **Issue Finder** | Queries and prioritizes open issues | `gpt-5-nano` |
| **Issue Analyzer** | Extracts metadata, subtasks, DoD from issues | `claude-haiku-4-5` |
| **Issue Note Writer** | Documents design decisions as comments | `claude-haiku-4-5` |
| **Issue Comment Formatter** | Structured comment formatting | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **Issue State Updater** | Transitions issue state labels | `gpt-5-nano` |
| **New Issue Creator** | Creates issues for discovered work | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Subtask Checker** | Updates subtask checkboxes in issue body | `gpt-5-nano` |

**Issue State Updater: Label Transition Protocol**

The Issue State Updater performs state transitions through a 7-step process: read current state, validate preconditions, remove old state label (via REST API DELETE), apply new state label (via REST API POST), handle special cases (close issue for terminal states, remove Blocked label), synchronize PR states, and report results. Retries up to 3 times with exponential backoff (2s, 4s, 8s) on API failures. Handles HTTP 404, 401/403, 422, and 429 status codes specifically.

**Issue Note Writer: Code Location Rule**

The Issue Note Writer must reference code by logical location ONLY (module path, class name, method name), never by line number. Line numbers change with every commit, making them unreliable for documentation. Each comment must include the commit hash for traceability.

**New Issue Creator: Milestone Scope Guard**

The New Issue Creator applies a strict scope guard for milestone assignment:
1. Critical bugs: assign to the milestone where the bug was found
2. All other discovered issues: no milestone, `Priority/Backlog`
3. Exception: only if the caller explicitly specifies a milestone AND the issue is essential
4. Never add non-critical issues to converging milestones

#### 12.2.1 Issue Management Agent Responsibilities

| Agent | Responsibilities | Sections |
|-------|-----------------|---------|
| **Issue State Updater** | [R-10](#2210-r-10-issue-state-lifecycle-management) (state transitions), [R-60](#2260-r-60-state-transition-precondition-enforcement) (precondition validation, blocker checks, PR sync), [R-128](#22128-r-128-valid-state-transition-matrix-enforcement) (valid transition matrix), [R-127](#22127-r-127-label-creation-prohibition-enforcement) (one of two agents permitted to call `forgejo_add_issue_labels`) | 22.10, 22.60, 22.128, 22.127 |
| **New Issue Creator** | [R-37](#2237-r-37-milestone-assignment-and-scope-guard) (milestone scope guard), [R-130](#22130-r-130-standard-issue-body-format-enforcement) (Metadata/Subtasks/DoD format), [R-38](#2238-r-38-issue-body-and-dod-compliance) (body compliance at creation), [R-11](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) (child-blocks-parent Epic link), [R-127](#22127-r-127-label-creation-prohibition-enforcement) (labels via Label Manager) | 22.37, 22.130, 22.38, 22.11, 22.127 |
| **Issue Analyzer** | [R-115](#22115-r-115-issue-analyzer-structured-data-extraction) (structured data extraction: metadata, subtasks, DoD, comments, deps) | 22.115 |
| **Issue Note Writer** | [R-117](#22117-r-117-issue-note-writer-logical-reference-protocol) (logical code references, never line numbers, mandatory 7-section format) | 22.117 |
| **Subtask Checker** | [R-116](#22116-r-116-subtask-checker-fuzzy-match-checkbox-toggle) (fuzzy-match checkbox toggle, body preservation) | 22.116 |
| **Issue Comment Formatter** | [R-83](#2283-r-83-issue-comment-type-formatting-standards) (5 comment types: progress/error/success/analysis/status) | 22.83 |

### 12.3 Git and Repository Agents

| Agent | Purpose | Model |
|-------|---------|-------|
| **Repo Isolator** | Clones to `/tmp/` with auth and cleanup | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **Branch Setup** | Creates/checks out branches with rebase | `gpt-5-nano` |
| **Git Committer** | Stages, commits, pushes to both remotes | `gpt-5-nano` |
| **Git Commit Helper** | Safe commits with validation and rollback | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **CI Log Fetcher** | Retrieves CI logs via web authentication | `gpt-5-codex` |

#### 12.3.1 Git and Repository Agent Responsibilities

| Agent | Responsibilities | Sections |
|-------|-----------------|---------|
| **Repo Isolator** | [R-57](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) (clone creation in `/tmp/isolated-*`, auth URL construction, safety validation — refuses `/`, `/tmp`, `/app` deletion, retry cleanup 3×), [R-114](#22114-r-114-startup-credential-validation-gate) (PAT validation before clone) | 22.57, 22.114 |
| **Branch Setup** | [R-30](#2230-r-30-branch-management-and-rebase) (create or checkout with rebase-only policy, dependent branch stacking via `base_branch`, local-then-remote branch existence check, conflict abort-and-report) | 22.30 |
| **Git Committer** | [R-29](#2229-r-29-commit-formatting-and-git-operations) (stage all, commit, dual-remote push: origin then upstream, both required, error reporting with full context) | 22.29 |
| **Git Commit Helper** | [R-29](#2229-r-29-commit-formatting-and-git-operations) (pre-commit validation, optional hooks, `Co-authored-by` trailers, rollback via `git reset --soft HEAD~1` on failure, structured JSON return) | 22.29 |
| **CI Log Fetcher** | [R-27](#2227-r-27-ci-log-retrieval-and-diagnosis) (cookie-based web auth: POST `/user/login` with CSRF, navigate to actions page, extract run ID from HTML, download logs, 8 CI job-to-artifact mappings, cookie cleanup) | 22.27 |

### 12.4 Reference and Knowledge Agents

| Agent | Purpose | Model |
|-------|---------|-------|
| **Ref Reader** | Reads and summarizes CONTRIBUTING.md, spec, timeline | `gemini-2.5-pro` |
| **Ref Material Loader** | Caches reference materials for child agents | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **Spec Reader** | Extracts issue-relevant specification sections | `gemini-2.5-pro` |
| **Difficulty Evaluator** | Recommends starting model tier for subtasks | `claude-haiku-4-5` |

**Ref Material Loader: Caching Strategy**

The Ref Material Loader implements a parent-child caching model to reduce redundant Ref Reader calls. When a pool supervisor loads references, it caches the result in `/tmp/ref-cache/` and passes the cached content to all its workers. This reduces O(N) Ref Reader calls (one per worker) to O(1) (one per cycle).

- Cache files are stored in `/tmp/ref-cache/` with cycle-based naming
- Cache validity: 24-hour expiry, cycle-based invalidation
- Stale caches older than 7 days are automatically cleaned
- Performance benefit: 80% faster for 5 workers, 90% for 10, 95% for 20

**Difficulty Evaluator: Conservative Bias**

The Difficulty Evaluator recommends starting model tiers based on a five-axis assessment (scope, algorithmic complexity, novelty, integration surface, ambiguity). It has an explicit **conservative bias**: when in doubt, it must recommend a LOWER tier, defaulting to Haiku. This is safe because the escalation system (Section 11.2) automatically promotes to higher tiers when the lower tier fails. Under-estimating difficulty costs one retry; over-estimating difficulty wastes money on every successful task.

#### 12.4.1 Reference and Knowledge Agent Responsibilities

| Agent | Responsibilities | Sections |
|-------|-----------------|---------|
| **Ref Reader** | [R-61](#2261-r-61-reference-material-caching-and-distribution) (reads and summarizes CONTRIBUTING.md + `docs/specification.md` + `docs/timeline.md`; output is the foundation for all worker context) | 22.61 |
| **Ref Material Loader** | [R-61](#2261-r-61-reference-material-caching-and-distribution) (cycle-based caching in `/tmp/ref-cache/`, 24h expiry, 7-day stale cleanup, O(N)→O(1) optimization for worker pools) | 22.61 |
| **Spec Reader** | [R-61](#2261-r-61-reference-material-caching-and-distribution) (issue-relevant extraction: filters full spec to applicable modules, interfaces, data models, cross-cutting concerns) | 22.61 |
| **Difficulty Evaluator** | [R-119](#22119-r-119-difficulty-evaluator-5-criteria-assessment) (5-axis assessment: scope, complexity, novelty, integration, ambiguity → simple/moderate/complex/very_complex; conservative bias → default lower tier) | 22.119 |

### 12.5 Label and Forgejo Agents

| Agent | Purpose | Model |
|-------|---------|-------|
| **Forgejo Label Manager** | Centralized label operations (CANNOT create) | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Forgejo Signature Appender** | Standardized bot signature formatting | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **Automation Tracking Manager** | Centralized tracking issue operations | `gpt-5-nano` |

#### 12.5.1 Label and Forgejo Agent Responsibilities

| Agent | Responsibilities | Sections |
|-------|-----------------|---------|
| **Forgejo Label Manager** | [R-09](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) (label application), [R-58](#2258-r-58-label-name-to-id-resolution-and-conflict-prevention) (name→ID resolution, conflict detection, MoSCoW exclusivity), [R-127](#22127-r-127-label-creation-prohibition-enforcement) (cannot create labels — only apply existing) | 22.9, 22.58, 22.127 |
| **Forgejo Signature Appender** | [R-63](#2263-r-63-bot-signature-standardization) (3 format types, signature dedup on updates, format validation) | 22.63 |
| **Automation Tracking Manager** | [R-20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) (11 tracking operations), [R-42](#2242-r-42-tracking-issue-cleanup-and-deduplication) (close-all protocol), [R-45](#2245-r-45-estimated-cycle-interval-maintenance) (rolling average calculation), [R-143](#22143-r-143-dual-status-issue-cleanup-defense-in-depth) (primary close-all-then-create), [R-132](#22132-r-132-subagent-specialization-principle) (centralized tracking logic) | 22.20, 22.42, 22.45, 22.143, 22.132 |

### 12.6 Quality and Verification Agents

| Agent | Purpose | Model |
|-------|---------|-------|
| **Implementation Reviewer** | Post-quality-gate functional correctness review | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Milestone Reviewer** | Holistic review after milestone completion | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Product Verifier** | End-to-end product completion verification | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Quality Enforcer** | Repairs branch protection; creates CI-Blocker issues | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **State Reconciler** | Bulk-fixes state label mismatches | `claude-sonnet-4-6` |

#### 12.6.1 Quality and Verification Agent Responsibilities

| Agent | Responsibilities | Sections |
|-------|-----------------|---------|
| **Implementation Reviewer** | [R-62](#2262-r-62-implementation-correctness-verification) (requirement-by-requirement cross-reference; "would-fail" test reasoning; rejects for functional gaps, not style) | 22.62 |
| **Milestone Reviewer** | [R-120](#22120-r-120-milestone-reviewer-holistic-integration-review) (8-area cross-issue review; PASS/PASS WITH ISSUES/FAIL assessment; creates issues for gaps) | 22.120 |
| **Product Verifier** | [R-67](#2267-r-67-product-completion-verification) (10-point checklist: milestones, issues, PRs, tests, coverage, spec, docs, code quality, blockers, branches) | 22.67 |
| **Quality Enforcer** | [R-12](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) (branch protection repair), [R-32](#2232-r-32-master-ci-health-emergency-response) (`Priority/CI-Blocker` issue creation), [R-90](#2290-r-90-watchdog-alert-response-and-dispatch) (dispatched by Watchdog for violations) | 22.12, 22.32, 22.90 |
| **State Reconciler** | [R-10](#2210-r-10-issue-state-lifecycle-management) (8 reconciliation rules for bulk fixes), [R-09](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) (bulk label correction), [R-11](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) (dependency direction fixes) | 22.10, 22.9, 22.11 |

### 12.7 Session Management Agents

| Agent | Purpose | Model |
|-------|---------|-------|
| **Async Agent Manager** | Centralized async session operations | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **Async Agent Monitor** | Health checks and restart capabilities | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **Async Agent Cleanup** | Safe single-session shutdown | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **Async Agent Cleanup All** | Batch session termination | `gpt-5-codex` |
| **Session Persister** | Persists state via tracking issues | `gpt-5-nano` |
| **Session Cleanup** | One-shot cleanup of stale sessions | (primary mode) |

#### 12.7.1 Session Management Agent Responsibilities

| Agent | Responsibilities | Sections |
|-------|-----------------|---------|
| **Async Agent Manager** | [R-75](#2275-r-75-session-naming-and-tag-convention) (`[TAG] display-name` convention, 24+ prefixes, duplicate prevention), [R-122](#22122-r-122-prompt-async-mandatory-for-supervisor-launch) (exclusive `localhost:4096` access), [R-56b](#2256b-r-56b-transient-error-classification-and-retry) (5-attempt exponential backoff) | 22.75, 22.122, 22.56b |
| **Async Agent Monitor** | [R-76](#2276-r-76-async-session-health-detection) (unhealthy detection: no messages 10 min; auto-restart with same tag) | 22.76 |

**Async Agent Manager: Retry Logic**

All operations use a five-attempt retry schedule with exponential backoff: 0 seconds, 5 seconds, 30 seconds, 2 minutes, 5 minutes. This handles transient OpenCode Server API failures gracefully.

**Async Agent Manager: Bash Restrictions**

The Async Agent Manager's bash permissions are tightly restricted to prevent misuse. Only these commands are allowed:
- `curl*localhost:4096*` and `curl*127.0.0.1:4096*` (OpenCode Server API calls)
- `python3*`, `echo*`, `date*`, `jq*`, `grep*`, `sed*`, `awk*`, `cat*`, `rm*`, `sleep*`

All other bash commands are denied, including any that could manipulate the filesystem, git, or external APIs.

**Async Agent Cleanup All: Filter Patterns**

Supports targeted cleanup with filter patterns: `all` (everything), `tag:TAG_NAME` (by tag prefix), `status:STATUS` (by session status), `title:PATTERN` (by title match). Also supports `exclude_pattern` for protecting specific sessions during mass cleanup. Has a `dry_run` mode for previewing cleanup actions.

---

## 13. Shared Modules

Shared modules in `.opencode/agents/shared/` define reusable protocols and utilities that all agents must incorporate. Each module is a markdown file that agents reference for consistent behavior.

### 13.1 Coordination Protocols (`shared/coordination_protocols.md`)

Defines the work-item claiming protocol with constants (2-hour claim duration, 10-minute heartbeat interval), comment-based claims with prefixes (`[CLAIM:`, `[HEARTBEAT:`, `[RELEASE:`), and concurrent work detection with conflict matrices. See Section 6.12 for the full claiming protocol specification.

**Conflict Matrix**: Code changes conflict with other code changes and merge attempts. Merge attempts conflict with everything. Reviews conflict with nothing.

### 13.2 Credential Security (`shared/credential_security.md`)

Mandates that credentials are never logged, always accessed via environment variables, validated without exposure, and cleaned up after use. Defines validation patterns and secure configuration functions.

**Required Environment Variables**: `FORGEJO_PAT` (40 hex chars), `GIT_USER_NAME`, `GIT_USER_EMAIL`, `FORGEJO_USERNAME`, `FORGEJO_PASSWORD` (8+ chars).

**Optional**: `CA_MAX_PARALLEL_WORKERS` (default 4), `OPENCODE_SERVER_PASSWORD`.

**Seven Security Rules**: (1) No credential logging, (2) No credentials in prompts, (3) No credentials in Forgejo comments, (4) No credentials in temp files (except cookies), (5) No partial credential exposure, (6) No credential defaults, (7) Validate credentials early at startup.

### 13.3 Error Handling (`shared/error_handling.md`)

Standardizes error types (NetworkError, GitError, GitConflictError, ForgejoError, CoordinationError, AlreadyClaimedError, ConfigurationError, OperationFailedError) and recovery patterns with retry logic and exponential backoff (1s, 2s, 4s base; 60s wait for rate limits).

**Key Pattern**: `safe_operation_with_recovery()` -- wraps any operation with retry logic, cleanup on failure via a CleanupManager context manager, and specific handling per error type.

### 13.4 Logging (`shared/logging.md`)

Mandates a structured log format: `[AGENT:{name}][SESSION:{id}][ACTION:{action}][LEVEL:{level}] {message}`. Errors at ERROR and CRITICAL levels auto-persist to Forgejo as issue comments. Standard action names: `init`, `setup`, `clone`, `implement`, `test`, `review`, `merge`, `dispatch`, `monitor`, `cleanup`.

### 13.5 Performance Monitoring (`shared/performance_monitoring.md`)

Provides operation timing, resource monitoring (CPU, memory, I/O via psutil), health score calculation (0-1 scale based on success rates and resource usage), and system KPIs.

**Key KPIs**: `issues_per_hour`, `prs_merged_per_hour`, `tests_written_per_hour`, `first_attempt_success_rate`, `review_approval_rate`, `test_coverage_trend`, `avg_issue_completion_time`, `avg_pr_fix_time`, `worker_utilization`, `system_health_score`, `failure_rate_trend`, `resource_pressure`.

**Adaptive Timeouts**: Based on historical 99th percentile plus 50% buffer, ensuring timeouts grow with observed operation durations.

### 13.6 Merge Safety (`shared/merge_safety.md`)

Defines mandatory pre-merge verification including CI status, approval detection (with flexible keyword matching), conflict checking, post-merge verification, and the `safe_merge_pr()` function as the only approved merge mechanism. Direct `forgejo_merge_pull_request` calls without these checks are forbidden. See Section 6.18 for the merge safety protocol and Section 8.3.4 for the mandatory merge verification protocol.

**Seven mandatory rules** for all agents that merge:
1. Always use `safe_merge_pr()`, never call `forgejo_merge_pull_request` directly
2. Always call `verify_merge_safety()` before merging
3. Handle both success and failure cases
4. Never attempt to bypass safety checks
5. Never use or accept a `force_merge` parameter
6. Never post "merged successfully" without verifying `merged == true` via `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index`
7. Always check if the branch needs rebasing (`merge_base != base.sha`) before attempting merge

**System Watchdog monitoring**: The watchdog now monitors for "merged successfully" comments on PRs that are still open, as an additional safety net for the false-success bug.

### 13.7 Session State (`shared/session_state.md`)

Defines standardized patterns for persisting agent session state for crash recovery and work resumption. State is persisted via Forgejo (never local files), checkpointed frequently, versioned (format v1.0), and must be human-readable.

**Checkpoint Format**: JSON wrapped in `[CHECKPOINT]` comments on a tracking issue, containing version, timestamp, agent name, session ID, current phase, and phase-specific data.

**Resume Patterns**: Agent-specific resume logic maps checkpoint phases to restart points (e.g., `clone_complete` resumes at Phase 2, `subtasks_done` resumes at Phase 3).

### 13.8 Tracking Discovery Guide (`shared/tracking_discovery_guide.md`)

Defines how ALL agents discover, interact with, and coordinate through the automation tracking issue system. The universal discovery mechanism is: query Forgejo for issues with the `Automation Tracking` label, filter by agent prefix in the title, and parse the structured body.

**Core Discovery Patterns**:
- `discover_all_automation_activity()`: Find all open issues with "Automation Tracking" label, extract active agent prefixes.
- `check_agent_activity(prefix, max_age)`: Check a specific agent's recent activity.
- `get_agent_status_details(prefix)`: Get detailed status from the most recent tracking issue.

### 13.9 Bug Hunter Tracking Update (`shared/bug_hunter_tracking_update.md`)

Defines the migration guide for converting the Bug Hunt supervisor from the old session state system to the new individual tracking issue system. Documents the tracking issue format `[AUTO-BUG-SUP] Bug Hunt Status (Cycle 25)`, the cleanup protocol (one issue per cycle, preserve announcements), and worker coordination via announcement issues.

---

## 14. Inter-Agent Interaction Map

The following diagram shows how all agents interact with each other through subagent calls and async launches.

```kroki-plantuml
@startuml
!theme plain
skinparam linetype ortho
skinparam nodesep 50
skinparam ranksep 30

package "Tier 0: Orchestrator" {
  [Product Builder] as PB
}

package "Tier 1: Pool Supervisors" {
  [Implementation Pool] as IPS
  [PR Review Pool] as PRP
  [PR Fix Pool] as PFP
  [PR Merge] as PMG
  [UAT Test Pool] as UTP
  [Bug Hunt Pool] as BHP
  [Test Infra Pool] as TIP
}

package "Tier 1: Singletons" {
  [Architecture] as ARCH
  [Epic Planning] as EPIC
  [Human Liaison] as HL
  [Agent Evolution] as AE
  [Arch Guard] as AG
  [Spec Evolution] as SE
  [Backlog Grooming] as BG
  [Documentation] as DOC
  [Timeline] as TL
  [Project Owner] as PO
  [System Watchdog] as SW
}

package "Tier 2: Workers" {
  [Impl Worker] as IW
  [PR Reviewer] as PRR
}

package "Tier 3: Specialists" {
  [Subtask Loop] as SL
  [Tier Selectors] as TS
  [Implementer] as IMPL
  [Behave Tester] as BT
  [Robot Tester] as RT
  [Lint Fixer] as LF
  [Typecheck Fixer] as TF
  [Test Fixer] as TEF
  [Coverage Improver] as CI
  [Unit Test Runner] as UTR
  [Integration Test Runner] as ITR
}

package "Shared Services" {
  [Async Agent Mgr] as AAM
  [Tracking Mgr] as ATM
  [Ref Reader] as RR
  [Label Mgr] as LM
  [Repo Isolator] as RI
  [CI Log Fetcher] as CLF
}

PB --> AAM : launches all supervisors
PB --> ATM : tracking
PB --> RR : load refs

IPS --> AAM : launches workers
IPS --> ATM : tracking
PRP --> AAM : launches reviewers
PRP --> ATM : tracking
PFP --> IW : dispatches (sync Task)
UTP --> AAM : launches workers
BHP --> AAM : launches workers
TIP --> AAM : launches workers
PMG --> ATM : tracking
PMG --> RI : rebase clones

IW --> SL : implement subtasks
IW --> ATM : tracking
IW --> CLF : fetch CI logs
IW --> RR : load refs
SL --> TS : select model tier
TS --> IMPL : implement
TS --> BT : unit tests
TS --> RT : integration tests
TS --> LF : lint
TS --> TF : typecheck
TS --> TEF : fix tests
TS --> CI : coverage
TS --> UTR : run unit tests
TS --> ITR : run integration tests

SW --> AAM : dispatch fix agents
SW --> ATM : tracking
BG --> LM : label operations
BG --> ATM : tracking
EPIC --> LM : label operations
HL --> LM : label operations
HL --> ATM : tracking
PO --> LM : label operations
PO --> ATM : tracking
PRR --> RR : load refs
PRR --> CLF : fetch CI logs
@enduml
```

### 14.1 Forgejo-Centric Coordination Flow

The following diagram shows how agents coordinate exclusively through Forgejo artifacts (issues, PRs, comments, labels) without any direct inter-agent communication:

```kroki-plantuml
@startuml
!theme plain
skinparam actorStyle awesome

actor "Human Developer" as Human
database "Forgejo" as FG

rectangle "Agent System" {
  [Human Liaison] as HL
  [Project Owner] as PO
  [Epic Planner] as EP
  [Impl Pool] as IP
  [Impl Worker] as IW
  [PR Review Pool] as RP
  [PR Reviewer] as RV
  [PR Merge] as PM
  [Backlog Groomer] as BG
  [System Watchdog] as SW
}

Human --> FG : creates issue
FG --> HL : polls for new activity
HL --> FG : triages, responds
FG --> PO : polls for unverified
PO --> FG : assigns MoSCoW, priority
FG --> EP : polls for empty milestones
EP --> FG : creates Epics, child issues
FG --> IP : polls for assigned issues
IP --> IW : dispatches worker (async)
IW --> FG : claims issue, creates PR
FG --> RP : polls for unreviewed PRs
RP --> RV : dispatches reviewer (async)
RV --> FG : posts review
FG --> IW : reads review, fixes
FG --> PM : polls for merge-ready PRs
PM --> FG : merges PR, closes issue
FG --> BG : polls for stale/duplicate
BG --> FG : cleans, comments, closes
FG --> SW : polls for violations
SW --> FG : creates alert issues

note right of FG
  All coordination happens through:
  - Issues (state, labels, body)
  - PRs (status, reviews, comments)
  - Comments (claims, heartbeats, notes)
  - Labels (state transitions)
  - Dependencies (blocks/blocked-by)
end note
@enduml
```

### 14.2 Tracking Ticket Coordination Flow

Agents read each other's tracking tickets to understand system state and coordinate behavior:

```kroki-plantuml
@startuml
!theme plain

rectangle "Tracking Issue Producers" {
  [Impl Pool\nAUTO-IMP-POOL] as IP
  [Review Pool\nAUTO-REV-POOL] as RP
  [Watchdog\nAUTO-WATCHDOG] as WD
  [Groomer\nAUTO-GROOMER] as BG
  [Liaison\nAUTO-LIAISON] as HL
  [All Others...] as OT
}

database "Forgejo Issues\n(Automation Tracking label)" as FG

rectangle "Tracking Issue Consumers" {
  [Product Builder] as PB
  [System Watchdog\n(reads ALL agents)] as WDR
  [Impl Pool\n(reads watchdog,\narch, groomer)] as IPR
  [Human Liaison\n(reads ALL agents)] as HLR
  [Backlog Groomer\n(cleanup duty)] as BGR
}

IP --> FG : status every 5 cycles
RP --> FG : status every 10 cycles
WD --> FG : health every 6 cycles
BG --> FG : grooming every cycle
HL --> FG : activity every 10 cycles
OT --> FG : per-agent schedule

FG --> PB : convergence checks
FG --> WDR : staleness detection
FG --> IPR : announcement reading
FG --> HLR : system awareness
FG --> BGR : cleanup old tickets

note bottom of FG
  Tracking issues follow format:
  [PREFIX] Type (Cycle N)
  
  Announcements follow format:
  [PREFIX] Announce: message
  
  ALL carry "Automation Tracking" label
end note
@enduml
```

---

## 15. Quality and Verification Agents (Detailed)

### 15.1 Quality Enforcer

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `quality-enforcer.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` (one-off, dispatched by Watchdog) |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Subagents** | `new-issue-creator` |

**Purpose**: Dispatched by the System Watchdog when quality gate violations are detected. Verifies and repairs Forgejo branch protection configuration and creates `Priority/CI-Blocker` issues for any code merged to master without passing CI. Does NOT revert commits; creates tracked issues for human review.

**Actions**: (1) Verify/fix branch protection rules via REST API, (2) Audit recent merges for CI compliance, (3) Create CI-Blocker issues for violations. CI-Blocker issues get absolute priority in the implementation system.

### 15.2 State Reconciler

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `state-reconciler.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` (one-off, dispatched by Watchdog) |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Subagents** | `forgejo-label-manager` |

**Purpose**: Bulk-fixes state label mismatches across all issues. Scans all issues and reconciles State labels against actual status.

**Eight Reconciliation Rules**:
1. Closed issues must have terminal state labels (Completed or Wont Do)
2. Open issues must NOT have terminal state labels
3. Issues with merged PRs must be closed and marked Completed
4. Issues with State/In Review must have an open PR
5. Issues must have exactly ONE State label
6. Every issue must have State, Type, and Priority labels
7. Dependency links: child blocks parent Epic, Epic blocks Legendary, PR blocks issue
8. Non-Epic/Legendary issues beyond Unverified must have milestones

### 15.3 Project Bootstrapper

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `project-bootstrapper.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` (one-shot) |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |

**Purpose**: One-time project setup. Idempotent: checks if each artifact exists before creating it.

**What It Creates** (in order):
1. `pyproject.toml` (hatch build system, Python >=3.11)
2. `noxfile.py` (lint, typecheck, unit_tests, integration_tests, coverage_report sessions)
3. Directory structure: `src/<package>/`, `features/`, `features/steps/`, `features/mocks/`, `robot/`, `benchmarks/`, `docs/`
4. `.forgejo/workflows/ci.yml` (CI pipeline)
5. `CONTRIBUTING.md` (development standards)
6. Forgejo labels (all labels from Section 6.9 with exact color codes)
7. Forgejo milestones (M0 Project Setup, M1 Core Foundation, etc.)
8. Branch protection for master (status checks required, 1 approval, dismiss stale, block on rejected, push disabled)

**Critical**: Commits all files BEFORE applying branch protection (otherwise the commits would be blocked).

### 15.4 Product Verifier

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `product-verifier.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |
| **Subagents** | `ref-reader` |

**Purpose**: End-to-end product completion verification. Returns `COMPLETE` or `INCOMPLETE`.

**Ten-Point Verification Checklist**:
1. All milestones complete (every issue closed per milestone)
2. No open issues with State/Verified, In Progress, or Paused
3. No open/unmerged pull requests
4. Full test suite passes (`nox` all sessions)
5. Coverage >= 97% (`nox -s coverage_report`)
6. Every specification requirement has test coverage
7. Documentation complete (README, API docs, architecture docs)
8. No TODO/FIXME/HACK/XXX in code, no debug code
9. No `Blocked` label issues remain
10. No stale feature branches

### 15.5 Implementation Reviewer

| Property | Value |
|----------|-------|
| **Agent File** | `implementation-reviewer.md` |
| **Mode** | `subagent` (read-only) |
| **Model** | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` |

**Purpose**: Final gate before a subtask is considered complete. Invoked AFTER all quality gates pass. Verifies functional correctness (does the code actually do what the subtask requires?) rather than code quality (which lint/typecheck/tests already verified).

**Decision**: Returns `APPROVE` (with confidence level) or `REJECT` (with specific concerns, file references, and suggested fixes). Does NOT reject for style issues (that is the linter's job). Must be specific when rejecting: file, function, line range.

---

## 16. Escalation State Persistence

The Subtask Loop persists its escalation state as HTML comments within PR comments, enabling recovery after crashes:

```html
<!-- ESCALATION-STATE: START
{
  "subtask": "description",
  "current_tier": "codex",
  "attempt": 3,
  "history": [
    {"tier": "haiku", "attempt": 1, "result": "quality_gate_failure"},
    {"tier": "haiku", "attempt": 2, "result": "review_rejection"},
    {"tier": "codex", "attempt": 3, "result": "in_progress"}
  ]
}
ESCALATION-STATE: END -->
```

On startup, the Subtask Loop checks for an existing PR and parses escalation state from PR comments. If found, it resumes from the correct tier and attempt number rather than restarting from scratch.

---

## 17. Deprecated Agents

The following agents have been deprecated and replaced by the tier selector architecture:

- `implementer-haiku.md`, `implementer-codex.md`, `implementer-sonnet.md`, `implementer-opus.md`
- `behave-tester-haiku.md`, `behave-tester-codex.md`, `behave-tester-sonnet.md`, `behave-tester-opus.md`
- `robot-tester-haiku.md`, `robot-tester-codex.md`, `robot-tester-sonnet.md`, `robot-tester-opus.md`
- `coverage-checker.md`, `quality-gate-escalator.md`, `subtask-loop-v2.md`

These files contain only a deprecation notice pointing to the tier selector architecture.

---

## 18. Configuration

### 18.1 Model Configuration (`config/models.yaml`)

Defines four cost tiers (haiku, codex, sonnet, opus) with agent-specific model assignments and escalation paths.

### 18.2 Resource Configuration (`config/resources.yaml`)

Key operational constants. The config file is the canonical reference; values listed here are for quick lookup.

**Timeouts:**

| Parameter | Value | Context |
|-----------|-------|---------|
| Agent heartbeat | 600s (10 min) | Time between heartbeat signals |
| Work claim duration | 2 hours | Maximum time a claim is valid (Section 6.12) |
| Bash command default | 120s (2 min) | Default timeout for bash tool calls |
| Bash sleep multiplier | 1.5x | Sleep timeout = sleep_duration × 1.5 |
| Forgejo API | 30,000ms (30s) | API call timeout |
| Git operations | 300,000ms (5 min) | Clone, push, fetch timeout |
| Test execution | 900,000ms (15 min) | Nox session timeout |

**Human response timeouts:**

| Parameter | Value |
|-----------|-------|
| PR needs feedback | 48 hours |
| Question on issue | 24 hours |
| Blocked on human | 72 hours |
| Architecture approval | 48 hours |
| Verification request | 24 hours |

**Retry policies:**

| Error Type | Max Attempts | Strategy |
|-----------|-------------|----------|
| Network errors | 3 | Exponential backoff (1s, 2s, 4s; max 60s) |
| Git conflicts | 2 | Rebase and retry (cleanup on failure) |
| Test failures | 3 | Escalate model tier |
| Rate limits | 5 | Fixed 60s delay between attempts |

**Pressure thresholds:**

| Metric | Warning | Critical |
|--------|---------|----------|
| Worker utilization | 90% | 95% |
| Failure rate | 20% | 80% |
| Queue depth | 80% of max | 100% of max |

**Queue limits:** Maximum queue depth = workers × 3. Priority queue holds 10 high-priority items ready for immediate dispatch.

**Monitoring intervals:** Health signal every 10 min, worker status check every 1 min, session validation every 5 min, resource cleanup every 5 min.

**Cleanup:** Temp directories use prefix `/tmp/cleveragents-`, expire after 24 hours, cleaned automatically on agent exit.

---

## 19. Operational Model

### 19.1 System Startup

The system is started by invoking the **Product Builder** as a primary agent in OpenCode. The Product Builder is the only entry point. No other agent should be launched directly by an operator.

**Pre-requisites before startup:**
1. OpenCode Server running at `localhost:4096`
2. Forgejo instance accessible with valid `FORGEJO_PAT`
3. All required environment variables set (see Section 19.4)
4. Git authentication configured (`GIT_USER_NAME`, `GIT_USER_EMAIL`)
5. Repository exists on Forgejo with appropriate permissions for the bot account

**Startup command:** Invoke `product-builder` as a primary agent with a product description prompt.

### 19.2 System Shutdown

There is no graceful shutdown command built into the Product Builder (by design -- it is meant to run until the product is complete). To shut down the system:

1. **Preferred**: Use the `session-cleanup` primary agent, which queries all active sessions and terminates them. It detects automated sessions by searching for the `[AUTO-` prefix substring in session titles.
2. **Alternative**: Use `async-agent-cleanup-all` as a subagent with `filter: all` to terminate every active session.
3. **Manual**: Query the OpenCode Server API directly (`GET localhost:4096/api/session`) and terminate sessions individually.

Workers in progress will lose uncommitted work when their sessions are terminated. Committed-and-pushed work is safe. Claimed issues will have stale claims that expire after 2 hours.

### 19.3 Crash Recovery Model

The system is designed for crash recovery at every level:

| Level | Crash Scenario | Recovery Mechanism |
|-------|---------------|-------------------|
| **Product Builder** | Orchestrator process dies | Re-invoke Product Builder; it detects existing sessions via OpenCode API (Phase C.0), adopts them, and resumes monitoring |
| **Supervisor** | A supervisor session dies | Product Builder detects it within 60 seconds and re-launches with the same parameters |
| **Worker** | A worker session dies | Supervisor detects dead worker, slot becomes available, work re-dispatched; new worker checks for existing PR/branch (crash recovery check) |
| **Subtask Loop** | Subtask loop dies mid-escalation | HTML comment escalation state (Section 14) in PR comments preserves tier and attempt number; new invocation resumes from correct state |
| **Git push failure** | Network interruption during push | Retry with exponential backoff; clone is preserved until successful push |
| **Forgejo API failure** | Forgejo temporarily unavailable | All API calls retry with exponential backoff per shared error handling module |

**State preservation hierarchy** (most durable to least):
1. **Forgejo issues/PRs/comments** -- survives any crash, persisted on the Forgejo server
2. **Git branches/commits** -- survives any crash once pushed to remote
3. **Tracking issues** -- survives any crash, provides status and cycle state
4. **Clone directories in `/tmp/`** -- survives worker crash but not machine reboot
5. **In-memory agent state** -- lost on any crash (must be recoverable from levels 1-4)

### 19.4 Environment Variables Reference

| Variable | Required | Format | Purpose |
|----------|----------|--------|---------|
| `FORGEJO_PAT` | Yes | 40 hex chars (`[a-f0-9]{40}`) | Forgejo personal access token for API authentication (primary bot account) |
| `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` | Yes | 40 hex chars (`[a-f0-9]{40}`) | Forgejo personal access token for the reviewer bot account (used by PR Reviewer only) |
| `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME` | Yes | Alphanumeric | Forgejo username for the reviewer bot account (must be different from `FORGEJO_USERNAME` to allow formal PR approval) |
| `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD` | Yes | 8+ chars | Forgejo password for the reviewer bot account (web UI access for CI log scraping via ci-log-fetcher) |
| `GIT_USER_NAME` | Yes | Any string | Git commit author name (typically `CleverAgents Bot`) |
| `GIT_USER_EMAIL` | Yes | Email format | Git commit author email (typically `bot@cleveragents.ai`) |
| `FORGEJO_USERNAME` | Yes | Alphanumeric | Forgejo web login username for CI log scraping |
| `FORGEJO_PASSWORD` | Yes | 8+ chars | Forgejo web login password for CI log scraping |
| `CA_MAX_PARALLEL_WORKERS` | No | Integer (default 4) | Controls parallelism (see Section 1.3) |
| `OPENCODE_SERVER_PASSWORD` | No | Any string | Authentication for OpenCode Server API |

**Security rules**: See Section 13.2 for the seven mandatory security rules governing credential handling.

### 19.5 Security Model

The system uses **two Forgejo bot accounts** (Section 6.17):

1. **Primary account (HAL9000)** — used by all agents except the PR Reviewer:
   - Repository write access (push to branches, create PRs, post comments)
   - Organization label read access (list organization-level labels)
   - Issue and PR management permissions (create, edit, close, merge)
   - Branch protection bypass is NOT granted (must comply with branch protection rules)

2. **Reviewer account** — used exclusively by the PR Reviewer for review operations:
   - Pull request review access (post formal APPROVED / REQUEST_CHANGES reviews)
   - Issue comment access (post backup review comments)
   - Web UI access (for CI log scraping via ci-log-fetcher)
   - No write access to branches, issues, or labels (review-only)

The OpenCode Server API at `localhost:4096` is the control plane. Only the **Async Agent Manager** is permitted to make direct HTTP calls to this API. All other agents must invoke the Async Agent Manager as a subagent.

Credential isolation: The primary and reviewer credentials are separate environment variable sets. The PR Review Pool Supervisor receives both sets and passes reviewer credentials to PR Reviewer instances via prompt parameters. The Credential Security module (Section 13.2) mandates validation without exposure.

---

## 20. Design Decisions and Rationale

This section documents intentional design choices that might otherwise appear to be inconsistencies.

### 20.1 Two-Tier Claim Timeout

The Work Item Claiming Protocol (Section 6.12) specifies a **2-hour** stale claim threshold. Individual workers use a shorter **30-minute** operational target for completing their work. These are complementary, not contradictory: the 30-minute target is how long a worker aims to hold a claim, while the 2-hour value is how long other workers must wait before overriding an apparently-abandoned claim. This two-tier approach prevents premature claim stealing while encouraging workers to release claims promptly.

### 20.2 Configuration Files as Aspirational Reference

The configuration files `config/models.yaml` and `config/resources.yaml` serve as aspirational reference documents for cost-tier planning. The authoritative model assignment for each agent is in its frontmatter `model:` field; the config files provide a bird's-eye view of intended tier allocation. The config files should be kept synchronized with frontmatter, but when they diverge, frontmatter takes precedence at runtime.

---

## 21. Additional Agent Behavioral Specifications

### 21.1 PR Fix Pool Supervisor: Synchronous Dispatch

Unlike other pool supervisors which dispatch workers via the Async Agent Manager, the PR Fix Pool Supervisor dispatches workers synchronously using the Task tool. This is by design: the PR Fix supervisor performs intelligent pre-analysis (common cause grouping, root cause identification) before dispatching, and needs to coordinate the results of multiple workers against the same PR. The Task tool's blocking semantics enable this coordination.

**Subagents**: `implementation-worker`, `ref-reader`, `ci-log-fetcher`, `issue-note-writer`

**Worker Prioritization**: When the number of required fixes exceeds the worker limit, priority is: root cause fixes first, then critical path fixes, then simpler fixes.

**Stuck Detection Threshold**: If more than five previous fix attempts are recorded and failures have not changed, the supervisor requests human help and adds the `needs feedback` label.

**Default Worker Count**: `max(1, CA_MAX_PARALLEL_WORKERS // 4)` (quarter allocation, minimum 1).

### 21.2 PR Merge Pool Supervisor: Complete Subagent List

**Subagents**: `pr-merge-worker` (blocking), `automation-tracking-manager`, `repo-isolator`, `git-commit-helper`

**Worker dispatch model**: Unlike all other supervisors, the PR Merge Pool Supervisor calls `pr-merge-worker` as a **blocking subagent** via the Task tool. It does NOT use `async-agent-manager` to dispatch workers. The supervisor blocks until the worker finishes, then continues its cycle. There are no `[AUTO-PRMRG-<N>]` async sessions. The `async-agent-manager` is not in the supervisor's task permissions.

**Important**: `edit: deny` -- the PR Merge supervisor does NOT have file edit permissions. Rebase operations are delegated to the `pr-merge-worker` subagent, which creates an isolated clone via `repo-isolator` and performs git operations within it.

**Branch Deletion Policy**: `delete_branch_after_merge` is set to `False` (not True as the merge safety default suggests). The rationale is to let humans decide when to delete branches.

**Rebase Protocol**: When a PR has no merge conflicts but is behind master, the supervisor calls `pr-merge-worker` which: (1) creates an isolated clone via repo-isolator, (2) rebases onto the base branch, (3) resolves conflicts by reviewing recent git history, (4) force-pushes with lease via git-commit-helper, (5) cleans up the clone, (6) polls for CI completion, (7) merges with fast-forward if the PR is mergeable.

### 21.3 UAT Test Pool Supervisor: Complete Subagent List

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`, `async-agent-manager`, `spec-reader`, `new-issue-creator`, `pr-description-writer`, `git-committer`, `pr-creator`, `automation-tracking-manager`

**Documentation Generation**: Successful test runs generate showcase documentation in categorized directories (cli-tools, api-clients, data-processing, testing-tools). Duplicate detection uses 0.7 cosine similarity threshold. Candidates require a minimum of 3 commands to qualify. Documentation is submitted as PRs.

### 21.4 Implementer: Domain Model Verification Rule

!!! danger "Critical Rule"

    Before writing code that references any field, method, or attribute on a domain model class, the Implementer MUST read the actual class definition to confirm the member exists. Never assume a field exists based solely on the issue description. If the field does not exist, CREATE it -- do not reference a non-existent field.

The Implementer also must NOT write tests (that is the Behave Tester's and Robot Tester's job) and must NOT run `nox` or quality checks (that is the Subtask Loop's responsibility). Return values must reference code by module path, class name, and method name -- never by line number.

### 21.5 Subtask Loop: Async Test Writer Launching

The Subtask Loop launches three test writers in parallel via the Async Agent Manager:
- Behave Tester with session tag `AUTO-SUBTASK-BEHAVE-{attempt}`
- Robot Tester with session tag `AUTO-SUBTASK-ROBOT-{attempt}`
- ASV Benchmarker with session tag `AUTO-SUBTASK-ASV-{attempt}`

A monitoring loop checks every 10 seconds (`bash("sleep 10", timeout=15000)`) for up to 60 cycles (10-minute timeout). Failed writers are restarted.

**Per-Gate Independent Tier Escalation**: Each quality gate (lint, typecheck, unit tests, integration tests, coverage) has its own independent tier that starts at Haiku and escalates independently. Quality gate sessions use tags like `AUTO-SUBTASK-{GATE_NAME}-A{attempt}-P{inner_pass}`. The monitoring loop runs every 10 seconds with a 20-minute timeout (120 cycles).

**Inner Pass Limit**: Each tier gets 5 inner passes before escalation occurs.

**Meaningful Change Verification**: Before quality gates run, the subtask loop verifies the implementer produced meaningful changes: fewer than 3 functional lines (excluding comments, whitespace, and empty lines) causes rejection without running quality gates. The working directory is reset with `git checkout -- .` and escalation is triggered.

### 21.6 Plan Agent: Behavioral Specification

The Plan agent (`plan.md`, mode `all`) is available in both primary and subagent modes. It replaces the default planning agent and has broad permissions (`task: "*": allow`, `webfetch: allow`, `edit: deny`).

**Mandatory Pre-Planning Steps**: Before creating any plan, the agent must read CONTRIBUTING.md, project documentation (README, specification, ADRs), and analyze the project structure.

**Required Plan Structure** (six sections):
1. **Context and Analysis**: Current state understanding, requirements interpretation
2. **Implementation Strategy**: Approach, key design decisions, CONTRIBUTING.md compliance
3. **Detailed Steps**: What to change, where, how, which tests, which CONTRIBUTING.md section applies
4. **Testing Plan**: Unit (BDD), integration (Robot), performance (ASV), coverage targets
5. **Risk Analysis**: Breaking changes, performance impacts, security concerns, migration needs
6. **Task Breakdown**: Prerequisites, implementation order, testing sequence, documentation, deployment

**Clone Isolation for Analysis**: When analyzing code on different branches, the Plan agent clones to `/tmp/` for read-only analysis. Direct `/app` access is permitted for reading documentation only.

**Red Flags**: The plan must flag violations of CONTRIBUTING.md, introduction of new tools/frameworks, changes to established patterns, missing testing strategy, or lack of rollback plan.

### 21.7 Context Self-Management Pattern

Long-running agents (all supervisors and workers) must actively manage their context window to prevent exhaustion. The pattern is:

- **Every N cycles** (varies by agent: 10-50), discard all accumulated tool outputs.
- **Retain only**: persistent state variables (active worker maps, completed lists, cycle counts, fail counts, queue depths).
- **Never retain**: raw Forgejo API responses, full file contents, CI log contents, PR diffs.

Agents that have been observed to exhaust context include the Backlog Groomer (every 20 cycles), Human Liaison (every 20 cycles), Implementation Pool Supervisor (every 50 iterations), and Agent Evolution Supervisor (every 10 cycles).

### 21.8 Bug Hunt: Clone Failure Handling and Finding Validation

**Hostname Warning**: The Bug Hunt agent must derive the Forgejo hostname from environment variables or API responses. It must never assume the hostname is `git.<org-name>.com`. TLS/SSL failures, DNS resolution errors, and clone failures are infrastructure problems, NOT product bugs. The agent must never file issues about its own infrastructure failures.

**Finding Validation** (five rules before filing any bug issue):
1. Must have actual code evidence (file path, function name, specific code pattern)
2. Must verify environment assumptions (check actual Python version, dependency versions)
3. Must verify the finding is actionable (not a design choice or documented limitation)
4. Must verify against the actual codebase (not outdated cached code)
5. Severity must match evidence (Critical requires data loss/security/crash proof)

**Severity Assessment**:

| Severity | Criteria |
|----------|----------|
| Critical | Data loss, security vulnerability, application crash |
| High | Incorrect behavior, resource leaks, performance degradation |
| Medium | Edge cases, minor spec deviations, non-critical error handling |
| Low | Code quality, potential future problems, style inconsistencies |

### 21.9 Issue Finder: Blocking Category Detection

The Issue Finder classifies issues into three blocking categories:

| Category | Meaning | Action |
|----------|---------|--------|
| `ready` | No blockers, or blockers are all completed | Include in queue |
| `blocked_by_self` | Blocked by an issue assigned to the same user (HAL9000) | Include in queue (will unblock itself) |
| `blocked_by_other` | Blocked by an issue assigned to a different user | Skip (cannot unblock) |

This distinction prevents the Implementation Pool from dispatching workers on issues that are blocked by human-assigned work.

### 21.10 Forgejo Label Manager: Five Operations

The Forgejo Label Manager provides five discrete operations:

| Operation | Purpose |
|-----------|---------|
| **Label Validation** | Check if a label name exists at the organization level |
| **Label Application** | Apply labels to an issue or PR by name (handles name-to-ID mapping) |
| **Label Reading** | Read current labels on an issue or PR |
| **Label Inference** | Infer appropriate labels from issue title, body, and commit message content |
| **Label Compliance Checking** | Verify an issue has required labels (State, Type, Priority, Points if applicable) |

The label inference capability uses keyword matching against the issue content to suggest appropriate Type, Priority, and MoSCoW labels.

### 21.11 Subtask Checker: Fuzzy Matching

The Subtask Checker matches subtask descriptions by content similarity, not exact string match. The provided description from the caller may be paraphrased relative to the original subtask text in the issue body. The checker must find the closest-matching subtask and update its checkbox. It must only modify checkbox states (`[ ]` to `[x]`) and must NOT change any other part of the issue body.

### 21.12 Forgejo Signature Appender: Three Format Variants

The Forgejo Signature Appender supports three signature formats:

| Format | Structure | Use Case |
|--------|-----------|----------|
| **standard** (default) | `---` separator + bold attribution + supervisor/agent line | Most content |
| **minimal** | Bold attribution only (no separator, no supervisor line) | Inline comments, short notes |
| **extended** | `---` separator + bold attribution + supervisor/agent + timestamp + closing `---` | Formal reports, tracking issues |

The appender includes a `clean_existing_signatures()` function that strips any existing bot signatures before appending a new one, preventing signature duplication from repeated updates.

### 21.13 Issue Comment Formatter: Five Comment Types

The Issue Comment Formatter supports five structured comment types, each with a distinct visual template:

| Type | Visual Indicators | Use Case |
|------|------------------|----------|
| `progress` | Progress bars, checklist, completion percentage | Status updates |
| `error` | Red alert icons, error details block, stack traces | Error reports |
| `success` | Green checkmarks, summary, next steps | Completion notices |
| `status` | Dashboard layout, metrics table, health indicators | Periodic status |
| `analysis` | Collapsible sections, data tables, trend indicators | Deep analysis |

Features include collapsible sections, read-time estimates, auto-linking to commits/files/issues, and markdown injection prevention.

### 21.14 Product Builder: Specification PR Monitoring

The Product Builder monitors specification PRs created by the Architecture Supervisor. If a spec PR becomes stale (no activity for 24+ hours), the Product Builder rebases it. If a human merges a spec PR, the Product Builder detects this and updates its internal state. If a spec PR is closed (rejected), the Product Builder creates a follow-up issue. Reminder comments are posted after 24 hours of inactivity.

### 21.15 Product Builder: Non-Return Guarantee

The Product Builder must NEVER return prematurely. An explicit list of things that are NOT reasons to stop includes: "You 'feel done'", "The monitoring loop feels repetitive", "Context is getting large", "No immediate progress is visible", "A few supervisors have restarted", and "Some issues appear stuck". The only valid exit condition is the Product Verifier returning `COMPLETE`.

### 21.16 Final Reporter: Output Format

The Final Reporter is a read-only agent invoked by the Product Builder at the end of a session. It produces a structured markdown report with the following sections:

1. **Summary**: Total issues completed/skipped, total PRs created, overall status
2. **Per-Branch Detail**: For each branch: issue number, PR number/URL, quality check table (lint, typecheck, unit tests, integration tests, coverage with pass/fail and notes), PR description summary, issues encountered
3. **Model Usage and Efficiency Table**: Per-issue breakdown of evaluator recommendation, starting tier, final tier, attempt count, escalation count, and cost estimate
4. **Problems Encountered**: Aggregated list of failures, skips, and stuck issues
5. **Recommendations**: Suggested follow-up actions

**Permissions**: `edit: deny`, `task: deny` — the Final Reporter is strictly read-only. It reads from Forgejo (issues, PRs, comments) and git history but cannot modify anything.

### 21.17 Milestone Reviewer: Holistic Review Protocol

The Milestone Reviewer runs after all issues in a milestone are merged. It reviews the **integrated codebase** (not individual PRs) looking for problems that per-issue reviews cannot catch.

**Eight Review Areas**:
1. **Integration gaps**: Do the modules that were built separately actually work together?
2. **API consistency**: Are naming conventions, parameter ordering, error handling, and return types consistent across the public API surface?
3. **Specification coverage**: Does every specification requirement have a corresponding implementation and test?
4. **Test quality**: Are there integration test gaps between modules? Are the tests meaningful?
5. **Error handling coherence**: Does the error handling strategy flow consistently from module boundaries to the top level?
6. **Performance concerns**: Are there O(n²) patterns, unbounded queries, or resource leaks introduced across the milestone?
7. **Documentation completeness**: Are all new public APIs documented?
8. **Technical debt**: Were any TODO/FIXME/HACK items introduced?

**Output**: Posts a comprehensive review comment on the milestone issue. Creates `Type/Bug` or `Type/Refactor` issues for any problems found.

**Subagents**: `ref-reader`

**Permissions**: `edit: deny` — the reviewer clones the repo to its own `/tmp/` directory for analysis and runs `nox` to execute the full test suite, but it never pushes changes.

### 21.18 Commit Message Formatter: Three-Part Format

The Commit Message Formatter constructs git commit messages following a strict three-part structure:

```
<exact Commit Message from issue Metadata table>

<Implementation description: what was done, key design decisions,
 technical approaches, modules affected>

ISSUES CLOSED: #<issue-number>
```

**Rules**:
1. The first line MUST be the exact commit message from the issue's Metadata section (Conventional Changelog format, e.g., `feat(module): description`)
2. A blank line MUST separate the first line from the body
3. The body describes what was implemented and why
4. The footer MUST include `ISSUES CLOSED: #N` for the linked issue

**Permissions**: `edit: deny`, `bash: deny` — this is a pure formatting agent that reads from Forgejo (to get issue metadata) and returns a formatted string. It cannot execute any commands.

### 21.19 PR Status Analyzer: Multi-Dimensional Analysis

The PR Status Analyzer provides deep PR health assessment across six dimensions, returning structured JSON:

| Dimension | What It Checks |
|-----------|---------------|
| `ci_cd` | Check pass/fail statuses, log URLs, failure categorization |
| `merge_conflicts` | Conflict detection, affected files, resolution complexity |
| `reviews` | Approval status, pending reviews, blocking reviews, reviewer list |
| `tests` | Test pass/fail counts, flaky test detection, coverage delta |
| `blocking_issues` | Dependency analysis, upstream blockers, label blockers |
| `build` | Build status, artifact availability, deployment readiness |

**Three analysis depths**: `quick` (CI and conflicts only), `standard` (all six dimensions), `comprehensive` (all six plus log fetching and delta comparison against a baseline).

**Subagents**: `ci-log-fetcher`

### 21.20 Async Agent Monitor: Four Operations

The Async Agent Monitor supports four discrete operations:

| Operation | Purpose | Key Parameters |
|-----------|---------|---------------|
| `monitor` | Continuous health monitoring of a session | `tag` or `session_id`, `health_timeout_minutes` (default 10), `auto_restart` |
| `health_check` | One-shot health assessment | Returns `healthy`, `unhealthy`, or `dead` with last activity timestamp |
| `get_messages` | Retrieve recent messages from a session | `include_messages`, pagination support |
| `restart` | Terminate and re-launch a session | `restart_params` (agent_name, prompt_text, display_name), preserves the same tag |

**Health detection**: A session is unhealthy if it has had no messages for `health_timeout_minutes` (default 10 minutes). A session is dead if the OpenCode Server reports it as completed or errored.

**Auto-restart**: When `auto_restart: true`, the monitor automatically restarts unhealthy agents using the same tag, enabling seamless recovery. The new session inherits the tag so that the parent agent can find it.

**Subagents**: `async-agent-manager`

### 21.21 Git Commit Helper: Safe Commit with Rollback

The Git Commit Helper wraps git commit operations with validation, conflict resolution, and rollback capabilities:

**Pre-commit validation**:
1. Verify the working directory is a git repository
2. Verify the target branch is checked out
3. Stage specified files (or all changes if `files: all`)
4. Validate that staged changes are non-empty (unless `allow_empty: true`)
5. Run pre-commit hooks if `pre_commit_checks: true`

**Commit creation**:
- Formats the message using Conventional Changelog if `commit_type` is provided
- Adds `Co-authored-by: <name> <email>` trailer if `co_authored_by` is specified
- Signs the commit if `sign_commit: true` and signing is configured

**Rollback on failure**: If `rollback_on_failure: true` (default) and any post-commit operation fails (e.g., push), the helper automatically rolls back the commit with `git reset --soft HEAD~1`, preserving the staged changes for retry.

**Output**: Returns structured JSON with `commit_sha`, `commit_message`, `files_changed`, and `stats` (insertions, deletions).

### 21.22 PR Reviewer: Restricted Bash with curl for Reviewer Authentication

The PR Reviewer agent has `bash: "*": deny` with a selective exception for `curl *: allow`. Combined with `edit: deny`, this makes the PR Reviewer highly constrained — it can only:

- **Read** Forgejo data via MCP tools (PRs, issues, comments, reviews, diffs) — these authenticate as the primary bot, which is fine for reads
- **Write** reviews and comments via `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` — this authenticates as the reviewer bot, enabling formal APPROVED reviews
- Invoke two subagents: `ref-reader` (for specification context) and `ci-log-fetcher` (for CI failure analysis, with reviewer credential overrides)

It cannot edit any files, run arbitrary bash commands, or invoke any other subagents. The `curl` exception exists solely to enable reviewer-authenticated API calls (see Section 6.17.0 for the MCP token limitation). The Forgejo MCP write tools (`forgejo_create_pull_review`, `forgejo_create_issue_comment`) are explicitly denied in its permissions to prevent accidentally using the wrong account.

### 21.23 Branch Setup: Rebase-Only Policy

The Branch Setup agent creates or checks out branches with a strict rebase-only policy:

**Workflow**:
1. Checkout and pull the base branch (default: `master`, but supports any base for dependent branch stacking)
2. Check if the target branch exists on the remote
3. If exists: fetch, checkout, and rebase onto the base branch
4. If not: create new branch from the base branch
5. Verify the current branch

**Critical rules**:
- **Never merge, always rebase** — no merge commits are permitted
- **Rebase conflicts are NOT auto-resolved** — if a rebase has conflicts, the agent reports the conflict details and aborts the rebase. The caller must handle conflicts.
- **Dependent branch support**: By accepting a `base_branch` parameter (not just `master`), the agent supports stacking branches for dependent issues.

**Permissions**: `edit: deny` — the agent only runs git commands, never modifies files directly.

---

## 22. Division of Responsibilities and Redundancy Model

!!! abstract "Purpose of This Section"

    This section provides an exhaustive, responsibility-first view of the entire agent system. For each system responsibility, it identifies every agent that participates, describes that agent's specific role, and highlights the **redundancy layers** that ensure no single agent's failure creates a gap. The system is designed with **defense-in-depth**: critical responsibilities are covered by two, three, or even four independent agents, each approaching the responsibility from a different angle. Where an agent is mentioned under a responsibility, a cross-reference link to that agent's main specification section is provided. Conversely, each agent's specification section contains a back-reference table listing all responsibilities it participates in (see Sections [7.8](#78-product-builder-responsibilities), [8.1.7](#817-implementation-pool-supervisor-responsibilities), etc.).

!!! tip "How to Read This Section"

    **By responsibility**: Start with the [Responsibility Index](#220-responsibility-index-categorized) to find a specific responsibility (R-01 through R-144). Each entry links to a detail section with a goal statement, redundancy depth, agent role table, and sub-responsibilities.

    **By agent**: Go to the agent's specification section (Sections 7–12) and look for its "Responsibilities" subsection. Each entry links back to the corresponding R-item detail. Every supervisor also inherits 13 [universal responsibilities](#79-universal-supervisor-responsibilities-all-18-supervisors).

    **By category**: Browse the 8 categories (A–H) in the index. Each category is subdivided into 2–8 sub-categories grouping related responsibilities.

    **By redundancy**: See Section [22.145](#22145-redundancy-analysis-summary) for the redundancy depth distribution, highest-redundancy responsibilities, most cross-referenced agents, and the five named redundancy patterns.

    **Scale**: 144 named responsibilities, 8 categories, 29 sub-categories, 30 agent back-reference tables covering ~50 agents.

### 22.0 Responsibility Index (Categorized)

#### Category A — Development Lifecycle

*The complete code pipeline from planning through merge — 50 responsibilities covering how work is planned, claimed, implemented, tested, reviewed, fixed, merged, and closed. This is the largest category because it encompasses the core value-delivery chain.*

**A.1 — Planning and Work Setup**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-03](#223-r-03-work-planning-and-decomposition) | Work Planning and Decomposition | Double | Epic Planner, Architecture Supervisor |
| [R-68](#2268-r-68-epic-and-legendary-closure-evaluation) | Epic and Legendary Closure Evaluation | Double | Epic Planner, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-69](#2269-r-69-orphaned-issue-and-epic-remediation) | Orphaned Issue and Epic Remediation | Triple | Epic Planner, Backlog Groomer, Watchdog |
| [R-24](#2224-r-24-work-item-claiming-and-coordination) | Work Item Claiming and Coordination | Double | Implementation Worker, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-49](#2249-r-49-pr-ownership-detection-and-work-scoring) | PR Ownership Detection and Work Scoring | Single | Implementation Pool |
| [R-98](#2298-r-98-issue-dispatch-priority-ordering-rules) | Issue Dispatch Priority Ordering Rules | Single | Implementation Pool |
| [R-119](#22119-r-119-difficulty-evaluator-5-criteria-assessment) | Difficulty Evaluator 5-Criteria Assessment | Single | Difficulty Evaluator |

**A.2 — Implementation and Testing**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-04](#224-r-04-issue-implementation) | Issue Implementation | Single (crash recovery) | Implementation Pool, Implementation Worker |
| [R-93](#2293-r-93-subtask-wave-dispatch-and-parallel-conflict-resolution) | Subtask Wave Dispatch and Parallel Conflict Resolution | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-56](#2256-r-56-meaningful-change-verification) | Meaningful Change Verification | Single | Subtask Loop |
| [R-31](#2231-r-31-progressive-model-escalation) | Progressive Model Escalation | Single | Subtask Loop, Tier Selectors |
| [R-25](#2225-r-25-test-writing-and-tdd-lifecycle) | Test Writing and TDD Lifecycle | Double | Behave Tester, Robot Tester, Implementation Worker |

**A.3 — Quality Gates**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-06](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) | Quality Gate Enforcement | Triple | Subtask Loop, PR CI Test Fixer, System Watchdog |
| [R-110](#22110-r-110-per-gate-independent-tier-tracking) | Per-Gate Independent Tier Tracking | Single | Subtask Loop |
| [R-111](#22111-r-111-periodic-diagnostics-at-opus-tier) | Periodic Diagnostics at Opus Tier | Single | Subtask Loop |
| [R-91](#2291-r-91-amend-only-commit-protocol-for-ci-fixes) | Amend-Only Commit Protocol for CI Fixes | Single | PR CI Test Fixer |

**A.4 — PR Creation and Review**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-26](#2226-r-26-pr-creation-and-metadata-inheritance) | PR Creation and Metadata Inheritance | Double | PR Creator, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-05](#225-r-05-code-review-and-quality-assessment) | Code Review and Quality Assessment | Double | PR Review Pool, PR Reviewer |
| [R-52](#2252-r-52-dual-account-review-authentication) | Dual-Account Review Authentication | Single | PR Reviewer |
| [R-53](#2253-r-53-anti-pattern-and-code-smell-detection) | Anti-Pattern and Code Smell Detection | Triple | PR Reviewer, Architecture Guard, Bug Hunt Pool |
| [R-97](#2297-r-97-review-feedback-type-based-routing) | Review Feedback Type-Based Routing | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-112](#22112-r-112-pr-concurrent-work-conflict-matrix) | PR Concurrent Work Conflict Matrix | Single (shared protocol) | All PR-modifying agents |

**A.5 — PR Fixing and CI Remediation**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-07](#227-r-07-pr-fixing-and-ci-remediation) | PR Fixing and CI Remediation | Single | Implementation Pool (PR-first priority with progressive escalation) |
| [R-27](#2227-r-27-ci-log-retrieval-and-diagnosis) | CI Log Retrieval and Diagnosis | Single (shared tool) | CI Log Fetcher, System Watchdog |
| [R-94](#2294-r-94-deep-context-gathering-before-pr-fixes) | Deep Context Gathering Before PR Fixes | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-95](#2295-r-95-fix-attempt-loop-prevention-and-stuck-detection) | Fix Attempt Loop Prevention and Stuck Detection | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-96](#2296-r-96-pr-lifecycle-monitoring-loop) | PR Lifecycle Monitoring Loop | Single | Implementation Worker |

**A.6 — Merging and Post-Merge**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-54](#2254-r-54-three-tier-approval-detection) | Three-Tier Approval Detection | Single (shared protocol) | PR Merge Pool, Implementation Worker |
| [R-99](#2299-r-99-pr-merge-seven-criteria-checklist) | PR Merge Seven Criteria Checklist | Single | PR Merge Pool |
| [R-100](#22100-r-100-blocking-review-temporal-detection) | Blocking Review Temporal Detection | Single | PR Merge Pool, Implementation Worker |
| [R-08](#228-r-08-pr-merging-and-post-merge-verification) | PR Merging and Post-Merge Verification | Double | PR Merge Pool, Implementation Worker |
| [R-55](#2255-r-55-post-merge-state-verification) | Post-Merge State Verification | Triple | PR Merge Pool, Implementation Worker, System Watchdog |
| [R-28](#2228-r-28-issue-closure-and-post-merge-cleanup) | Issue Closure and Post-Merge Cleanup | Triple | Implementation Worker, Backlog Groomer, PR Merge Pool |
| [R-102](#22102-r-102-merged-pr-issue-closure-with-dependency-cleanup) | Merged PR Issue Closure with Dependency Cleanup | Triple | Backlog Groomer, Implementation Worker, PR Merge Pool |

**A.7 — Git Operations**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-29](#2229-r-29-commit-formatting-and-git-operations) | Commit Formatting and Git Operations | Single (delegation) | Git Committer, Commit Message Formatter |
| [R-30](#2230-r-30-branch-management-and-rebase) | Branch Management and Rebase | Double | Branch Setup, PR Merge Pool |
| [R-59](#2259-r-59-pr-description-preservation) | PR Description Preservation | Double | PR Editor, Spec Evolution |
| [R-77](#2277-r-77-push-conflict-recovery-protocol) | Push Conflict Recovery Protocol | Single (shared) | All pushing agents |

**A.8 — Lifecycle Events**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-65](#2265-r-65-specification-pr-monitoring-and-lifecycle) | Specification PR Monitoring and Lifecycle | Double | Product Builder, Spec Evolution |
| [R-66](#2266-r-66-finding-validation-gate-before-issue-filing) | Finding Validation Gate Before Issue Filing | Triple | Bug Hunt, Test Infra, UAT |
| [R-67](#2267-r-67-product-completion-verification) | Product Completion Verification | Single | Product Verifier |
| [R-93](#2293-r-93-subtask-wave-dispatch-and-parallel-conflict-resolution) | Subtask Wave Dispatch and Parallel Conflict Resolution | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-94](#2294-r-94-deep-context-gathering-before-pr-fixes) | Deep Context Gathering Before PR Fixes | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-95](#2295-r-95-fix-attempt-loop-prevention-and-stuck-detection) | Fix Attempt Loop Prevention and Stuck Detection | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-96](#2296-r-96-pr-lifecycle-monitoring-loop) | PR Lifecycle Monitoring Loop | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-97](#2297-r-97-review-feedback-type-based-routing) | Review Feedback Type-Based Routing | Single | Implementation Worker |
| [R-98](#2298-r-98-issue-dispatch-priority-ordering-rules) | Issue Dispatch Priority Ordering Rules | Single | Implementation Pool |
| [R-112](#22112-r-112-pr-concurrent-work-conflict-matrix) | PR Concurrent Work Conflict Matrix | Single (shared protocol) | All PR-modifying agents |
| [R-91](#2291-r-91-amend-only-commit-protocol-for-ci-fixes) | Amend-Only Commit Protocol for CI Fixes | Single | PR CI Test Fixer |

#### Category B — Quality Assurance and Bug Detection

*Ensuring code quality through CI health monitoring, testing standards, correctness verification, and proactive bug detection. The deepest redundancy in the system (quadruple depth) exists here because quality failures cascade into every other category.*

**B.1 — CI and Build Health**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-32](#2232-r-32-master-ci-health-emergency-response) | Master CI Health Emergency Response | Double | System Watchdog, Quality Enforcer |
| [R-12](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) | Merge Safety and Branch Protection | Triple | PR Merge Pool, System Watchdog, Quality Enforcer |
| [R-71](#2271-r-71-never-disable-checks-safety-constraint) | Never-Disable-Checks Safety Constraint | Triple | Test Infra Pool, PR Reviewer, System Watchdog |

**B.2 — Testing Quality and Stability**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-33](#2233-r-33-flaky-test-detection-and-prevention) | Flaky Test Detection and Prevention | Double | PR Reviewer, System Watchdog |
| [R-34](#2234-r-34-test-stability-enforcement) | Test Stability Enforcement | Triple | Implementation Worker, PR Reviewer, Subtask Loop |
| [R-101](#22101-r-101-flaky-test-16-pattern-detection) | Flaky Test 16-Pattern Detection Checklist | Single | PR Reviewer |
| [R-70](#2270-r-70-tdd-workflow-awareness-in-bug-reports) | TDD Workflow Awareness in Bug Reports | Double | Bug Hunt Pool, Implementation Worker |

**B.3 — Code Quality and Correctness**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-62](#2262-r-62-implementation-correctness-verification) | Implementation Correctness Verification | Double | Implementation Reviewer, Milestone Reviewer |
| [R-120](#22120-r-120-milestone-reviewer-holistic-integration-review) | Milestone Reviewer Holistic Integration Review | Single (post-milestone) | Milestone Reviewer |
| [R-53](#2253-r-53-anti-pattern-and-code-smell-detection) | Anti-Pattern and Code Smell Detection | Triple | PR Reviewer, Architecture Guard, Bug Hunt Pool |
| [R-14](#2214-r-14-codebase-coherence-and-technical-debt) | Codebase Coherence and Technical Debt | Triple | Architecture Guard, Bug Hunt Pool, PR Reviewer |

**B.4 — Proactive Bug Detection**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-16](#2216-r-16-bug-detection-and-proactive-quality-assurance) | Bug Detection and Proactive Quality Assurance | Quadruple | Bug Hunt Pool, UAT Test Pool, PR Reviewer, Architecture Guard |
| [R-66](#2266-r-66-finding-validation-gate-before-issue-filing) | Finding Validation Gate Before Issue Filing | Triple | Bug Hunt, Test Infra, UAT |
| [R-86](#2286-r-86-open-pr-awareness-before-bug-filing) | Open PR Awareness Before Bug Filing | Double | UAT Test Pool, Bug Hunt Pool |

#### Category C — Ticket Hygiene and Metadata Management

*Maintaining the integrity of Forgejo's issue and PR metadata — labels, state transitions, dependency links, milestones, body format, and backlog cleanliness. The Backlog Groomer (24 responsibilities) and System Watchdog (24 responsibilities) provide overlapping coverage here, creating the system's strongest redundancy zone.*

**C.1 — Labels and Metadata**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-09](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) | Label and Metadata Correctness | Quadruple | Forgejo Label Manager, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-58](#2258-r-58-label-name-to-id-resolution-and-conflict-prevention) | Label-Name-to-ID Resolution and Conflict Prevention | Single (centralized) | Forgejo Label Manager |
| [R-35](#2235-r-35-pr-issue-label-synchronization) | PR-Issue Label Synchronization | Double | Backlog Groomer, PR Creator |
| [R-36](#2236-r-36-story-point-estimation) | Story Point Estimation | Double | Backlog Groomer, Human Liaison |
| [R-127](#22127-r-127-label-creation-prohibition-enforcement) | Label Creation Prohibition Enforcement | Triple | Permission blocks, Bash URL blocking, Label Manager delegation |

**C.2 — Issue State and Lifecycle**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-10](#2210-r-10-issue-state-lifecycle-management) | Issue State Lifecycle Management | Quadruple | Issue State Updater, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-60](#2260-r-60-state-transition-precondition-enforcement) | State Transition Precondition Enforcement | Double | Issue State Updater, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-128](#22128-r-128-valid-state-transition-matrix-enforcement) | Valid State Transition Matrix Enforcement | Single (enforced by updater) | Issue State Updater |

**C.3 — Dependencies and Hierarchy**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-11](#2211-r-11-dependency-and-hierarchy-integrity) | Dependency and Hierarchy Integrity | Triple | Epic Planner, Backlog Groomer, System Watchdog |
| [R-103](#22103-r-103-wrong-direction-dependency-auto-fix) | Wrong-Direction Dependency Auto-Fix | Double | Backlog Groomer, Epic Planner |
| [R-104](#22104-r-104-priority-consistency-cross-check) | Priority Consistency Cross-Check | Double | Backlog Groomer, System Watchdog |

**C.4 — Milestones and Scope**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-37](#2237-r-37-milestone-assignment-and-scope-guard) | Milestone Assignment and Scope Guard | Triple | New Issue Creator, Epic Planner, UAT Test Pool |
| [R-129](#22129-r-129-priority-ordering-rules-for-milestone-work) | Priority Ordering Rules for Milestone Work | Double | Implementation Pool, System Watchdog |

**C.5 — Issue and PR Body Format**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-38](#2238-r-38-issue-body-and-dod-compliance) | Issue Body and Definition of Done Compliance | Double | Backlog Groomer, New Issue Creator |
| [R-130](#22130-r-130-standard-issue-body-format-enforcement) | Standard Issue Body Format Enforcement | Double | New Issue Creator, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-131](#22131-r-131-standard-pr-body-format-enforcement) | Standard PR Body Format Enforcement | Double | PR Creator, PR Description Writer |
| [R-115](#22115-r-115-issue-analyzer-structured-data-extraction) | Issue Analyzer Structured Data Extraction | Single (subagent) | Issue Analyzer |
| [R-116](#22116-r-116-subtask-checker-fuzzy-match-checkbox-toggle) | Subtask Checker Fuzzy Match Checkbox Toggle | Single (subagent) | Subtask Checker |
| [R-117](#22117-r-117-issue-note-writer-logical-reference-protocol) | Issue Note Writer Logical Reference Protocol | Single (subagent) | Issue Note Writer |
| [R-118](#22118-r-118-pr-status-analyzer-5-dimension-framework) | PR Status Analyzer 5-Dimension Framework | Single (subagent) | PR Status Analyzer |

**C.6 — Backlog Hygiene**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-15](#2215-r-15-backlog-hygiene-and-duplicate-detection) | Backlog Hygiene and Duplicate Detection | Double | Backlog Groomer, Test Infrastructure Pool |
| [R-72](#2272-r-72-stale-pr-detection-and-remediation) | Stale PR Detection and Remediation | Double | Backlog Groomer, System Watchdog |
| [R-39](#2239-r-39-blocked-chain-analysis-and-resolution) | Blocked Chain Analysis and Resolution | Double | Backlog Groomer, System Watchdog |

#### Category D — Architecture and Specification Governance

*Keeping the specification current with implementation discoveries and preventing architectural drift. The spec flows in both directions: Architecture Supervisor writes spec forward (design → code), Spec Evolution corrects it backward (code → design), and Architecture Guard detects divergence.*

**D.1 — Specification Lifecycle**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-13](#2213-r-13-specification-and-architecture-governance) | Specification and Architecture Governance | Double | Architecture Supervisor, Spec Evolution |
| [R-40](#2240-r-40-specification-first-development-enforcement) | Specification-First Development Enforcement | Double | Epic Planner, Architecture Supervisor |
| [R-73](#2273-r-73-spec-change-classification-and-two-step-proposal) | Spec Change Classification and Two-Step Proposal | Double | Architecture Supervisor, Spec Evolution |
| [R-92](#2292-r-92-proactive-specification-scan-protocol) | Proactive Specification Scan Protocol | Single | Spec Evolution |

**D.2 — Codebase Scanning**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-74](#2274-r-74-sha-based-idle-detection-for-scanners) | SHA-Based Idle Detection for Scanners | Single | Architecture Guard, Spec Evolution |
| [R-132](#22132-r-132-subagent-specialization-principle) | Subagent Specialization Principle | Universal | All agents |

#### Category E — Operational Health and Coordination

*The system's "plumbing" — keeping supervisors alive, workers dispatched, sessions healthy, tracking issues coordinated, errors retried, clones isolated, credentials validated, and logs structured. These responsibilities are invisible when working but catastrophic when broken.*

**E.1 — Supervisor and Worker Management**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-01](#221-r-01-supervisor-liveness-and-health-monitoring) | Supervisor Liveness and Health Monitoring | Triple | Product Builder, System Watchdog |
| [R-50](#2250-r-50-worker-session-adoption-and-lifecycle) | Worker Session Adoption and Lifecycle | Single per pool | Pool Supervisors |
| [R-41](#2241-r-41-worker-dispatch-and-sliding-window-management) | Worker Dispatch and Sliding Window Management | Single per pool | Pool Supervisors |
| [R-81](#2281-r-81-tiered-worker-allocation-formula) | Tiered Worker Allocation Formula | Single | Product Builder |
| [R-76](#2276-r-76-async-session-health-detection) | Async Session Health Detection | Double | Async Agent Monitor, Product Builder |
| [R-75](#2275-r-75-session-naming-and-tag-convention) | Session Naming and Tag Convention | Single (centralized) | Async Agent Manager |
| [R-122](#22122-r-122-prompt-async-mandatory-for-supervisor-launch) | prompt_async Mandatory for Supervisor Launch | Single (architectural) | Product Builder |
| [R-123](#22123-r-123-all-18-supervisors-mandatory-verification) | All 18 Supervisors Mandatory Verification | Single | Product Builder |
| [R-126](#22126-r-126-no-duplicate-supervisor-instances) | No Duplicate Supervisor Instances | Double | Product Builder, System Watchdog |

**E.2 — Automation Tracking and Coordination**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-20](#2220-r-20-automation-tracking-and-inter-agent-coordination) | Automation Tracking and Inter-Agent Coordination | Triple | Automation Tracking Manager, Backlog Groomer, System Watchdog |
| [R-42](#2242-r-42-tracking-issue-cleanup-and-deduplication) | Tracking Issue Cleanup and Deduplication | Triple | Automation Tracking Manager, Backlog Groomer, Each Supervisor |
| [R-43](#2243-r-43-announcement-lifecycle-management) | Announcement Lifecycle Management | Double | Each Supervisor, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-133](#22133-r-133-announcement-consumption-priority-protocol) | Announcement Consumption Priority Protocol | Universal | All supervisors (per consumption table) |
| [R-45](#2245-r-45-estimated-cycle-interval-maintenance) | Estimated Cycle Interval Maintenance | Double | Automation Tracking Manager, System Watchdog |

**E.3 — Crash Recovery and State Persistence**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-21](#2221-r-21-crash-recovery-and-state-persistence) | Crash Recovery and State Persistence | Multi-level | Every agent (per level) |
| [R-84](#2284-r-84-checkpoint-and-state-persistence-via-forgejo-comments) | Checkpoint and State Persistence via Forgejo Comments | Single (per worker) | Implementation Worker |
| [R-44](#2244-r-44-context-window-self-management) | Context Window Self-Management | Single (per agent) | Long-running agents |
| [R-124](#22124-r-124-convergence-check-algorithm) | Convergence Check Algorithm | Single | Product Builder |
| [R-80](#2280-r-80-non-return-guarantee-enforcement) | Non-Return Guarantee Enforcement | Single | Product Builder |
| [R-125](#22125-r-125-product-builder-never-edits-or-merges-directly) | Product Builder Never Edits or Merges Directly | Single (prohibition) | Product Builder |

**E.4 — Universal Agent Protocols**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-51](#2251-r-51-forgejo-api-pagination-and-truncation-recovery) | Forgejo API Pagination and Truncation Recovery | Universal | All Forgejo-querying agents |
| [R-57](#2257-r-57-clone-isolation-and-safety) | Clone Isolation and Safety | Single (protocol) | Repo Isolator, All cloning agents |
| [R-56b](#2256b-r-56b-transient-error-classification-and-retry) | Transient Error Classification and Retry | Single (shared module) | All agents via Error Handling module |
| [R-113](#22113-r-113-guaranteed-resource-cleanup-via-cleanupmanager) | Guaranteed Resource Cleanup via CleanupManager | Universal | All resource-acquiring agents |
| [R-114](#22114-r-114-startup-credential-validation-gate) | Startup Credential Validation Gate | Universal | All agents at startup |
| [R-63](#2263-r-63-bot-signature-standardization) | Bot Signature Standardization | Single (centralized) | Forgejo Signature Appender |
| [R-78](#2278-r-78-structured-logging-protocol) | Structured Logging Protocol | Single (shared module) | All agents |
| [R-79](#2279-r-79-performance-monitoring-and-health-scoring) | Performance Monitoring and Health Scoring | Single (shared module) | All agents |
| [R-61](#2261-r-61-reference-material-caching-and-distribution) | Reference Material Caching and Distribution | Single (optimization) | Ref Material Loader |
| [R-134](#22134-r-134-internet-access-restriction) | Internet Access Restriction | Universal | All autonomous agents (denied) |

**E.5 — Content Formatting Standards**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-83](#2283-r-83-issue-comment-type-formatting-standards) | Issue Comment Type Formatting Standards | Single (centralized) | Issue Comment Formatter |
| [R-82](#2282-r-82-timeline-surgical-edit-and-append-only-protocol) | Timeline Surgical Edit and Append-Only Protocol | Single | Timeline Supervisor |
| [R-77](#2277-r-77-push-conflict-recovery-protocol) | Push Conflict Recovery Protocol | Single (shared) | All pushing agents |

#### Category F — Human Interaction and Escalation

*The bridge between autonomous agents and human developers. Covers issue triage, MoSCoW prioritization, developer assignment, comment response, feedback incorporation, timeout management, and escalation. The Human Liaison (14 responsibilities) is the fastest-polling agent (2-minute cycle) to minimize human wait time.*

**F.1 — Issue Triage and Prioritization**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-02](#222-r-02-issue-triage-verification-and-priority-management) | Issue Triage, Verification, and Priority Management | Triple | Project Owner, Human Liaison |
| [R-107](#22107-r-107-moscow-decision-framework) | MoSCoW Decision Framework | Single (exclusive) | Project Owner |
| [R-108](#22108-r-108-strategic-priority-re-evaluation) | Strategic Priority Re-evaluation | Single | Project Owner |
| [R-48](#2248-r-48-developer-expertise-discovery-and-assignment) | Developer Expertise Discovery and Assignment | Double | Project Owner, Human Liaison |
| [R-109](#22109-r-109-developer-assignment-decision-gate) | Developer Assignment Decision Gate | Single | Project Owner |

**F.2 — Human Communication and Monitoring**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-18](#2218-r-18-human-communication-and-escalation) | Human Communication and Escalation | Double | Human Liaison, System Watchdog |
| [R-105](#22105-r-105-human-liaison-10-step-monitoring-loop) | Human Liaison 10-Step Monitoring Loop | Single | Human Liaison |
| [R-106](#22106-r-106-closed-issue-comment-response-patterns) | Closed Issue Comment Response Patterns | Single | Human Liaison |
| [R-46](#2246-r-46-feedback-incorporation-protocol) | Feedback Incorporation Protocol | Single | Human Liaison |
| [R-47](#2247-r-47-human-response-timeout-management) | Human Response Timeout Management | Double | Human Liaison, Project Owner |
| [R-48](#2248-r-48-developer-expertise-discovery-and-assignment) | Developer Expertise Discovery and Assignment | Double | Project Owner, Human Liaison |

#### Category G — Strategic Governance and Self-Improvement

*Long-term system health — scope creep prevention, agent self-improvement, documentation maintenance, and security enforcement. These responsibilities operate on longer timescales (every 10+ cycles) than the development lifecycle categories.*

**G.1 — Scope and Milestone Governance**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-19](#2219-r-19-scope-management-and-milestone-control) | Scope Management and Milestone Control | Triple | Backlog Groomer, Epic Planner, New Issue Creator |
| [R-87](#2287-r-87-five-state-project-classification) | Five-State Project Classification | Single | Product Builder |
| [R-88](#2288-r-88-uat-feature-area-retest-on-code-changes) | UAT Feature Area Retest on Code Changes | Single | UAT Test Pool |
| [R-67](#2267-r-67-product-completion-verification) | Product Completion Verification | Single | Product Verifier |

**G.2 — Self-Improvement and Evolution**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-22](#2222-r-22-self-improvement-and-agent-evolution) | Self-Improvement and Agent Evolution | Double | Agent Evolution, System Watchdog |
| [R-85](#2285-r-85-agent-improvement-pattern-detection) | Agent Improvement Pattern Detection | Double | Agent Evolution, System Watchdog |
| [R-90](#2290-r-90-watchdog-alert-response-and-dispatch) | Watchdog Alert Response and Dispatch | Single | System Watchdog |

**G.3 — Documentation and Reporting**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-17](#2217-r-17-documentation-and-timeline-maintenance) | Documentation and Timeline Maintenance | Single (exclusive domains) | Documentation Supervisor, Timeline Supervisor |
| [R-89](#2289-r-89-documentation-generation-by-type) | Documentation Generation by Type | Single | Documentation Supervisor |

**G.4 — Security**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-23](#2223-r-23-security-and-credential-management) | Security and Credential Management | Double | Shared Credential Security module, System Watchdog |
| [R-134](#22134-r-134-internet-access-restriction) | Internet Access Restriction | Universal | All autonomous agents (denied) |

#### Category H — Project Standards and CONTRIBUTING.md Compliance

*The non-negotiable project conventions that every code-writing, test-writing, and PR-creating agent must follow. These are enforced at implementation time (workers), review time (PR Reviewer), and audit time (System Watchdog), creating triple redundancy on every standard.*

**H.1 — Code Standards**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-64](#2264-r-64-nox-routing-enforcement) | Nox Routing Enforcement | Universal | All code-executing agents |
| [R-135](#22135-r-135-file-organization-enforcement) | File Organization Enforcement | Triple | Implementation Worker, PR Reviewer, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-136](#22136-r-136-static-typing-and-type-ignore-prohibition) | Static Typing and `type: ignore` Prohibition | Triple | Typecheck Fixer, PR Reviewer, System Watchdog |
| [R-137](#22137-r-137-maximum-file-size-enforcement-500-lines) | Maximum File Size Enforcement (500 Lines) | Double | Implementation Worker, PR Reviewer |

**H.2 — Testing Standards**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-138](#22138-r-138-testing-framework-selection-rules) | Testing Framework Selection Rules | Triple | Behave Tester, Robot Tester, PR Reviewer |
| [R-139](#22139-r-139-coverage-threshold-enforcement-97-percent) | Coverage Threshold Enforcement (97%) | Triple | Coverage Improver, PR Merge Pool, System Watchdog |

**H.3 — Commit and PR Standards**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-140](#22140-r-140-conventional-changelog-commit-format) | Conventional Changelog Commit Format | Double | Commit Message Formatter, PR Reviewer |
| [R-131](#22131-r-131-standard-pr-body-format-enforcement) | Standard PR Body Format Enforcement | Double | PR Creator, PR Reviewer |

**H.4 — Startup and Lifecycle Protocols**

| ID | Responsibility | Redundancy | Primary Agent(s) |
|----|---------------|-----------|-------------------|
| [R-141](#22141-r-141-supervisor-mandatory-startup-sequence) | Supervisor Mandatory Startup Sequence | Universal | All 18 supervisors |
| [R-142](#22142-r-142-startup-state-recovery-before-tracking-creation) | Startup State Recovery Before Tracking Creation | Universal | All 18 supervisors |
| [R-143](#22143-r-143-dual-status-issue-cleanup-defense-in-depth) | Dual Status Issue Cleanup (Defense-in-Depth) | Double | Each supervisor, Backlog Groomer |
| [R-144](#22144-r-144-tier-selector-pure-pass-through-constraint) | Tier Selector Pure Pass-Through Constraint | Single (architectural) | Four tier selectors |

---

### Category A — Development Lifecycle

### 22.1 R-01: Supervisor Liveness and Health Monitoring

**Goal**: Ensure all 18 supervisors remain alive and productive at all times. A dead or zombied supervisor creates a gap in system functionality that can cascade into stalled work.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Detection Method | Response |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|----------|
| **1 (Primary)** | [Product Builder](#7-product-builder-tier-0-orchestrator) | 60-second monitoring loop queries session status via Async Agent Manager; immediately re-launches any dead supervisor (Section [4.3](#43-the-monitoring-loop)) | Session no longer appears in OpenCode Server API response | Re-launch with same parameters within 60 seconds |
| **2 (Deep Inspection)** | [Product Builder](#7-product-builder-tier-0-orchestrator) | Every 5 heartbeats (~5 minutes), reads last 100 messages from each pool supervisor to verify active worker dispatching (Section [7.6](#76-phase-details)) | No worker activity patterns in last 15 minutes | Announces zombie warning, may force-restart |
| **3 (Behavioral Analysis)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 6 reads last 5 messages from each supervisor session and analyzes tool call patterns to detect zombies, error loops, and identical-call loops (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Sleep-only pattern (3+ consecutive sleep calls with no productive actions), error-loop pattern (3+ consecutive errors), identical-call loop (same tool+args 3+ times) | Creates diagnostic issue, may dispatch restart |
| **3b (Staleness)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 11 monitors tracking issue age against the agent's self-reported estimated cycle interval; triggers recovery when overdue by >2× (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Tracking issue age exceeds 2× estimated cycle interval | Session termination, root cause analysis, diagnostic issue creation |

**Why triple redundancy?** Layer 1 catches hard crashes (session disappears). Layer 2 catches soft failures (session alive but supervisor not dispatching workers — "zombie" state caused by context exhaustion). Layer 3 catches behavioral failures (session alive, supervisor appears active, but stuck in a non-productive loop). Each layer catches a distinct failure mode invisible to the other layers.

---

### 22.2 R-02: Issue Triage, Verification, and Priority Management

**Goal**: Every new issue must be triaged (verified or rejected), assigned appropriate priority and MoSCoW labels, and placed in the correct milestone. No issue should remain in `State/Unverified` indefinitely.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Scope | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-------|-------|
| **1 (Strategic Triage)** | [Project Owner](#910-project-owner-supervisor) | Primary triager. Polls every 5 minutes for `State/Unverified` issues. Assigns MoSCoW labels (**exclusive authority** — no other agent may assign MoSCoW). Sets priority labels. Transitions to `State/Verified` or `State/Wont Do`. Assigns developers. (Section [9.10](#910-project-owner-supervisor)) | All unverified issues (skips `needs feedback`, skips issues being triaged by Human Liaison) | MoSCoW decision framework: Must Have = spec requirements + blockers + security; Should Have = usability + non-blocking; Could Have = polish + advanced |
| **2 (Human-Created Issues)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | Triages human-created issues with full triage authority. Polls every 2 minutes. Verifies, sets priority, plans implementation. Responds to human comments and PR reviews. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | Human-originated activity only (new issues, comments, reviews, label changes) | Has the fastest polling interval (2 min) to minimize human wait time |
| **3 (Gap Filler)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 4 auto-fixes missing labels: adds `State/Unverified` if no state label, adds `Priority/Backlog` if no priority, infers `Type/*` from title/body. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | All open issues with missing required labels | Safety net — catches issues that slip through triage |
| **3b (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 4 verifies priority/milestone ordering is correct; flags issues worked on out of order. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | All in-progress issues across milestones | Catches systemic priority violations |

**Redundancy pattern**: The Project Owner performs strategic triage; the Human Liaison provides fast-response triage for human activity; the Backlog Groomer fills any gaps with safe defaults; the Watchdog audits the result.

---

### 22.3 R-03: Work Planning and Decomposition

**Goal**: Transform high-level milestones and product vision into a structured hierarchy of Legendary → Epic → Issue with correct dependency chains, subtasks, and definitions of done.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Trigger | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|---------|-------|
| **1 (Specification)** | [Architecture Supervisor](#91-architecture-supervisor) | Writes and extends `docs/specification.md`. Defines module boundaries, interfaces, data models, and patterns. Major changes go through PRs with `needs feedback` label. (Section [9.1](#91-architecture-supervisor)) | New milestones without spec coverage, spec ambiguities, human requests | "Most consequential agent — bad architecture cascades everywhere" |
| **2 (Decomposition)** | [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Decomposes architecture into Forgejo Epics and Issues with proper dependency chains (child BLOCKS parent). Four phases: hierarchy enforcement, closure evaluation, specification compliance, traditional planning. (Section [9.2](#92-epic-planning-supervisor)) | Milestones without issues, epics without children, human requests | Enforces Legendary→Epic→Issue hierarchy |
| **3 (Gap Detection)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Passes 12-13 detect incomplete epics and legendaries; creates missing child issues when gaps are identified. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Epics with zero or incomplete children, legendaries with missing child epics | Redundant check on Epic Planner's completeness |
| **4 (Human Requests)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | Step 7 (every 10th cycle): Epic/Legendary gap analysis. Also decomposes human-created issues into implementation plans. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | Human-created issues needing decomposition, periodic gap analysis | Handles the human-originated subset of planning |

**Redundancy pattern**: Architecture provides the what (specification), Epic Planner provides the how (decomposition), Backlog Groomer catches what the Planner missed (gap detection), Human Liaison handles human-originated planning requests.

---

### 22.24 R-24: Work Item Claiming and Coordination

**Goal**: Prevent two workers from implementing the same issue simultaneously. Ensure claimed issues have active heartbeats and stale claims are detected.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Claiming)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Posts `[CLAIM: agent=<name>, session=<id>, timestamp=<ISO>]` comment before starting work. Sends `[HEARTBEAT:]` comments every 10 minutes. Posts `[RELEASE: reason=completed\|failed\|timeout]` on exit, guaranteed via try/finally. Checks existing claims before claiming — aborts if issue already claimed within 30 minutes. (Section [6.12](#612-work-item-claiming-protocol)) | Claim posting, heartbeat maintenance, release guarantee, stale claim detection |
| **2 (Stale Detection)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 3: detects `State/In Progress` issues with no comments for >48 hours, implying stale or abandoned claims. Posts staleness comment. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Stale claim detection via activity monitoring |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Generating unique claim IDs (MD5 hash), parsing existing claims for freshness, wrapping all work in try/finally for release guarantee, conflict matrix evaluation (code changes conflict with other code changes, merges conflict with everything, reviews conflict with nothing).

---

### 22.49 R-49: PR Ownership Detection and Work Scoring

**Goal**: Correctly classify every open PR as bot-owned (needs automated shepherding) or human-created (leave for human workflows), then score bot PRs by work urgency to prioritize the dispatch queue.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Detection)** | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | Ownership check: `pr.user.login == FORGEJO_USERNAME`. FORBIDDEN checks: PR body content, PR labels, branch name patterns. Historical bug: 26+ PRs were misclassified as "external" because ownership was checked via body content. (Section [6.21](#621-pr-ownership-detection)) | Login identity comparison only |
| **2 (Scoring)** | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | Work scoring algorithm: `ready-to-merge`=95, `review-feedback` (REQUEST_CHANGES)=90, `review-feedback` (COMMENT)=85, `ci-fix`=85, `merge-conflicts`=80, `awaiting-review`=60, orphan PRs=100. Age bonus: `min(age_days * 2, 10)`. (Section [8.1.2](#812-pr-first-priority-gate)) | Numerical priority scoring per PR |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Extracting linked issue numbers from PR body (`Closes #N`, `Fixes #N`, `closes #N`, `fixes #N`, `Close #N`, `Fix #N`), fetching review state per PR, CI-Blocker priority override (score=infinity, bypasses PR-first gate).

---

### 22.4 R-04: Issue Implementation

**Goal**: Transform verified issues into merged code on master through an automated pipeline of implementation, testing, quality gates, PR creation, review, and merge.

**Redundancy Depth: Single chain (with crash recovery at every level)**

| Stage | Agent | Role | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-------|
| **Dispatch** | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | Finds verified issues, dispatches workers via Async Agent Manager, manages sliding window of N workers. Enforces PR-first priority gate. (Section [8.1](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor)) | Only agent that dispatches implementation workers |
| **Execution** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Dual-mode worker. In issue-impl mode: claims issue, creates clone, implements subtasks, creates PR, shepherds to merge. In pr-fix mode: fixes CI, handles review feedback, resolves conflicts. (Section [10.1](#101-implementation-worker)) | One instance per branch/PR; owns work to merge |
| **Subtask Orchestration** | [Subtask Loop](#113-subtask-loop-workflow) | Manages progressive escalation for each subtask. Evaluates difficulty, selects starting tier, loops through implement→test→quality gates→review until passing. (Section [11.3](#113-subtask-loop-workflow)) | Escalates haiku→codex→sonnet→opus on failure |
| **Code Writing** | [Implementer](#114-specialized-workers) | Writes code for subtasks. Never writes tests. Verifies domain model fields exist before referencing them. (Section [11.4](#114-specialized-workers), [21.4](#214-implementer-domain-model-verification-rule)) | Inherits model from tier selector |
| **Unit Testing** | [Behave Tester](#114-specialized-workers) | Writes BDD/Gherkin unit tests in `features/`. (Section [11.4](#114-specialized-workers)) | Inherits model from tier selector |
| **Integration Testing** | [Robot Tester](#114-specialized-workers) | Writes Robot Framework integration tests in `robot/`. No mocking. (Section [11.4](#114-specialized-workers)) | Inherits model from tier selector |
| **Performance Testing** | [ASV Benchmarker](#114-specialized-workers) | Writes Airspeed Velocity benchmarks in `benchmarks/`. (Section [11.4](#114-specialized-workers)) | Launched in parallel with unit/integration testers |

**Why only single depth?** Implementation is inherently sequential — you cannot have two agents implementing the same issue simultaneously. Redundancy comes instead from **crash recovery**: the Implementation Worker checks for existing PRs/branches (Section [10.1.6](#1016-issue-implementation-work-claiming-and-crash-recovery)), the Subtask Loop preserves escalation state in HTML comments (Section [16](#16-escalation-state-persistence)), and the Pool Supervisor re-dispatches workers for failed slots.

**Sub-responsibilities**: Subtask dependency analysis and wave grouping, parallel wave dispatch, post-wave conflict detection (`git status --porcelain`), auto-resolution of merge conflicts between parallel subtasks, sequential re-run of conflicting subtasks, out-of-scope work detection and new issue creation, subtask checkbox updates via Subtask Checker, implementation notes via Issue Note Writer.

---

### 22.25 R-25: Test Writing and TDD Lifecycle

**Goal**: Every implementation change has corresponding unit tests (Behave/BDD), integration tests (Robot Framework), and optionally performance benchmarks (ASV). Bug fixes follow the TDD lifecycle with `@tdd_expected_fail` tags.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Test Creation)** | [Behave Tester](#114-specialized-workers) | Writes BDD/Gherkin unit tests in `features/`. Tags bug-fix tests with `@tdd_issue`, `@tdd_issue_<N>`, `@tdd_expected_fail`. (Section [11.4](#114-specialized-workers)) | Creates `.feature` files with Given/When/Then scenarios |
| **1b (Integration)** | [Robot Tester](#114-specialized-workers) | Writes Robot Framework integration tests in `robot/`. No mocking allowed. Tags with `tdd_issue_<N>` for bug fixes. (Section [11.4](#114-specialized-workers)) | Creates `.robot` files with keyword-driven tests |
| **1c (Performance)** | [ASV Benchmarker](#114-specialized-workers) | Writes Airspeed Velocity benchmarks in `benchmarks/` for performance-sensitive code. (Section [11.4](#114-specialized-workers)) | Creates benchmark classes with `time_*` and `mem_*` methods |
| **2 (TDD Tag Cleanup)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | After bug fix: searches `features/` and `robot/` for `@tdd_issue_N` tests, removes `@tdd_expected_fail` tags (indicating bug is fixed), keeps permanent `@tdd_issue` and `@tdd_issue_N` tags. (Section [6.13](#613-tdd-issue-test-tags-system)) | Tag removal from passing TDD tests |
| **2b (TDD Verification)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | For bug-fix PRs: verifies all `@tdd_issue_N` tests had `@tdd_expected_fail` removed. (Section [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Verifies TDD tag correctness in reviews |
| **3 (Parallel Launch)** | [Subtask Loop](#113-subtask-loop-workflow) | Launches Behave, Robot, and ASV testers simultaneously via async-agent-manager. Monitors with 10-second polling (10-minute timeout). Restarts failed writers. (Section [21.5](#215-subtask-loop-async-test-writer-launching)) | Parallel test writer orchestration |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Test determinism enforcement (no `time.sleep()`, no unseeded randomness, no shared filesystem, no network dependencies), test isolation, proper mock placement in `features/mocks/`, Coverage Improver writes additional tests when coverage drops below 97%.

---

### 22.56 R-56: Meaningful Change Verification

**Goal**: Prevent empty or trivial implementation attempts from consuming expensive quality gate runs. Reject attempts with fewer than 3 functional lines of code.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1** | [Subtask Loop](#113-subtask-loop-workflow) | After implementer returns: runs `git diff --stat` and `git diff`. Counts functional lines (excluding comments, whitespace, empty lines, import-only additions). If <3 functional lines: resets working directory with `git checkout -- .`, increments attempt counter, triggers tier escalation. (Section [21.5](#215-subtask-loop-async-test-writer-launching)) | Diff analysis, functional line counting, attempt rejection |

**Why this matters**: Without this check, a model that produces only comments or import statements would pass to quality gates, which would pass (no code to fail), and the subtask would be "completed" with no actual implementation.

---

### 22.26 R-26: PR Creation and Metadata Inheritance

**Goal**: Every PR is created with correct metadata: closing keywords, inherited labels from the linked issue, milestone, dependency links (PR BLOCKS issue), and proper state transitions.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Creation)** | [PR Creator](#121-pr-management-agents) | Creates PR via Forgejo API. Inherits ALL labels from issue (Type/, Priority/, MoSCoW/, Points/). Adds `State/In Review`. Creates dependency link (PR BLOCKS issue). Transitions issue to `State/In Review` via Issue State Updater. Post-creation compliance verification: re-reads PR and issue to verify all metadata correct. (Section [12.1](#121-pr-management-agents)) | PR creation, label inheritance, dependency linking, state transition, compliance verification |
| **2 (Sync Verification)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 19: detects PRs missing labels that exist on the linked issue. Auto-fixes by copying Priority/, MoSCoW/, Points/ labels. Updates milestone to match. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Post-creation label synchronization |

**Sub-responsibilities**: PR description generation via PR Description Writer (Summary, Changes, Design Decisions, Testing, Modules Affected, Related Issues, Checklist), Forgejo Label Manager delegation for label application, PR body preservation on subsequent updates (Forgejo API deletes body if not re-sent).

---

### 22.5 R-05: Code Review and Quality Assessment

**Goal**: Every PR receives at least one independent code review before merge, assessing code quality, specification alignment, security, and correctness.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Focus | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-------|-------|
| **1 (Code Quality)** | [PR Review Pool](#82-pr-review-pool-supervisor) → [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Dispatches N/2 parallel reviewers. Each reviewer reads diff, checks CI, loads spec context, reviews against rotating focus areas (10 categories). Posts formal APPROVED/REQUEST_CHANGES review via dual-account protocol. (Sections [8.2](#82-pr-review-pool-supervisor), [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Architecture alignment, error handling, test quality, security, performance, code patterns, specification compliance, and more | Uses `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` for formal reviews (different account from PR author) |
| **2 (Functional Correctness)** | [Implementation Reviewer](#155-implementation-reviewer) | Post-quality-gate review invoked by the Subtask Loop AFTER lint, typecheck, unit tests, integration tests, and coverage all pass. Verifies the code actually fulfills the subtask requirements. (Section [15.5](#155-implementation-reviewer)) | Does the code do what the subtask requires? (Not style — that is the linter's job) | Returns APPROVE or REJECT with specific file/function references |
| **3 (Flaky Test Detection)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Specifically watches for non-deterministic test patterns: `time.sleep()`, `random.choice()` without seed, shared filesystem paths, timing-sensitive assertions. Performs CI pattern analysis across multiple PRs. (Section [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Tests that pass locally but fail in CI, or fail intermittently | Catches a class of issues that quality gates miss |

**Redundancy pattern**: Layer 1 reviews the PR as a whole (quality, patterns, architecture); Layer 2 reviews each subtask individually (functional correctness); Layer 3 adds specialized detection for a specific class of hard-to-catch issues (flaky tests).

---

### 22.52 R-52: Dual-Account Review Authentication

**Goal**: PR reviews must be posted as a different Forgejo user than the PR author to enable formal `APPROVED` state. The MCP tools cannot override their server-level authentication token, so the reviewer must use `curl` for all write operations.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (architectural constraint)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (READ ops)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Uses Forgejo MCP tools (`forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index`, `forgejo_list_pull_reviews`, etc.) authenticated as primary bot — fine for reads. (Section [6.17.0](#6170-mcp-token-limitation-and-the-curl-workaround)) | MCP tools for all reads |
| **2 (WRITE ops)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Uses `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` header for: (1) formal review via POST to pulls/reviews API, (2) backup issue comment via POST to issues/comments API. MCP write tools (`forgejo_create_pull_review`, `forgejo_create_issue_comment`) are explicitly DENIED. (Section [6.17.2](#6172-dual-account-review-protocol)) | curl-based writes as reviewer account |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Credential passing from PR Review Pool (all 3 reviewer credentials: PAT, username, password), backup comment posting after every formal review, `ci-log-fetcher` invocation with reviewer credential overrides.

---

### 22.53 R-53: Anti-Pattern and Code Smell Detection

**Goal**: Detect recurring anti-patterns that indicate systemic problems rather than individual code issues: repetitive fix attempts, type system workarounds, test quality issues, and architectural drift.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Patterns Detected |
|-------|-------|------|--------------------------|
| **1 (Per-PR)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Watches for: repetitive fix attempts (same fix tried multiple times indicating misunderstanding), type system workarounds (excessive `cast()`, `Any`, complex generics), test quality issues (testing implementation details, mocked-to-pass, brittle assertions), architectural drift (new patterns without spec update, boundary violations "just this once"). (Section [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Implementation-level anti-patterns |
| **2 (Codebase-wide)** | [Architecture Guard](#95-architecture-guard) | Seven checks including: inconsistent patterns (different error handling styles across modules), module coupling violations (cross-module imports violating boundaries), technical debt indicators (>50 line functions, >4 nesting levels, TODO/FIXME). (Section [9.5](#95-architecture-guard)) | Structural anti-patterns |
| **3 (Per-module)** | [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor) | Pass 8 (code consistency): identifies inconsistent patterns within and across modules. Pass 6 (type safety): detects type system abuse. (Section [8.6.2](#862-nine-analysis-passes)) | Module-level anti-patterns |

---

### 22.6 R-06: Quality Gate Enforcement

**Goal**: No code reaches master without passing ALL quality checks: lint, typecheck, unit tests, integration tests, and ≥97% coverage. Quality gates must be enforced at PR creation time, CI pipeline time, and post-merge audit time.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | When | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|------|-------|
| **1 (Pre-PR)** | [Subtask Loop](#113-subtask-loop-workflow) → [Lint Fixer](#114-specialized-workers), [Typecheck Fixer](#114-specialized-workers), [Unit Test Runner](#114-specialized-workers), [Integration Test Runner](#114-specialized-workers), [Coverage Improver](#114-specialized-workers) | Runs all five quality gates BEFORE creating a PR. Each gate has its own independent tier that starts at Haiku and escalates independently. 5 inner passes per tier before escalation. (Section [11.3](#113-subtask-loop-workflow)) | Before PR creation | Catches issues before they enter the CI pipeline |
| **2 (Post-PR CI)** | [PR CI Test Fixer](#1211-critical-pr-management-behavioral-rules) | The ONLY agent that amends commits and force-pushes. Fixes CI failures after PR creation by running quality gates in the clone, amending the commit, and force-pushing. Loops until all checks pass. (Section [12.1](#121-pr-management-agents)) | After PR creation, when CI fails | Handles issues that the pre-PR gates missed (environment differences, test isolation) |
| **3 (Post-Merge Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 0: monitors master CI health (EMERGENCY priority). Audit 1: verifies recent master commits have passing CI. Audit 2: verifies branch protection is active. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Continuously, every 5 minutes | Catches cases where code reached master despite quality gates |
| **3b (Enforcement Repair)** | [Quality Enforcer](#151-quality-enforcer) | Dispatched by Watchdog when quality gate violations are detected. Repairs branch protection rules. Creates `Priority/CI-Blocker` issues for code merged without CI. (Section [15.1](#151-quality-enforcer)) | On Watchdog dispatch | Nuclear option — creates blocking issues when gates are bypassed |

**Redundancy pattern**: Layer 1 prevents bad code from entering a PR. Layer 2 fixes issues that CI catches after PR creation. Layer 3 audits that the entire pipeline is working and repairs it when it is not. Each layer operates at a different point in the code's journey to master.

---

### 22.7 R-07: PR Fixing and CI Remediation

**Goal**: Ensure every PR with failing CI or review feedback gets an active worker to fix it. No PR should remain in a failing state indefinitely.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Strategy | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|----------|-------|
| **1 (PR-First Gate)** | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | Enforces absolute PR-first priority: NO new issues dispatched until every bot-created PR has an active worker. Analyzes all open PRs, scores them by work type, and dispatches workers in pr-fix mode. (Section [8.1.2](#812-pr-first-priority-gate)) | Worker re-assignment: existing workers shift to PR fixing | Guarantees every PR gets attention before new work starts |
| **2 (Progressive Escalation)** | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | Four-tier model escalation (haiku → codex → sonnet → opus) with same-problem detection. Workers use `ci-log-fetcher` for failure analysis. Human escalation via `needs feedback` label after exhausting all tiers. (Section [8.1](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor)) | Cost-optimized fixing with guaranteed human fallback | Escalation state tracked via PR/issue comments |
| **3 (Struggling Detection)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 5b detects PRs with 3+ failed fix attempts; requests human assistance after threshold. Audit 5 tracks PR aging and review coverage. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Escalation to humans when automation is stuck | Safety net for cases where automated fixing loops |

**Redundancy pattern**: The Implementation Pool guarantees every PR gets a worker (throughput). The PR Fix Pool adds intelligence (root cause analysis). The Watchdog adds escalation (human assistance when both automated approaches fail).

---

### 22.8 R-08: PR Merging and Post-Merge Verification

**Goal**: Approved PRs with passing CI are merged promptly, and every merge is verified to have actually succeeded (guarding against Forgejo's silent merge failures).

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Mechanism | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-----------|-------|
| **1 (Dedicated Merger)** | [PR Merge Pool](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor) | Singleton that continuously polls for merge-ready PRs every 5 minutes. Verifies all 7 merge criteria (Section [8.3.2](#832-merge-criteria)). Handles pre-merge rebase. Uses `safe_merge_pr()` with mandatory post-merge verification. (Section [8.3](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor)) | Polls PRs → verifies criteria → rebases if needed → merges → verifies | Primary merge path for all PRs |
| **2 (Worker Merge)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | In `ready-to-merge` work type: verifies approvals via 3-tier detection, rebases if needed, delegates to `safe_merge_pr()`. (Section [10.1.4](#1014-pr-fix-mode-workflow)) | Triggered by Implementation Pool when PR is scored as "ready to merge" | Backup merge path — catches PRs faster than the 5-minute poll cycle |
| **3 (Merge Verification)** | [Shared Merge Safety module](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd) | `safe_merge_pr()` function mandates: (1) call merge API, (2) immediately call `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index`, (3) verify `merged == true` AND `state == "closed"`. Never post success without verification. (Section [6.18](#618-merge-safety-protocol), [8.3.4](#834-mandatory-merge-verification-protocol)) | Post-merge API verification | Prevents the false "merged successfully" bug (Forgejo silently fails when branch is behind) |
| **4 (False-Merge Monitoring)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Monitors for "merged successfully" comments on PRs that are still open. (Section [13.6](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd)) | Cross-checks comment text against PR state | Catches any case where merge verification itself was bypassed |

**Redundancy pattern**: Two independent agents can merge PRs (Merge Pool and Worker). The merge safety module enforces verification in both paths. The Watchdog provides a final audit layer for false-merge detection.

---

### 22.54 R-54: Three-Tier Approval Detection

**Goal**: Reliably detect PR approval from any source — formal reviews, review body keywords, or issue comments — with proper handling of blocking reviews that may have been superseded by later approvals.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (shared protocol, multiple consumers)**

| Tier | Source | Mechanism | Priority |
|------|--------|-----------|----------|
| **1** | Formal Reviews | Reviews with `state == "APPROVED"` from `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME` | Primary path |
| **2** | Review Bodies | Reviews with `state in ("COMMENT", "PENDING")` whose body contains approval keywords | Fallback |
| **3** | Issue Comments | Comments containing approval keywords (case-insensitive) | Durable backup |

**Consumers**: [PR Merge Pool](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor) (`check_pr_approval()`), [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) (`has_required_approvals()`), [Shared Merge Safety](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd) (`check_flexible_approval()`).

**Sub-responsibilities**: Approval keyword matching against specific set (`lgtm`, `approved`, `decision: approved`, `ready to merge`, `looks good`, `ship it`, `merge it`, `good to go`, plus emoji `✅`, `👍`). Blocking review recency check: `REQUEST_CHANGES` only blocks if more recent than latest approval from ANY tier.

---

### 22.55 R-55: Post-Merge State Verification

**Goal**: After every merge API call, verify via a second API call that the merge actually succeeded. The `forgejo_merge_pull_request` tool returns success even when merges silently fail (e.g., branch behind base). Never post "merged" without verification.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Inline)** | [PR Merge Pool](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor), [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | After `forgejo_merge_pull_request`: immediately call `forgejo_get_pull_request_by_index`, check `merged == true` AND `state == "closed"`. On failure: attempt rebase and retry. (Section [8.3.4](#834-mandatory-merge-verification-protocol)) | Post-merge API verification |
| **2 (Shared)** | [Shared Merge Safety](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd) | `safe_merge_pr()` includes mandatory verification step. Rule 6: "Never post 'merged successfully' without verifying `merged == true`". (Section [13.6](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd)) | Protocol-level enforcement |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Monitors for "merged successfully" comments on PRs that are still open — the telltale sign of a false merge. (Section [13.6](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd)) | Cross-check comment text against PR state |

---

### 22.59 R-59: PR Description Preservation

**Goal**: When editing a PR (changing labels, milestone, dependencies, or any other field), the full PR description must be re-sent in the API call. The Forgejo API silently deletes the description if the `body` field is omitted from update calls.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Editor)** | [PR Editor](#121-pr-management-agents) | Primary invariant: before ANY edit, fetches current PR data, extracts body, includes it in every update payload. Even for label-only or milestone-only changes. (Section [12.1.1](#1211-critical-pr-management-behavioral-rules)) | Fetch-before-edit protocol |
| **2 (Spec Evolution)** | [Spec Evolution](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor) | Explicitly warned about this bug: "When updating PRs via the Forgejo API, always re-send the full PR body." (Section [9.6](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor)) | Duplicate enforcement in spec-related PRs |

**Historical context**: This was documented as "The #1 Bug Prevented" in PR management. Multiple PR descriptions were silently deleted before this protocol was established.

---

### 22.27 R-27: CI Log Retrieval and Diagnosis

**Goal**: When CI fails, agents must retrieve detailed logs to diagnose the specific failure. Since the Forgejo Actions API is unavailable, this requires cookie-based web authentication.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (shared tool)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Retrieval Tool)** | [CI Log Fetcher](#123-git-and-repository-agents) | Cookie-based web authentication: POSTs to `/user/login` with `_csrf` token, stores cookies in `/tmp/forgejo_cookies.txt`. Navigates to actions page, extracts run ID from HTML, downloads job logs. Maps CI jobs to artifact names (lint→ci-logs-lint, typecheck→ci-logs-typecheck, etc.). Cleans up cookie file after use. (Section [10.1.5](#1015-ci-artifact-mapping)) | Web login, CSRF extraction, run ID parsing, log download, cookie cleanup |
| **2 (Consumer: Watchdog)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 0: uses same cookie-based approach (stores in `/tmp/watchdog_cookies.txt`) to investigate master CI failures. Parses Behave failure patterns (`FAILED...features/*.feature...line N`), Robot patterns (`FAIL...robot/*.robot`), and generic test failure patterns. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Log parsing for specific failing test identification |
| **3 (Consumer: Workers)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker), [PR CI Test Fixer](#1211-critical-pr-management-behavioral-rules), [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | All invoke `ci-log-fetcher` as subagent to retrieve CI logs for their respective purposes (fixing, reviewing, diagnosing). (Sections [10.1](#101-implementation-worker), [12.1](#121-pr-management-agents)) | CI log consumption for diagnosis and fixing |

**Sub-responsibilities**: CSRF token extraction from login page HTML, session cookie management, CI job-to-artifact name mapping (8 mappings), log file path resolution, HTML parsing for workflow run IDs.

---

### 22.28 R-28: Issue Closure and Post-Merge Cleanup

**Goal**: After a PR is merged, the linked issue must be closed, state transitioned to `State/Completed`, stale dependency links removed, and the issue properly finalized.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Immediate)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | After successful merge verification: transitions issue to `State/Completed` via Issue State Updater, posts final comment with statistics, deletes clone directory. (Section [10.1](#101-implementation-worker)) | State transition, final comment, cleanup |
| **1b (Immediate)** | [PR Merge Pool](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor) | After verified merge: updates linked issues to `State/Completed`. (Section [8.3](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor)) | State transition after merge |
| **2 (Catch-up)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 14: for PRs merged in last 24 hours, checks if linked issues are still open. Removes satisfied dependency links (merged PRs, closed issues). Closes issues and transitions to `State/Completed`. Posts diagnostic comment for issues with remaining blockers. Pass 6: detects closeable issues (DoD complete, branch merged). (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Stale dependency removal, issue closure catch-up |
| **3 (Reconciliation)** | [State Reconciler](#152-state-reconciler) | Rule 3: issues with merged PRs must be closed and marked `State/Completed`. (Section [15.2](#152-state-reconciler)) | Bulk state correction |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Dependency link removal via REST API DELETE, clone directory deletion, bot signature on final comments.

---

### 22.29 R-29: Commit Formatting and Git Operations

**Goal**: All commits follow Conventional Changelog format, are pushed to both origin and upstream remotes, and use proper author attribution.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (delegation chain)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Formatting)** | [Commit Message Formatter](#2118-commit-message-formatter-three-part-format) | Constructs three-part commit message: exact commit message from issue Metadata, implementation description body, `ISSUES CLOSED: #N` footer. Read-only agent (edit:deny, bash:deny). (Section [21.18](#2118-commit-message-formatter-three-part-format)) | Message formatting from issue metadata |
| **2 (Execution)** | [Git Committer](#123-git-and-repository-agents) | Stages all changes, commits with formatted message, pushes to BOTH remotes in sequence: `git push -u origin <branch>` then `git push upstream <branch>`. Both pushes required. Reports errors with full details. (Section [12.1](#121-pr-management-agents)) | Staging, committing, dual-remote pushing |
| **2b (Safe Commit)** | [Git Commit Helper](#2121-git-commit-helper-safe-commit-with-rollback) | Pre-commit validation (verify repo, branch, staged changes). Optional pre-commit hooks. `Co-authored-by` trailers. Rollback on failure (`git reset --soft HEAD~1`). Returns structured JSON with sha, message, files, stats. (Section [21.21](#2121-git-commit-helper-safe-commit-with-rollback)) | Validated commit with rollback capability |
| **3 (Amend-only)** | [PR CI Test Fixer](#1211-critical-pr-management-behavioral-rules) | The ONLY agent that amends commits. `git commit --amend --no-edit` followed by `git push --force-with-lease` to both remotes. Never creates new commits on existing PRs. (Section [12.1](#121-pr-management-agents)) | Commit amendment, force-push with lease |

---

### 22.30 R-30: Branch Management and Rebase

**Goal**: Feature branches are always created from and kept current with master via rebase (never merge). Rebase conflicts are detected and handled appropriately.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Branch Setup)** | [Branch Setup](#2123-branch-setup-rebase-only-policy) | Creates or checks out branches with strict rebase-only policy. Supports dependent branch stacking via `base_branch` parameter. If branch exists: fetches, checkouts, rebases onto base. If not: creates from base. Rebase conflicts are NOT auto-resolved — aborts and reports. (Section [21.23](#2123-branch-setup-rebase-only-policy)) | Branch creation, checkout, rebase-only enforcement |
| **2 (Pre-merge Rebase)** | [PR Merge Pool](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor) | Pre-merge staleness check: compares `merge_base` vs `base.sha`. If behind: calls `pr-merge-worker` as a **blocking subagent** which clones via repo-isolator, rebases, force-pushes with lease, waits for CI, and attempts fast-forward merge. With conflicts: worker resolves by reviewing git history or posts comment. (Section [8.3.5](#835-pre-merge-rebase-protocol)) | Pre-merge rebase via blocking worker, conflict detection |
| **3 (Worker Rebase)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Before committing: rebases branch onto latest master (stash, fetch, rebase, pop). Resolves simple conflicts automatically (imports, whitespace, version numbers). Falls back to no-rebase if auto-resolution fails. Before merge: compares `merge_base` vs `base.sha`, rebases if behind, waits 120s for CI. (Section [10.1](#101-implementation-worker)) | Pre-commit rebase, pre-merge rebase |

---

### 22.31 R-31: Progressive Model Escalation

**Goal**: Start with the cheapest viable model (Haiku) and automatically escalate through Codex, Sonnet, Opus as failures accumulate, optimizing cost while ensuring complex tasks succeed.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Orchestration)** | [Subtask Loop](#113-subtask-loop-workflow) | Manages escalation schedule: haiku(2x)→codex→sonnet→opus(forever). Distinguishes transient errors (retries without incrementing) from genuine failures (increments attempt counter). Each quality gate has independent tier escalation. 5 inner passes per tier before escalation. Persists state as HTML comments in PR. (Section [11.2](#112-escalation-schedule), [11.3](#113-subtask-loop-workflow)) | Escalation scheduling, transient error detection, state persistence |
| **2 (Tier Selection)** | [Tier Selectors](#111-tier-selector-architecture) (`tier-haiku`, `tier-codex`, `tier-sonnet`, `tier-opus`) | Pure pass-through agents that set the model via their frontmatter and invoke the specified worker. Must not modify, interpret, or filter context. (Section [11.1](#111-tier-selector-architecture)) | Model selection, context forwarding |
| **3 (Difficulty Pre-assessment)** | [Difficulty Evaluator](#124-reference-and-knowledge-agents) | Five-axis assessment (scope, complexity, novelty, integration, ambiguity). Conservative bias: when in doubt, recommends LOWER tier. (Section [12.4](#124-reference-and-knowledge-agents)) | Starting tier recommendation |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Meaningful change verification (rejects <3 functional lines), per-gate independent tier tracking, escalation state persistence as `<!-- ESCALATION-STATE: -->` HTML comments, diagnostic comments every 3 attempts at opus tier.

---

### Category B — Quality Assurance and Bug Detection

### 22.62 R-62: Implementation Correctness Verification

**Goal**: After all quality gates pass (lint, typecheck, tests, coverage), verify the code actually fulfills the subtask requirements — not just that it compiles and passes tests. Detect tests that pass trivially or test the wrong thing.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Per-Subtask)** | [Implementation Reviewer](#155-implementation-reviewer) | Invoked AFTER quality gates pass. Enumerates each requirement from subtask description, verifies code fulfilling each requirement exists AND tests verifying each requirement exist. Rejects with specific file/function references and suggested fixes. Does NOT reject for style (linter's job). (Section [15.5](#155-implementation-reviewer)) | Requirement-by-requirement cross-reference |
| **2 (Per-Milestone)** | [Milestone Reviewer](#2117-milestone-reviewer-holistic-review-protocol) | After all issues in a milestone are merged: reviews integrated codebase across 8 areas (integration gaps, API consistency, spec coverage, test quality, error handling coherence, performance, documentation, tech debt). Creates issues for problems found. (Section [21.17](#2117-milestone-reviewer-holistic-review-protocol)) | Cross-issue integration verification |

**Sub-responsibilities**: "Would-fail" reasoning (would this test actually fail if the implementation were broken?), detecting tests that pass trivially (assert True, empty mocks), verifying domain model fields exist before referencing (Implementer rule from Section [21.4](#214-implementer-domain-model-verification-rule)).

---

### 22.32 R-32: Master CI Health Emergency Response

**Goal**: Master branch must NEVER have failing tests. Any master CI failure blocks all future PR merges, creating a system-wide deadlock. This responsibility has EMERGENCY priority — higher than any other audit.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Detection & Triage)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 0 (CRITICAL): checks latest master commit CI status. For each failing check: logs into Forgejo web UI, retrieves workflow run logs, parses for specific failing test scenarios (Behave patterns, Robot patterns, generic patterns). Creates `Priority/CI-Blocker` issue for each identified failing test with skip instructions. Creates `Priority/High` follow-up fix issue for the underlying problem. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Failure detection, log parsing, CI-Blocker issue creation |
| **2 (Enforcement Repair)** | [Quality Enforcer](#151-quality-enforcer) | Dispatched by Watchdog. Creates `Priority/CI-Blocker` issues for code merged without CI. Verifies/repairs branch protection rules via REST API. (Section [15.1](#151-quality-enforcer)) | CI-Blocker issue creation, branch protection repair |
| **3 (Priority Override)** | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | `Priority/CI-Blocker` issues bypass the PR-first priority gate — the only exception. Dispatches workers immediately regardless of pending PR queue. (Section [8.1.2](#812-pr-first-priority-gate)) | Priority override for CI blockers |

---

### 22.9 R-09: Label and Metadata Correctness

**Goal**: Every issue and PR has the correct labels (State, Type, Priority, MoSCoW, Points), milestone assignment, and PR-issue label synchronization. Label application must use the centralized Label Manager to prevent label-ID errors.

**Redundancy Depth: Quadruple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | When | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|------|-------|
| **1 (Application)** | [Forgejo Label Manager](#2110-forgejo-label-manager-five-operations) | Centralized label operations. Handles name-to-organization-ID mapping. Five operations: validation, application, reading, inference, compliance checking. (Section [12.5](#125-label-and-forgejo-agents)) | Every label operation by every agent | The ONLY agent (besides Issue State Updater) permitted to call `forgejo_add_issue_labels` |
| **2 (Initial Assignment)** | Every issue-creating agent: [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor), [New Issue Creator](#122-issue-management-agents), [Project Owner](#910-project-owner-supervisor), [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor), [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor), [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor), [Test Infra Pool](#87-test-infrastructure-pool-supervisor), [Architecture Guard](#95-architecture-guard), [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Sets initial labels when creating issues, via Label Manager delegation. (Section [6.19](#619-label-application-delegation)) | At issue creation time | Responsible for getting labels right the first time |
| **3 (Verification & Auto-Fix)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 4: auto-fixes missing State, Type, Priority labels. Pass 5: checks priority consistency. Pass 19: synchronizes PR labels with issue labels (Priority, MoSCoW, Points, State, milestone). (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Every 5-minute grooming cycle | Catches and fixes any gaps left by Layer 2 |
| **4 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 7: verifies all issues have required labels and dependency links. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Every 5-minute watchdog cycle | Detects systemic labeling failures |
| **4b (Bulk Fix)** | [State Reconciler](#152-state-reconciler) | Dispatched by Watchdog for mass label correction. Rule 6: every issue must have State, Type, and Priority labels. (Section [15.2](#152-state-reconciler)) | On Watchdog dispatch | Nuclear option for systemic label drift |

**Redundancy pattern**: Label Manager ensures correct application (mechanism). Creating agents set initial labels (first pass). Groomer verifies and fixes (second pass). Watchdog audits (third pass). Reconciler bulk-fixes (emergency fourth pass). This quadruple redundancy exists because incorrect labels cause cascading failures: wrong priority → wrong work order → milestone delays.

---

### 22.10 R-10: Issue State Lifecycle Management

**Goal**: Every issue's `State/*` label accurately reflects its actual status at all times. Closed issues have terminal state labels. Issues with merged PRs are closed. Issues in `State/In Review` have open PRs.

**Redundancy Depth: Quadruple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Mechanism | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-----------|-------|
| **1 (Transitions)** | [Issue State Updater](#122-issue-management-agents) | Performs state transitions through 7-step process: read, validate, remove old, apply new, handle special cases, synchronize PRs, report. Retries 3× with exponential backoff. (Section [12.2](#122-issue-management-agents)) | Direct label manipulation via REST API (one of two agents permitted to do so) | The canonical state transition engine |
| **2 (Reconciliation)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 9: reconciles closed issue states (closed but wrong state label → auto-fix to State/Completed). Pass 4: detects State/In Review with no PR. Pass 6: detects closeable issues. Pass 14: closes issues whose PRs have been merged. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Scans all issues and cross-references with PR state | Catches issues where state transitions were missed or incomplete |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 3: checks closed issues with wrong state labels, In Review without PR, multiple State labels on same issue. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Cross-references issue state against Forgejo actual status | Detects systemic state integrity violations |
| **4 (Bulk Fix)** | [State Reconciler](#152-state-reconciler) | Eight reconciliation rules including: closed issues must have terminal labels, open issues must NOT have terminal labels, issues with merged PRs must be closed. (Section [15.2](#152-state-reconciler)) | Dispatched by Watchdog for mass correction | Handles large-scale state drift after system disruptions |

**Redundancy pattern**: Identical to label correctness (R-09). The Updater transitions (real-time), the Groomer reconciles (periodic), the Watchdog audits (periodic), the Reconciler bulk-fixes (on-demand). Four independent checks on the same invariant.

---

### 22.11 R-11: Dependency and Hierarchy Integrity

**Goal**: All dependency links follow correct directions (child BLOCKS parent Epic, Epic BLOCKS Legendary, PR BLOCKS issue). Every non-Epic/Legendary issue has a parent Epic. Every Epic has a parent Legendary.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Links Created/Verified | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|----------------------|-------|
| **1 (Creation)** | [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) — issue→epic→legendary links; [PR Creator](#121-pr-management-agents) — PR→issue links | Create dependency links with correct direction at creation time. (Sections [9.2](#92-epic-planning-supervisor), [12.1](#121-pr-management-agents)) | Epic Planner: child BLOCKS parent; PR Creator: PR BLOCKS issue | Responsible for getting direction right the first time |
| **2 (Verification & Auto-Fix)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 2: detects orphan issues (no parent Epic). Pass 10: auto-fixes missing dependency links by parsing issue body for "Parent Epic: #N". Pass 16: fixes wrong-direction dependencies (issue blocking PR → PR blocking issue) that create merge deadlocks. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | All dependency types: issue→epic, epic→legendary, PR→issue | Most active dependency fixer — catches and corrects wrong directions |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 8: verifies Epic→Legendary hierarchy intact, Epics have minimum children, no orphaned epics. Audit 7: verifies orphan issues and dependency links. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Hierarchy completeness and correctness | Detects systemic hierarchy violations |
| **3b (Bulk Fix)** | [State Reconciler](#152-state-reconciler) | Rule 7: fixes dependency link directions (child blocks parent Epic, Epic blocks Legendary, PR blocks issue). (Section [15.2](#152-state-reconciler)) | All dependency directions | Dispatched by Watchdog for mass correction |

**Redundancy pattern**: Creators set links (real-time). Groomer verifies and auto-fixes, including the critical wrong-direction fix that prevents merge deadlocks. Watchdog audits hierarchy completeness. Reconciler handles bulk corrections.

---

### 22.12 R-12: Merge Safety and Branch Protection

**Goal**: No code reaches master without passing CI. All merges use the `safe_merge_pr()` protocol with post-merge verification. Branch protection rules cannot be silently disabled.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | What It Protects | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|-------|
| **1 (Setup)** | [Project Bootstrapper](#153-project-bootstrapper) | Configures branch protection for master: status checks required, 1 approval, dismiss stale reviews, block on rejected, push disabled. (Section [15.3](#153-project-bootstrapper)) | Initial configuration | One-time setup; must be correct because it is the foundation |
| **2 (Enforcement)** | [Shared Merge Safety module](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd) | `safe_merge_pr()` enforces 7 mandatory rules: never call merge API directly, verify safety first, handle success/failure, no force_merge, no false success messages, check rebase needed. (Section [13.6](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd)) | Every merge attempt | Used by PR Merge Pool and Implementation Worker |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 1: verifies recent master commits have passing CI. Audit 2: verifies branch protection is active and correctly configured (status checks enabled, `status-check` context present, ≥1 required approval). (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Continuous verification that protection is intact | Catches silent disablement or misconfiguration |
| **4 (Repair)** | [Quality Enforcer](#151-quality-enforcer) | Dispatched by Watchdog. Repairs branch protection rules via REST API. Creates `Priority/CI-Blocker` issues for code merged without CI (absolute highest priority). (Section [15.1](#151-quality-enforcer)) | Recovery from violations | Does NOT revert commits — creates tracked issues for human review |

**Redundancy pattern**: Bootstrapper sets up protection (once). Merge Safety module enforces it per-merge (continuous). Watchdog audits that it has not been tampered with (periodic). Quality Enforcer repairs it when violations are detected (on-demand).

---

### 22.13 R-13: Specification and Architecture Governance

**Goal**: The project specification (`docs/specification.md`) accurately reflects the intended architecture, stays current with implementation discoveries, and drives implementation decisions.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Direction | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-----------|-------|
| **1 (Spec → Code)** | [Architecture Supervisor](#91-architecture-supervisor) | Writes and extends specification. Defines module boundaries, interfaces, data models. Monitors for new milestones without spec coverage, spec ambiguities, and human requests. Major changes go through PRs with `needs feedback` label. (Section [9.1](#91-architecture-supervisor)) | Specification drives implementation (forward-looking) | "Most consequential agent — bad architecture cascades everywhere" |
| **2 (Code → Spec)** | [Spec Evolution](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor) | Compares implementation against spec after merges. Updates spec where implementation found a better approach. Creates bug issues where implementation deviates incorrectly. Two-step proposal workflow with `needs feedback`. (Section [9.6](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor)) | Implementation corrects specification (backward-looking) | Critical rule: never removes unimplemented spec content |
| **3 (Drift Detection)** | [Architecture Guard](#95-architecture-guard) | Check 7: detects specification drift — implementation that has diverged from the specification. Creates `Type/Refactor` issues. (Section [9.5](#95-architecture-guard)) | Detects divergence in either direction | Uses Gemini 2.5 Pro's massive context window for full-codebase analysis |
| **4 (Milestone Review)** | [Milestone Reviewer](#2117-milestone-reviewer-holistic-review-protocol) | Area 3: verifies every specification requirement has corresponding implementation and test. (Section [21.17](#2117-milestone-reviewer-holistic-review-protocol)) | Post-milestone verification | Holistic check across the entire milestone's work |

**Redundancy pattern**: Architecture writes spec forward (creation). Spec Evolution corrects it backward (alignment). Architecture Guard detects drift (continuous monitoring). Milestone Reviewer verifies coverage (periodic).

---

### 22.40 R-40: Specification-First Development Enforcement

**Goal**: Features that require architectural decisions or API changes must go through a spec-change → ADR → implementation pipeline. No implementation of unspecified architecture.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Planning Gate)** | [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Phase 3 (Specification-First Compliance): identifies features requiring spec changes (keywords: architecture, design, interface, API, protocol, schema, model, integration). Creates ADR issue, spec update issue (depends on ADR), makes feature depend on spec update. Posts specification-first comment. (Section [9.2](#92-epic-planning-supervisor)) | ADR→Spec→Implementation dependency chain creation |
| **2 (Governance)** | [Architecture Supervisor](#91-architecture-supervisor) | Major architectural changes go through PRs with `needs feedback` label. Minor clarifications committed directly. (Section [9.1](#91-architecture-supervisor)) | Human-approval workflow for major changes |
| **3 (Feedback Channel)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | For features requiring spec changes: creates spec change issue, notes spec-updater will handle it, tracks spec PR, creates implementation issues when spec PR merges. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | Human-side spec change tracking |

---

### 22.14 R-14: Codebase Coherence and Technical Debt

**Goal**: The codebase maintains consistent patterns, avoids duplication, respects module boundaries, and accumulates minimal technical debt.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Analysis Type | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|--------------|-------|
| **1 (Proactive Scanning)** | [Architecture Guard](#95-architecture-guard) | Seven check categories: duplicate code (>70% similarity), inconsistent patterns, module coupling violations, API surface inconsistencies, technical debt indicators (>50 line functions, >4 nesting levels, TODO/FIXME), test quality, specification drift. Creates `Type/Refactor` issues. (Section [9.5](#95-architecture-guard)) | Codebase-wide, triggered by master SHA changes | Uses Gemini 2.5 Pro for massive context analysis |
| **2 (Per-Module Analysis)** | [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor) | Pass 8: code consistency analysis. Pass 9: data flow analysis. Identifies inconsistent patterns across modules. (Section [8.6.2](#862-nine-analysis-passes)) | Module-by-module, nine-pass deep analysis | Different perspective — code analysis rather than architecture review |
| **3 (Per-PR Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Focus areas 1 (architecture alignment), 4 (API consistency), 7 (code maintainability). Detects architectural drift and pattern violations per-PR. (Section [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Per-PR, with rotating focus areas | Catches issues at the point of introduction |

**Redundancy pattern**: Guard scans the whole codebase periodically (breadth). Bug Hunt analyzes each module deeply (depth). PR Reviewer catches issues as they are introduced (prevention). Three different angles on the same coherence goal.

---

### 22.33 R-33: Flaky Test Detection and Prevention

**Goal**: Identify and eliminate non-deterministic tests that pass sometimes and fail others, which erode CI reliability and cause false positives.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Per-PR Detection)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Code review red flags: `time.sleep()` or `datetime.now()` in test code without mocking, `random.choice()`/`random.randint()` without seed, shared filesystem paths between tests, tests that pass locally but fail in CI, timing-sensitive assertions. CI pattern analysis: intermittent failures, timeout errors. Multi-PR analysis: same tests failing across multiple PRs = master branch issue. Immediately requests changes for non-deterministic patterns. (Section [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Pattern detection in PR diffs, CI cross-analysis |
| **2 (Infrastructure Detection)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 9: monitors CI execution times (flags >30 minutes), detects recurring failures on same tests across different PRs. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Cross-PR failure pattern analysis |
| **2b (Infrastructure Analysis)** | [Test Infrastructure Pool](#87-test-infrastructure-pool-supervisor) | Area 4: dedicated flaky test analysis pass across the full test suite. (Section [8.7.2](#872-eight-analysis-areas)) | Systematic flaky test identification |

---

### 22.34 R-34: Test Stability Enforcement

**Goal**: All tests must be deterministic — no random behavior, timing dependencies, or external calls. Violations must be caught before they reach master.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Worker Rules)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Enforces strict test determinism rules: NEVER time-based dependencies, random values without seeding, filesystem races, network dependencies, order-dependent tests, uncontrolled async. ALWAYS: fixed test data, mock external deps, isolated temp filesystems, seeded random, proper isolation, synchronous operations. (Section [10.1.8](#1018-test-stability-requirements)) | Rule enforcement during implementation |
| **2 (Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Detects all six non-deterministic patterns in PR diffs and requests changes. (Section [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Pattern detection in code review |
| **3 (Quality Gate)** | [Subtask Loop](#113-subtask-loop-workflow) | Unit Test Runner and Integration Test Runner detect and fix flaky tests during quality gate execution. Test Fixer distinguishes tests that fail due to intentional behavior changes (update/remove) from tests exposing genuine bugs (fix code). (Section [11.3](#113-subtask-loop-workflow)) | Runtime failure detection and classification |

---

### 22.15 R-15: Backlog Hygiene and Duplicate Detection

**Goal**: The issue backlog is clean, free of duplicates, properly linked, and contains no stale or abandoned issues.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Scope | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-------|-------|
| **1 (Comprehensive Grooming)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | 19 analysis passes every 5 minutes: duplicate detection (issues only, NOT PRs), orphan detection, stale detection, label compliance, closeable issues, blocked chain analysis, body compliance, scope creep, PR health, and more. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | All open issues and PRs | The primary hygiene agent — most comprehensive |
| **2 (Self-Dedup)** | [Test Infrastructure Pool](#87-test-infrastructure-pool-supervisor) | Five mandatory dedup checks before filing any issue: keyword search, cross-area search, closed issues search, dedup proof in issue body, uncertainty avoidance. (Section [8.7.3](#873-duplicate-avoidance)) | Its own issue creation only | Documented as "#1 problem with this agent" — historical 48+ duplicates |
| **2b (Self-Dedup)** | [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor) | Finding validation: must have actual code evidence, verify environment assumptions, verify actionable, verify against actual codebase, severity must match evidence. (Section [21.8](#218-bug-hunt-clone-failure-handling-and-finding-validation)) | Its own issue creation only | Prevents filing issues about infrastructure failures |
| **2c (Self-Dedup)** | [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor) | Worker coordination through Forgejo comments to avoid duplicate testing. (Section [8.5](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor)) | Its own testing scope only | Prevents duplicate test-driven issues |

**Redundancy pattern**: Backlog Groomer provides comprehensive cross-agent hygiene. Issue-creating agents (Test Infra, Bug Hunt, UAT) each implement self-dedup to prevent duplicates at the source. The combination of source prevention and downstream detection creates double coverage.

---

### 22.58 R-58: Label-Name-to-ID Resolution and Conflict Prevention

**Goal**: Labels exist at the Forgejo organization level with numeric IDs. Agents must never reference labels by name in API calls — they must resolve names to org-level IDs first. Multiple labels in the same pattern group (e.g., two `State/` labels) must be prevented.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (centralized)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Resolution)** | [Forgejo Label Manager](#2110-forgejo-label-manager-five-operations) | Queries `GET /orgs/{org}/labels` to build name→ID mapping. Resolves label names to IDs before application. Detects and rejects requests for non-existent labels. Detects pattern conflicts (e.g., trying to add `State/Verified` when `State/In Progress` already exists) and removes the old one first. Enforces MoSCoW exclusivity (project owner only). (Section [21.10](#2110-forgejo-label-manager-five-operations)) | Name→ID mapping, conflict detection, pattern enforcement |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Label inference from content (title/body keyword analysis), label compliance checking per lifecycle stage (State + Type + Priority required, Points required for Verified+), providing helpful alternatives when requested labels don't exist.

---

### 22.35 R-35: PR-Issue Label Synchronization

**Goal**: PRs must mirror all relevant labels from their linked issue (Priority, MoSCoW, Points, State, Type) and milestones must match. Stale labels removed from the issue must also be removed from the PR.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (At Creation)** | [PR Creator](#121-pr-management-agents) | Inherits ALL Type/, Priority/, MoSCoW/, Points/ labels from issue to PR. Adds State/In Review. Copies milestone. (Section [12.1](#121-pr-management-agents)) | Initial label inheritance |
| **2 (Ongoing Sync)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 19 (every cycle): compares ALL labels between PR and issue. Adds missing Priority/, MoSCoW/, Points/ labels. Updates State/ labels to match issue. Removes stale labels that no longer exist on issue. Updates milestone. Posts explanatory comment. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Continuous synchronization with drift correction |

---

### 22.36 R-36: Story Point Estimation

**Goal**: Every issue in `State/Verified` or later (except Epics and Legendaries) has a `Points/*` label estimating effort.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Triage-time)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | Estimates story points during triage: XS (1pt), S (2pt), M (3pt), L (5pt), XL (8pt), XXL (13pt). Applies Points/ label via Forgejo Label Manager. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | Estimation during human issue triage |
| **2 (Compliance Fill)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 4: detects Verified+ issues without Points/ label. Estimates from subtask count and description complexity (0-2→Points/2, 3-5→Points/3, 6-8→Points/5, 9+→Points/8, epic-level→Points/13). Posts comment explaining estimation. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Automated estimation for unlabeled issues |

---

### 22.37 R-37: Milestone Assignment and Scope Guard

**Goal**: Non-Epic, non-Legendary issues beyond `State/Unverified` have milestones. New non-critical issues never inflate active milestone scope.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (At Creation)** | [New Issue Creator](#122-issue-management-agents) | Strict scope guard: critical bugs → source milestone; all others → no milestone, Priority/Backlog. Exception only for caller-specified essential milestones. NEVER adds non-critical to converging milestones. (Section [12.2](#122-issue-management-agents)) | Milestone assignment with scope guard |
| **2 (Planning)** | [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Milestone Scope Guard: will not create new issues in converging milestones (closed > open). New discovered work goes to backlog. (Section [9.2](#92-epic-planning-supervisor)) | Planning-level scope guard |
| **3 (Compliance)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 4: assigns milestone to non-Epic/non-Legendary issues in Verified+ without one. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Missing milestone fill |
| **3b (Testing)** | [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor) | Milestone Scope Guard: only critical bugs assigned to active milestone. (Section [8.5.3](#853-milestone-scope-guard)) | Testing-level scope guard |

---

### 22.60 R-60: State Transition Precondition Enforcement

**Goal**: State transitions must follow strict preconditions: transitioning FROM `State/Paused` requires the blocking issue to be closed; transitioning TO `State/In Review` requires an open PR; terminal states close the issue. No shortcuts.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Enforcement)** | [Issue State Updater](#122-issue-management-agents) | Step 2 (validate preconditions): checks blocking issue is closed before Paused→In Progress. Step 5 (special cases): closes issue for terminal states, removes `Blocked` label. Step 6: synchronizes PR state labels (finds PRs referencing this issue, removes old State/, adds new State/). Retries 3× with exponential backoff. (Section [12.2](#122-issue-management-agents)) | Precondition validation, terminal state closure, PR sync |
| **2 (Cross-check)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 4: detects `State/In Review` with no open PR (transitions to Completed if merged, or In Progress if never created). Pass 9: fixes closed issues with non-terminal labels. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | State/reality cross-check |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Atomic multi-state label cleanup (DELETE all existing State/* labels before adding new one, preventing accumulation), PR label synchronization (when issue state changes, matching PRs get updated labels), HTTP error handling (404 = label doesn't exist, 422 = already applied, 429 = rate limit).

---

### 22.38 R-38: Issue Body and Definition of Done Compliance

**Goal**: Every issue body contains the required sections per CONTRIBUTING.md: Metadata (Branch, Commit Message, Parent Epic), Subtasks (at least one checkbox), and Definition of Done.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (At Creation)** | [New Issue Creator](#122-issue-management-agents), [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Create issues with CONTRIBUTING.md-compliant body format (Metadata, Subtasks, DoD). Standard DoD includes: all subtasks completed, unit tests (≥97% coverage), integration tests, quality gates pass, PR created and approved, PR merged. (Section [6.14](#614-standard-issue-body-format)) | Compliant issue creation |
| **2 (Verification)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 11: checks for `## Metadata`, `## Subtasks` (with checkbox), `## Definition of Done` headings. Posts comment listing missing sections. Pass 7: audits DoD checklist for premature/missing check-offs. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Post-creation compliance verification |

---

### 22.39 R-39: Blocked Chain Analysis and Resolution

**Goal**: Detect and resolve circular dependencies, orphaned blockers (blocked by closed issue), and impossible chains (blocked by later milestone issue). No issue should be permanently stuck due to dependency problems.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Analysis)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 8: analyzes full dependency graph. Detects circular dependencies (A→B→C→A). Detects orphaned blockers (blocked by #N but #N is closed). Detects impossible chains (blocked by issue in later milestone). Posts comment explaining the problem and suggesting resolution. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Dependency graph analysis, problem detection |
| **2 (State Enforcement)** | [Issue State Updater](#122-issue-management-agents) | When transitioning from `State/Paused`: validates that the blocking issue is actually resolved before allowing transition. Prevents premature unblocking. (Section [12.2](#122-issue-management-agents)) | Transition precondition enforcement |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 7/8: detects orphan issues and hierarchy violations. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Hierarchy and dependency auditing |

---

### Category D — Architecture and Specification Governance

### 22.16 R-16: Bug Detection and Proactive Quality Assurance

**Goal**: Find bugs before users do. Detect bugs through code analysis, specification comparison, acceptance testing, and code review.

**Redundancy Depth: Quadruple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Detection Method | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|-------|
| **1 (Code Analysis)** | [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor) | Nine analysis passes per module: error handling, concurrency, security, boundary conditions, resource management, type safety, specification alignment, code consistency, data flow. (Section [8.6](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor)) | Static code analysis against spec | Uses Gemini 2.5 Pro for cross-module analysis |
| **2 (Spec Compliance)** | [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor) | Tests feature areas against the specification. Files bug issues for gaps and spec deviations. Captures successful workflows as documentation. (Section [8.5](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor)) | Dynamic testing against spec | Finds issues Bug Hunt cannot (runtime behavior) |
| **3 (Per-PR Detection)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Focus areas 2 (error handling/edge cases), 5 (security), 6 (performance), 10 (behavior correctness). Flaky test detection. (Section [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Code review of changes | Catches bugs at the point of introduction |
| **4 (Architecture-Level)** | [Architecture Guard](#95-architecture-guard) | Check 6: test quality (tests that do not verify meaningful behavior, missing edge cases). Check 5: technical debt indicators. (Section [9.5](#95-architecture-guard)) | Codebase-wide structural analysis | Catches classes of bugs caused by architectural issues |

**Redundancy pattern**: Bug Hunt finds code-level bugs proactively. UAT finds spec-deviation bugs through testing. PR Reviewer catches bugs at introduction. Architecture Guard finds bugs caused by structural issues. Four completely independent detection methods.

---

### 22.17 R-17: Documentation and Timeline Maintenance

**Goal**: Project documentation (README, API docs, architecture docs, changelog, module docs) and timeline (`docs/timeline.md`) stay current with the project state.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (exclusive domains)**

| Domain | Agent | Role | Territory | Notes |
|--------|-------|------|-----------|-------|
| **Documentation** | [Documentation Supervisor](#98-documentation-supervisor) | Generates and updates five documentation types: README, API docs, architecture docs, changelog, module docs. Always extends, never overwrites. (Section [9.8](#98-documentation-supervisor)) | All files EXCEPT `docs/timeline.md` | Must NOT modify timeline (exclusive to Timeline Supervisor) |
| **Timeline** | [Timeline Supervisor](#99-timeline-update-supervisor) | Keeps `docs/timeline.md` accurate. Makes surgical updates to nine sections including Gantt charts, status summaries, completion history, risk tables. (Section [9.9](#99-timeline-update-supervisor)) | `docs/timeline.md` exclusively | Never deletes historical data; append-only for history sections |
| **Showcase Docs** | [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor) | Generates showcase documentation from successful end-to-end test runs demonstrating real-world usage patterns. (Section [21.3](#213-uat-test-pool-supervisor-complete-subagent-list)) | Categorized showcase directories | Supplementary documentation from testing |

**Redundancy pattern**: None — these are exclusive domains by design. The Documentation Supervisor and Timeline Supervisor have non-overlapping territories enforced by explicit rules. This prevents conflicting edits to the same files.

---

### 22.18 R-18: Human Communication and Escalation

**Goal**: Human developers receive timely, professional responses. Automated issues that require human decisions are escalated promptly. Human feedback is incorporated systematically.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Trigger | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|---------|-------|
| **1 (Primary Bridge)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | 10-step monitoring loop every 2 minutes. Handles all human activity: new issues, comments, PR reviews, label changes. Full triage authority. Feedback Incorporation Protocol updates descriptions and notifies users. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | All human activity on Forgejo | Fastest response time (2-minute poll). Timeouts: 48h PR feedback, 24h questions, 72h blocked work |
| **2 (Strategic Questions)** | [Project Owner](#910-project-owner-supervisor) | Tags developers with questions in Forgejo comments. Assigns developers to issues based on expertise. Follows up on pending questions every 5th cycle. (Section [9.10](#910-project-owner-supervisor)) | Unassigned critical/blocking issues, strategic questions | Complements Liaison with strategic focus |
| **3 (Automated Escalation)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | After 3 stuck detections: posts diagnostic comment, adds `needs feedback` label, exits gracefully. (Section [10.1.4](#1014-pr-fix-mode-workflow)) | Repeated implementation failures on the same error | Self-escalation when automation is stuck |
| **3b (Independent Escalation)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 5b: independently detects struggling PRs (3+ fix attempts), requests human assistance. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | PR-level repeated failures detected from outside | Catches cases where the worker itself did not escalate |
| **4 (Proposal Escalation)** | [Agent Evolution](#94-agent-evolution-supervisor), [Spec Evolution](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor), [Architecture Supervisor](#91-architecture-supervisor) | Create `needs feedback` proposals for major changes requiring human approval. (Sections [9.4](#94-agent-evolution-supervisor), [9.6](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor), [9.1](#91-architecture-supervisor)) | Significant architectural/agent/spec changes | Human-approved workflow for high-impact changes |

**Redundancy pattern**: The Implementation Worker self-escalates when stuck (self-awareness). The Watchdog independently detects the same condition from outside (external awareness). This double escalation ensures no struggling PR goes unnoticed even if the worker itself fails to escalate.

---

### 22.46 R-46: Feedback Incorporation Protocol

**Goal**: When human feedback changes the nature of a ticket (scope, requirements, approach), the change must be captured in the issue/PR description — not buried in a comment thread. Users must be notified of description changes with a diff.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Protocol Execution)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | When discussion conclusions change ticket nature: (1) updates issue/PR description to reflect new understanding (source of truth), (2) posts comment tagging user with diff between old and new description, (3) confirms change is complete and ready for implementation. Applies to ALL scenarios where discussion changes agreed-upon details — scope changes, requirement changes, approach changes, priority changes, acceptance criteria changes. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | Description updates, user notification with diff, confirmation |

**Why single depth?** Only the Human Liaison communicates with humans. This is an exclusive domain. However, the Updated description persists on Forgejo and is read by all subsequent agents (Implementation Worker, PR Reviewer, etc.), so the effect propagates through the system.

---

### 22.47 R-47: Human Response Timeout Management

**Goal**: Automated work must not stall indefinitely waiting for human responses. Escalation actions must occur after defined timeout periods.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Timeout Tracking)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | Tracks five timeout types: `needs_feedback_pr` (48h), `question_on_issue` (24h), `blocked_on_human` (72h), `spec_approval` (48h), `verification_requested` (24h). On timeout: creates provisional ADR (PR feedback), proceeds with documented assumption (question), creates announcement (approval), removes State/Blocked (unblocking). Posts timeout action comments. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | Timeout tracking, escalation actions, provisional decisions |
| **2 (Question Follow-up)** | [Project Owner](#910-project-owner-supervisor) | Tracks developer questions asked. Posts follow-up after 48 hours of no response. Triages independently based on available info after 96 hours. (Section [9.10](#910-project-owner-supervisor)) | Question timeout follow-up |

---

### 22.48 R-48: Developer Expertise Discovery and Assignment

**Goal**: Issues are assigned to the most appropriate developer based on expertise, capacity, and velocity. The system discovers expertise automatically from git history and Forgejo assignments.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Discovery & Assignment)** | [Project Owner](#910-project-owner-supervisor) | Creates temporary shallow clone (depth=200). Analyzes `git log` for contributors and their primary files/modules. Checks Forgejo for recent assignees and PR authors. Builds `developer_expertise` map. Assigns developers considering: expertise match (>0.7), capacity, velocity boost (>1.3x), coordination overhead. Golden Rule: if ANY doubt, defaults to HAL9000. (Section [9.10](#910-project-owner-supervisor)) | Git history analysis, expertise mapping, strategic assignment |
| **2 (Expertise Tagging)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | Tags specific developers in comments based on their expertise areas when guidance is needed. Cross-references known developer specializations. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | Developer tagging for expertise-specific questions |

---

### Category G — Strategic Governance and Self-Improvement

### 22.19 R-19: Scope Management and Milestone Control

**Goal**: Milestones converge toward completion. New issues do not inflate scope uncontrollably. Non-critical discovered work goes to backlog, not active milestones.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Mechanism | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-----------|-------|
| **1 (Detection)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 18: scope creep detection. Calculates convergence ratio, 24h creation/closure rates. Alerts when creation rate > 2× closure rate. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Creation-vs-closure rate monitoring | Creates `Priority/High` announcement issues for scope alerts |
| **2 (Prevention at Planning)** | [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Milestone Scope Guard: does not create new issues in converging milestones. New discovered work goes to backlog. (Section [9.2](#92-epic-planning-supervisor)) | Prevents new issue creation in converging milestones | Applied at the planning level |
| **3 (Prevention at Creation)** | [New Issue Creator](#122-issue-management-agents) | Strict scope guard: critical bugs → current milestone; all other discovered issues → no milestone, `Priority/Backlog`. (Section [12.2](#122-issue-management-agents)) | Milestone assignment rules at creation time | Applied at the issue creation level |
| **3b (Prevention at Testing)** | [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor) | Milestone Scope Guard: only critical bugs assigned to active milestone. Non-critical issues go to backlog with no milestone. (Section [8.5.3](#853-milestone-scope-guard)) | Applied when filing test-discovered bugs | Prevents test-driven scope explosion |

**Redundancy pattern**: Groomer detects scope creep (monitoring). Planner, Creator, and UAT all independently apply scope guards (prevention). Three independent prevention mechanisms plus one detection mechanism.

---

### 22.20 R-20: Automation Tracking and Inter-Agent Coordination

**Goal**: All agents coordinate through a consistent tracking issue system. Status issues follow the one-at-a-time invariant. Stale tracking issues are cleaned up. Announcements propagate to relevant consumers.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Mechanism | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-----------|-------|
| **1 (Operations)** | [Automation Tracking Manager](#125-label-and-forgejo-agents) | Centralized tracking operations: 11 operations including create, update, close, read, announce, review. Enforces close-ALL-then-create for the one-at-a-time invariant. Manages cycle numbers, interval calculation. (Section [5.4](#54-tracking-operations)) | Central API for all tracking operations | No agent creates tracking issues directly |
| **2 (Self-Cleanup)** | Every supervisor | Each supervisor closes its own old status issues via `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` (which calls close-all first). Reviews own announcements every 3 cycles. (Sections [5.2.1](#521-status-issue-lifecycle-one-at-a-time-protocol), [5.3.1](#531-announcement-issue-lifecycle)) | Agent-side cleanup | Primary cleanup mechanism |
| **3 (Redundant Cleanup)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 19: cleans up stale tracking tickets with priority-based age thresholds. Pass 20: deduplicates status issues (keeps newest, closes rest) when same prefix has multiple open. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Age-based and duplicate-based cleanup | Safety net for agent-side cleanup failures |
| **4 (Health Monitoring)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 11: monitors tracking issue age against expected interval. Triggers recovery for stalled agents. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Staleness detection | Detects agents that stopped updating |

**Redundancy pattern**: Tracking Manager provides the mechanism. Each agent cleans up after itself (self-maintenance). Groomer catches failures in self-cleanup (cross-agent cleanup). Watchdog detects frozen agents (health monitoring). Three independent mechanisms maintain tracking hygiene.

---

### 22.21 R-21: Crash Recovery and State Persistence

**Goal**: The system survives crashes at every level — from individual workers to the Product Builder itself — without losing significant work.

**Redundancy Depth: Multi-level (every level has its own recovery mechanism)**

| Level | Agent | Recovery Mechanism | State Source | Notes |
|-------|-------|-------------------|-------------|-------|
| **Product Builder crash** | [Product Builder](#7-product-builder-tier-0-orchestrator) | Re-invoke → detects existing sessions via OpenCode API (Phase C.0) → adopts running supervisors → resumes monitoring. (Section [7.6](#76-phase-details)) | OpenCode Server session list | Human must re-invoke, but existing sessions survive |
| **Supervisor crash** | [Product Builder](#7-product-builder-tier-0-orchestrator) | Detects dead supervisor within 60 seconds → re-launches with same parameters. Startup State Recovery Protocol: reads most recent tracking issue before creating new one. (Sections [4.3](#43-the-monitoring-loop), [5.3.3](#533-startup-state-recovery-protocol)) | Forgejo tracking issues | New session recovers state from previous session's tracking issue |
| **Worker crash** | [Pool Supervisors](#8-pool-supervisors-tier-1) | Detect dead worker → slot becomes available → re-dispatches. New worker checks for existing PR/branch. (Section [10.1.6](#1016-issue-implementation-work-claiming-and-crash-recovery)) | Git branches, existing PRs, Forgejo comments | Work-in-progress preserved if committed/pushed |
| **Subtask Loop crash** | [Subtask Loop](#113-subtask-loop-workflow) | Reads escalation state from HTML comments in PR comments. Resumes from correct tier and attempt number. (Section [16](#16-escalation-state-persistence)) | PR comment HTML | Embedded state survives session death |
| **Git push failure** | [Shared Error Handling](#133-error-handling-sharederror_handlingmd) | Retry with exponential backoff. Clone preserved until successful push. (Section [13.3](#133-error-handling-sharederror_handlingmd)) | Clone directory in `/tmp/` | Clone survives worker crash but not machine reboot |
| **Forgejo API failure** | [Shared Error Handling](#133-error-handling-sharederror_handlingmd) | All API calls retry with exponential backoff (1s, 2s, 4s base; 60s for rate limits). (Section [13.3](#133-error-handling-sharederror_handlingmd)) | Retry state in memory | Handles transient unavailability |

**Design principle**: The system uses a **durability hierarchy**: Forgejo issues/PRs/comments (most durable, survives any crash) → Git branches/commits (survives any crash once pushed) → Tracking issues (survives any crash) → Clone directories (survives worker crash, not reboot) → In-memory state (lost on crash, must be recoverable from higher levels).

---

### 22.50 R-50: Worker Session Adoption and Lifecycle

**Goal**: When a pool supervisor restarts, it must discover and adopt existing worker sessions from its previous incarnation rather than launching duplicates. Dead worker sessions must be detected, cleaned up, and their slots recycled.

**Redundancy Depth: Single per pool**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Adoption)** | All pool supervisors | On startup: scan all active OpenCode sessions for matching title patterns (e.g., `[AUTO-IMP] worker-issue-impl: issue-N`). For each match: verify session is still active via `/session/status` API. Adopt active sessions into tracking dictionaries. Skip launch for adopted workers. (Section [8.1.4](#814-worker-adoption)) | Session scanning, status verification, dictionary adoption |
| **2 (Lifecycle)** | All supervisors | Periodically search for worker sessions by tag pattern. Monitor worker health (stuck, errored, completed). Launch new workers to keep the pool full as old ones complete. Terminate excess workers when count exceeds the allocated worker count. (Section [8.1](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor)) | Status polling, dead worker cleanup, pool maintenance |

---

### 22.51 R-51: Forgejo API Pagination and Truncation Recovery

**Goal**: The Forgejo REST API returns at most 50 items per page. Every list query must paginate through ALL pages. When tool output is truncated, the saved file must be read before proceeding. Failing to paginate causes silent data loss.

**Redundancy Depth: Universal (mandatory for all Forgejo-querying agents)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (All agents)** | Every agent querying Forgejo lists | Loop pattern: `page=1; while page_items: if len(page_items) < 50: break; page += 1`. Log total count after pagination. (Section [6.20](#620-forgejo-api-pagination-requirement)) | Mandatory pagination loop |
| **2 (Truncation)** | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) (most affected) | When tool response shows `...N bytes truncated... Full output saved to: /path`, reads the saved file via `jq` or `Read` before proceeding. NEVER treats truncated output as complete data. (Section [8.1.2](#812-pr-first-priority-gate)) | Truncated output file recovery |

**Most affected agents**: Implementation Pool (must analyze every open PR) and Backlog Groomer (scans all open issues). Missing items has severe consequences in both cases.

---

### 22.57 R-57: Clone Isolation and Safety

**Goal**: Every agent that touches the filesystem creates its own isolated clone in `/tmp/`. No agent ever modifies `/app`. Clone directories are created with authentication, used for work, pushed to remote, and deleted on exit. Safety validations prevent catastrophic directory deletion.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (protocol)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Creation)** | [Repo Isolator](#123-git-and-repository-agents) | Creates unique directory `/tmp/isolated-{agent}-{id}-{timestamp}/`. Constructs authenticated clone URL (PAT embedded in HTTPS URL, never logged). Configures git identity. Returns clone path. (Section [6.2](#62-clone-isolation-protocol)) | Clone creation, auth setup |
| **2 (Safety)** | [Repo Isolator](#123-git-and-repository-agents) | Refuses to delete protected directories (`/`, `/tmp`, `/app`). Only deletes directories matching `/tmp/isolated-*` pattern. Retries `rm -rf` up to 3× with verification. (Section [12.3](#123-git-and-repository-agents)) | Deletion safety, retry with verification |
| **3 (Branch Verification)** | [Repo Isolator](#123-git-and-repository-agents) | Checks `refs/heads/{branch}` then `refs/remotes/origin/{branch}` as fallback. Separate paths for checkout vs. create-and-checkout. (Section [12.3](#123-git-and-repository-agents)) | Branch existence verification |

---

### 22.56b R-56b: Transient Error Classification and Retry

**Goal**: Distinguish infrastructure failures (timeouts, rate limits, network errors) from genuine implementation failures (quality gate failures, review rejections). Transient errors get retries without penalty; genuine failures trigger escalation.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (shared module)**

| Error Type | Examples | Retry Strategy |
|-----------|---------|---------------|
| `NetworkError` | Timeout, connection refused, DNS failure | 3 retries, exponential backoff (1s, 2s, 4s) |
| `ForgejoError` (429) | Rate limit exceeded | 5 retries, fixed 60s delay |
| `ForgejoError` (5xx) | Server error | 3 retries, exponential backoff |
| `GitError` | Push rejected, fetch failed | 3 retries, exponential backoff |
| `GitConflictError` | Rebase conflict | 2 retries with rebase strategy, cleanup on failure |
| `CoordinationError` | Already claimed, stale claim | Abort immediately |
| `ConfigurationError` | Missing env var, invalid credential | Abort immediately |

**Key distinction in Subtask Loop**: Transient errors (timeout, rate limit, "context canceled") get 3 retries WITHOUT incrementing the attempt counter. Only genuine failures (quality gate failure, review rejection) increment and potentially escalate to a higher model tier.

---

### 22.41 R-41: Worker Dispatch and Sliding Window Management

**Goal**: Each pool supervisor maintains a sliding window of N parallel workers, immediately filling vacant slots from a priority queue. No worker slot should be idle when work is available.

**Redundancy Depth: Single per pool**

| Pool | Agent | Workers | Allocation | Dispatch Method |
|------|-------|---------|-----------|----------------|
| Implementation | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | `implementation-worker` | N (full) | Async (via Async Agent Manager) |
| PR Review | [PR Review Pool](#82-pr-review-pool-supervisor) | `pr-reviewer` | N/2 (half) | Async (via Async Agent Manager) |
| PR Fix | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | `implementation-worker` (PR-first priority) | Shared with issue workers (N) | Async (via Async Agent Manager) |
| UAT Test | [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor) | `uat-test-worker` | N/4 (quarter) | Async (via Async Agent Manager) |
| Bug Hunt | [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor) | `bug-hunt-worker` | N/4 (quarter) | Async (via Async Agent Manager) |
| Test Infra | [Test Infra Pool](#87-test-infrastructure-pool-supervisor) | `test-infra-worker` | N/4 (quarter) | Async (via Async Agent Manager) |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Session naming with tags (`[AUTO-IMP] worker-issue-impl: issue-{N}`), worker session adoption on startup, dead worker detection and slot recycling, excess worker termination, worker count enforcement.

---

### 22.42 R-42: Tracking Issue Cleanup and Deduplication

**Goal**: At most one open status tracking issue per agent prefix at any time. Stale tracking issues and announcements are cleaned up. No tracking issue accumulation.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Self-Cleanup)** | [Automation Tracking Manager](#125-label-and-forgejo-agents) | `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` closes ALL open status issues with same prefix before creating new one. Searches with `state: "open"` and `labels: "Automation Tracking"` with no pagination limits. Posts "Superseded by Cycle N" comment before closing. (Section [5.2.1](#521-status-issue-lifecycle-one-at-a-time-protocol)) | Close-all-then-create protocol |
| **2 (Per-Agent)** | Every supervisor | Invokes ATM's `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` which handles cleanup internally. Reviews own announcements every 3 cycles via `REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS`. (Section [5.3.1](#531-announcement-issue-lifecycle)) | Agent-side announcement review |
| **3 (Cross-Agent)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 19: cleans stale tracking tickets with priority-based age thresholds (Critical=72h, High=48h, Medium=24h, Low=12h for announcements; 1h for status). Pass 20: deduplicates status issues — keeps newest per prefix, closes rest. Checks for `[PERSIST]`/`[KEEP_OPEN]` markers before closing. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Age-based cleanup, deduplication, persistence markers |

---

### 22.43 R-43: Announcement Lifecycle Management

**Goal**: Important cross-agent events (quality gate violations, scope alerts, capacity warnings) are communicated via persistent announcement issues that survive cycle boundaries. Announcements are closed when their condition resolves. Stale announcements are cleaned.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Creation & Self-Review)** | Every announcement-creating supervisor | Creates announcements via ATM `CREATE_ANNOUNCEMENT_ISSUE` with `[PREFIX] Announce: <message>` title, priority label, and detailed body. Reviews own announcements via `REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS` every 3 cycles. Closes resolved announcements. (Section [5.3](#53-announcement-issues)) | Creation, self-review, self-closure |
| **2 (Consumption)** | Consumer agents per consumption protocol | System Watchdog reads ALL agents' announcements (Medium+). Product Builder reads ALL (Medium+). Human Liaison reads ALL (High+). Implementation Pool reads Watchdog/Liaison/Groomer (High+). Other supervisors read Watchdog (Critical only). Read depth varies: title-only, summary, or full body+comments. (Section [5.3.2](#532-tracking-issue-consumption-protocol)) | Priority-filtered reading at appropriate depth |
| **3 (Stale Cleanup)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 19: applies age thresholds per priority. Posts auto-closure inquiry comments on borderline announcements. Closes after 24h no response. Respects `[PERSIST]`/`[KEEP_OPEN]` markers. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Age-based cleanup with grace period |

---

### 22.44 R-44: Context Window Self-Management

**Goal**: Long-running agents must actively manage their context window to prevent exhaustion, which causes zombie behavior (agent alive but non-productive).

**Redundancy Depth: Single (per agent, with external detection)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Self-Management)** | Every long-running agent | Discards accumulated tool outputs every N cycles. Retains only persistent state (worker maps, completed lists, cycle counts, fail counts, queue depths). NEVER retains raw API responses, file contents, CI logs, PR diffs. (Section [21.7](#217-context-self-management-pattern)) | Periodic context pruning |
| **2 (External Detection)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 6: detects zombied agents via sleep-only pattern (context exhausted, agent only sleeping). (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Zombie detection for context-exhausted agents |

**Agent-specific intervals**: Backlog Groomer (every 20 cycles), Human Liaison (every 20 cycles), Implementation Pool (every 50 iterations), Agent Evolution (every 10 cycles).

---

### 22.61 R-61: Reference Material Caching and Distribution

**Goal**: Reduce redundant `ref-reader` calls by caching reference materials at the pool supervisor level and distributing pre-analyzed content to all child workers.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (optimization)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Caching)** | [Ref Material Loader](#124-reference-and-knowledge-agents) | Stores ref-reader output in `/tmp/ref-cache/` with cycle-based naming. Cache validity: 24-hour expiry. Stale caches >7 days automatically cleaned. Performance: 80% faster for 5 workers, 90% for 10, 95% for 20. (Section [12.4](#124-reference-and-knowledge-agents)) | Cycle-based caching, expiry management |
| **2 (Extraction)** | [Spec Reader](#124-reference-and-knowledge-agents) | Given an issue title and description, reads full specification and filters to only relevant sections: applicable modules, interface contracts, data models, cross-cutting concerns. (Section [12.4](#124-reference-and-knowledge-agents)) | Issue-relevant specification extraction |
| **3 (Distribution)** | Pool supervisors | Load references once per cycle via Ref Reader or cached Ref Material Loader, then pass the content to every worker launched in that cycle. (Section [6.8](#68-reference-material-loading)) | Parent-to-child content distribution |

---

### 22.63 R-63: Bot Signature Standardization

**Goal**: Every piece of content that any agent creates on Forgejo (issue bodies, comments, PR descriptions, review comments) must end with a standardized bot signature block for attribution, filtering, and tracing.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (centralized)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Formatting)** | [Forgejo Signature Appender](#125-label-and-forgejo-agents) | Three signature formats: `standard` (separator + attribution + supervisor/agent), `minimal` (attribution only), `extended` (separator + attribution + supervisor + timestamp + closing). Includes `clean_existing_signatures()` to prevent duplication on updates. (Section [5.7](#57-bot-signature-block), [21.12](#2112-forgejo-signature-appender-three-format-variants)) | Signature formatting, dedup on update |
| **2 (Enforcement)** | Every agent creating Forgejo content | Must append signature to ALL content: issue bodies, comments, PR descriptions, review comments, tracking issues. (Section [5.7](#57-bot-signature-block)) | Universal signature requirement |

**Signature template**: `---\n**Automated by CleverAgents Bot**\nSupervisor: <Name> | Agent: <filename>`

---

### 22.64 R-64: Nox Routing Enforcement

**Goal**: ALL build, test, lint, and typecheck commands must be routed through `nox` sessions. No agent may install software directly (`pip install`, `npm install`) or run quality tools directly (`ruff`, `pyright`, `behave`).

**Redundancy Depth: Universal (all code-executing agents)**

| Command | Nox Session | Used By |
|---------|------------|---------|
| Linting | `nox -e lint` | Lint Fixer |
| Type checking | `nox -e typecheck` | Typecheck Fixer |
| Unit tests | `nox -e unit_tests` | Unit Test Runner |
| Integration tests | `nox -e integration_tests` | Integration Test Runner |
| Coverage | `nox -s coverage_report` | Coverage Improver |
| Security | `nox -e security` | Quality gates |
| Quality | `nox -e quality` | Quality gates |

**Enforcement**: CONTRIBUTING.md compliance (Section [6.4](#64-contributingmd-compliance)). PR Reviewer checks for direct tool invocations. System Watchdog session spot-checks for forbidden commands.

---

### 22.45 R-45: Estimated Cycle Interval Maintenance

**Goal**: Every status tracking issue includes a rolling-average cycle interval that enables the Watchdog to detect frozen agents accurately without false positives.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Calculation)** | [Automation Tracking Manager](#125-label-and-forgejo-agents) | Calculates rolling average internally when `sleep_interval_default` is passed to `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE`. Formula: `round(old_interval * 0.90 + actual_interval * 0.10)`. Injects `**Estimated Cycle Interval**: Nmin` into the tracking body automatically. (Section [5.3.4](#534-estimated-cycle-interval-rolling-average)) | Rolling average calculation, body injection |
| **2 (Consumption)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 11: parses `Estimated Cycle Interval` from each tracking issue body. If issue age exceeds 2× estimated interval, the agent is likely frozen. The 2× threshold accounts for natural variance. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Staleness detection using the interval |

---

### Category F — Human Interaction and Escalation

### 22.22 R-22: Self-Improvement and Agent Evolution

**Goal**: The agent system identifies its own weaknesses and proposes improvements to agent definitions, with human approval before any changes are applied.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Detection Source | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|-------|
| **1 (Proactive Analysis)** | [Agent Evolution](#94-agent-evolution-supervisor) | Seven analysis steps per cycle: gather performance data, identify patterns (prompt improvements, workflow fixes, config adjustments, model tier adjustments, coordination improvements, capability gaps), filter already-proposed patterns, create proposal issues, implement approved proposals, monitor improvement PRs. (Section [9.4](#94-agent-evolution-supervisor)) | Tracking issues, PR comments, failure patterns | Two-step workflow: proposal issue first, implementation PR only after approval |
| **2 (Problem Detection)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Deep session introspection detects misbehavior patterns (forbidden API flags, policy violations, stuck agents, infinite loops). Creates `needs-feedback` issues for systemic problems requiring agent definition changes. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Session message analysis | Provides evidence that triggers Agent Evolution proposals |
| **3 (Human Feedback)** | [Human Liaison](#93-human-liaison-supervisor) | Incorporates human feedback about agent behavior. Feedback Incorporation Protocol ensures changes to ticket nature are captured. (Section [9.3](#93-human-liaison-supervisor)) | Human comments and reviews | Channels human observations into the improvement pipeline |

**Redundancy pattern**: Agent Evolution proactively analyzes failure patterns (analytical). Watchdog independently detects behavioral problems (observational). Human Liaison channels human feedback (experiential). All three feed into the same improvement pipeline with mandatory human approval.

---

### 22.23 R-23: Security and Credential Management

**Goal**: Credentials are never exposed in logs, comments, or temporary files. Dual bot accounts maintain proper separation. No agent exceeds its security scope.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Enforcement | Notes |
|-------|-------|------|-------------|-------|
| **1 (Protocol)** | [Shared Credential Security module](#132-credential-security-sharedcredential_securitymd) | Seven mandatory rules: no credential logging, no credentials in prompts, no credentials in Forgejo comments, no credentials in temp files (except cookies), no partial exposure, no defaults, validate early. (Section [13.2](#132-credential-security-sharedcredential_securitymd)) | Built into every agent's startup | Defines the security invariants |
| **2 (Permission Enforcement)** | Every agent's permission block | Bash URL blocking prevents label creation API access. Task permissions restrict subagent access. Edit permissions prevent unauthorized file modification. (Section [2.3](#23-permission-block-syntax)) | OpenCode permission system | Structural enforcement — agents literally cannot call forbidden tools |
| **3 (Behavioral Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 12/13: session spot-checks for forbidden patterns (`force_merge`, direct push to master, `type: ignore`). Deep introspection analyzes ALL supervisor sessions for misbehavior. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Active monitoring of agent behavior | Catches violations that structural enforcement misses |
| **4 (Account Separation)** | [Dual-Account Architecture](#617-dual-account-architecture-and-approval-detection) | Primary bot account (HAL9000) for implementation; separate reviewer account for PR reviews. MCP tools cannot override authentication per-call, so reviewer uses `curl` with `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT`. (Section [6.17](#617-dual-account-architecture-and-approval-detection)) | Separate Forgejo accounts | Enables formal APPROVED reviews on bot-created PRs |

**Redundancy pattern**: Credential Security defines rules (policy). Permission blocks enforce structurally (prevention). Watchdog audits behavior (detection). Dual accounts maintain separation (isolation).

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category A — Development Lifecycle

### 22.65 R-65: Specification PR Monitoring and Lifecycle

**Goal**: Specification PRs created by the Architecture Supervisor must be tracked through human review, rebased when stale, and their outcomes (merge/reject) propagated to dependent work.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Monitoring)** | [Product Builder](#7-product-builder-tier-0-orchestrator) | Tracks pending spec PRs; checks periodically; if merged → reloads spec via ref-reader; if stale (>24h no activity) → rebases; if closed without merge → notes as rejected and creates follow-up issue; posts reminder comments. (Section [21.14](#2114-product-builder-specification-pr-monitoring)) | Staleness detection, rebase, outcome propagation |
| **2 (Rebase)** | [Spec Evolution](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor) | Keeps own spec PRs up to date via rebase when master advances; force-pushes, preserves `needs feedback` label, posts rebase comment. (Section [9.6](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor)) | Self-rebase of spec PRs |

---

### 22.66 R-66: Finding Validation Gate Before Issue Filing

**Goal**: Agents that file issues (Bug Hunt, Test Infra, UAT) must validate every finding through a multi-check gate to prevent false positives, duplicate issues, and noise in the backlog.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple (each filing agent has own gate)**

| Agent | Validation Gate | Specific Checks |
|-------|----------------|-----------------|
| [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor) | 5-check gate: (1) actual code evidence (file/function/line), (2) verify environment assumptions, (3) actionable finding, (4) verified against actual codebase, (5) severity matches evidence. Never files infrastructure failures as product bugs. (Section [21.8](#218-bug-hunt-clone-failure-handling-and-finding-validation)) | Evidence, environment, actionability, freshness, severity |
| [Test Infra Pool](#87-test-infrastructure-pool-supervisor) | 5-step dedup: (1) keyword search 2-3 nouns, (2) cross-area search, (3) include closed issues, (4) `### Duplicate Check` section in every issue body, (5) if uncertain, don't file. (Section [8.7.3](#873-duplicate-avoidance)) | Keyword, cross-area, closed, proof, uncertainty |
| [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor) | Open PR awareness: checks if an open PR already addresses the gap; if so, doesn't file. Worker coordination via comments to avoid duplicate testing. (Section [8.5](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor)) | PR awareness, worker coordination |

---

### 22.67 R-67: Product Completion Verification

**Goal**: The autonomous system must know when the product is DONE. A single binary decision (COMPLETE or INCOMPLETE) based on a rigorous 10-point checklist. This is the ONLY mechanism that can cause the Product Builder to exit its monitoring loop.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (invoked by Product Builder)**

| # | Verification Point | Check Method | Failure Creates |
|---|-------------------|-------------|-----------------|
| 1 | All milestones complete | Query Forgejo API for open milestones | List of incomplete milestones |
| 2 | No open issues (verified/in-progress/paused) | Query by State labels | List of unfinished issues |
| 3 | No open/unmerged PRs | Query open PRs | List of orphaned PRs |
| 4 | Full `nox` test suite passes | Run `nox` all sessions in isolated clone | Failing test details |
| 5 | Coverage ≥97% | `nox -s coverage_report` | Coverage gap details |
| 6 | Every spec requirement has test coverage | Cross-reference spec vs test suite | Uncovered requirements |
| 7 | Documentation complete | Check README, API docs, architecture docs | Missing doc list |
| 8 | No TODO/FIXME/HACK/XXX markers | Grep codebase | Marker locations |
| 9 | No `Blocked` label issues | Query Forgejo | Blocked issue list |
| 10 | No stale feature branches | Query branches not merged to master | Stale branch list |

**Decision**: ALL 10 pass → `COMPLETE` (Product Builder exits to Phase D). ANY fail → `INCOMPLETE` with specific gap list and actionable remediations (Product Builder continues Phase C).

---

### 22.68 R-68: Epic and Legendary Closure Evaluation

**Goal**: When all child issues of an Epic are closed (or all child Epics of a Legendary are closed), evaluate whether the parent should be closed based on acceptance criteria fulfillment.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Evaluation)** | [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Phase 2: finds open Epics where all children closed (minimum 2 children required). Evaluates acceptance criteria. Closes with completion comment. Same for Legendaries with all child Epics closed. (Section [9.2](#92-epic-planning-supervisor)) | Acceptance criteria evaluation, closure |
| **2 (Detection)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 12-13: detects Epics/Legendaries where all children closed but parent still open. Creates missing children or flags for closure. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Gap detection and remediation |

---

### 22.69 R-69: Orphaned Issue and Epic Remediation

**Goal**: Every issue must have a parent Epic and every Epic must have a parent Legendary. Orphans must be automatically linked to appropriate parents.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Enforcement)** | [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Phase 1: scans ALL open non-Epic/non-Legendary issues for missing parent dependency. Finds suitable existing Epic (scope similarity) or creates new one. Creates `blocks` link. Same for orphan Epics → Legendary. Validates ALL dependency directions and fixes reversed ones. (Section [9.2](#92-epic-planning-supervisor)) | Orphan detection, parent assignment, direction fixing |
| **2 (Detection)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 2: flags orphan issues with no parent Epic. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Orphan flagging |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 7/8: verifies orphan counts and hierarchy integrity. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Hierarchy auditing |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category B — Quality Assurance

### 22.70 R-70: TDD Workflow Awareness in Bug Reports

**Goal**: Every bug report must include a TDD note explaining that after verification, a `Type/Testing` issue will be created with `@tdd_issue`, `@tdd_issue_<N>`, and `@tdd_expected_fail` tags to prove the bug exists before fixing it.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Bug Filing)** | [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor) | Includes TDD Note in every bug report body. (Section [8.6](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor)) | TDD note in bug body |
| **2 (TDD Execution)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Before implementing bug fix: searches `features/` and `robot/` for existing `@tdd_issue_N` tests. After fix: removes `@tdd_expected_fail` from all matching tests. (Section [6.13](#613-tdd-issue-test-tags-system)) | Tag search and cleanup |

---

### 22.71 R-71: Never-Disable-Checks Safety Constraint

**Goal**: No agent may ever disable, weaken, or reduce any quality check. Coverage thresholds, type checking, linting, security scanning, and test frameworks must never be downgraded.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Prohibitions |
|-------|-------|------|---------------------|
| **1 (Self-constraint)** | [Test Infrastructure Pool](#87-test-infrastructure-pool-supervisor) | Hard constraint in system prompt: "Never disable coverage thresholds, type checking, linting, security scanning. Never reduce coverage below 97%. Never remove CI steps. Never bypass nox." (Section [8.7](#87-test-infrastructure-pool-supervisor)) | Self-prohibition |
| **2 (Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Reviews for: removal of test cases, lowered coverage thresholds, added `# type: ignore`, weakened CI pipeline. (Section [12.1.2](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification)) | Detection in review |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Session spot-checks for `type: ignore`, coverage reduction commands, CI step removal. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Behavioral audit |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category C — Ticket Hygiene

### 22.72 R-72: Stale PR Detection and Remediation

**Goal**: PRs that have gone stale (no milestone, duplicated, targeting completed issues, or open >72h with no review activity) must be detected and flagged.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Checks |
|-------|-------|------|----------------|
| **1 (Detection)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 17 (every 3 cycles): detects PRs with no milestone, duplicate PRs (same branch or same linked issue), PRs targeting completed/wont-do issues, PRs open >72h with no review activity. (Section [9.7](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor)) | Four staleness patterns |
| **2 (Pipeline)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 5: detects PRs open >24h with no reviews, approved PRs not merged >6h, PRs with CI failing >2h. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Three pipeline health checks |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category D — Architecture

### 22.73 R-73: Spec Change Classification and Two-Step Proposal

**Goal**: Specification changes must be classified by impact (initial/major/minor) and major changes must go through a two-step human-approved workflow: proposal issue first, implementation PR only after approval.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Architecture)** | [Architecture Supervisor](#91-architecture-supervisor) | Classifies changes: Initial (no prior spec) → commit directly. Major (new modules, changed interfaces) → create branch `spec/architecture-<desc>`, PR with `needs feedback`. Minor (typos, formatting) → commit directly. (Section [9.1](#91-architecture-supervisor)) | Classification + needs-feedback PR |
| **2 (Spec Evolution)** | [Spec Evolution](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor) | Two-step workflow: Step 1: create PROPOSAL ISSUE with `needs feedback`, `Type/Task`, `State/Unverified`. Step 2: only after approval (label removed, State/Verified added, or approval comment), create branch and PR. Tracks rejected proposals in `rejected_proposals` set. (Section [9.6](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor)) | Proposal → Approval → PR pipeline |

---

### 22.74 R-74: SHA-Based Idle Detection for Scanners

**Goal**: Agents that scan the codebase (Architecture Guard, Spec Evolution) should not waste cycles re-scanning unchanged code. Skip scanning when master SHA is unchanged since last scan.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (per agent)**

| Agent | Mechanism | Idle Behavior |
|-------|-----------|---------------|
| [Architecture Guard](#95-architecture-guard) | Compares current master SHA with `last_known_sha`. If unchanged, increments idle counter and sleeps without scanning. Only scans when new code appears. (Section [9.5](#95-architecture-guard)) | Sleep on unchanged SHA |
| [Spec Evolution](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor) | Compares master SHA; proactive deep scan every 5th idle cycle (~75 min) even without new merges. (Section [9.6](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor)) | Sleep + periodic deep scan |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category E — Operational Health

### 22.75 R-75: Session Naming and Tag Convention

**Goal**: Every async session must follow the `[TAG] display-name` naming convention with registered tag prefixes. This enables session discovery, health monitoring, and crash recovery.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (centralized)**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Naming)** | [Async Agent Manager](#42-the-async-agent-manager) | Creates sessions with `[TAG] display-name` format. 24+ registered tag prefixes. Validates agent names against whitelist (overridable with `force=true`). Checks for existing sessions with same tag before launch. (Section [4.2.1](#421-session-naming-convention)) | Naming enforcement, duplicate prevention |
| **2 (Discovery)** | All pool supervisors, Product Builder | Search for sessions by tag pattern to discover workers, adopt orphan sessions, and detect duplicates. (Section [4.2](#42-the-async-agent-manager)) | Tag-based session discovery |

---

### 22.76 R-76: Async Session Health Detection

**Goal**: Detect unhealthy, stuck, or dead async sessions promptly so they can be restarted without losing significant work.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (Monitor)** | [Async Agent Monitor](#2120-async-agent-monitor-four-operations) | Four operations: `monitor` (continuous), `health_check` (one-shot), `get_messages` (retrieve), `restart` (terminate + re-launch). Unhealthy = no messages for 10 minutes. Dead = OpenCode reports completed/errored. Auto-restart with same tag. (Section [21.20](#2120-async-agent-monitor-four-operations)) | Health detection, auto-restart |
| **2 (Product Builder)** | [Product Builder](#7-product-builder-tier-0-orchestrator) | 60-second monitoring loop detects dead supervisor sessions; deep inspection every 5 heartbeats reads last 100 messages to detect zombies. (Section [4.3](#43-the-monitoring-loop)) | Session liveness polling |

---

### 22.77 R-77: Push Conflict Recovery Protocol

**Goal**: When `git push` is rejected (typically because another agent pushed to the same branch), recover automatically via rebase-and-retry rather than failing the operation.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (shared protocol)**

| Step | Action | Fallback |
|------|--------|----------|
| 1 | `git push --force-with-lease` | If rejected → Step 2 |
| 2 | `git pull --rebase origin <branch>` then `git push` | If rebase conflicts → Step 3 |
| 3 | Resolve conflicts (prefer own changes for trivial, abort for complex) | If 5 consecutive failures → Step 4 |
| 4 | Delete clone entirely, reclone fresh, cherry-pick changes, retry | Report failure if still failing |

**Consumers**: [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker), [PR CI Test Fixer](#1211-critical-pr-management-behavioral-rules), [PR Merge Pool](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor), [Spec Evolution](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor).

---

### 22.78 R-78: Structured Logging Protocol

**Goal**: All agents must use a standardized log format that enables automated analysis, cross-agent correlation, and critical error persistence.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (shared module)**

| Component | Format | Purpose |
|-----------|--------|---------|
| **Standard log** | `[AGENT:{name}][SESSION:{id}][ACTION:{action}][LEVEL:{level}] {message}` | Human-readable |
| **Structured log** | `[STRUCTURED]` + JSON payload (timestamp, agent, session, action, level, data) | Machine-parseable |
| **Auto-persistence** | ERROR and CRITICAL level → automatically posted as Forgejo comment | Crash-survivable |
| **Standard actions** | `init`, `setup`, `clone`, `implement`, `test`, `review`, `merge`, `dispatch`, `monitor`, `cleanup` | Consistent naming |

---

### 22.79 R-79: Performance Monitoring and Health Scoring

**Goal**: Track operation durations, success rates, resource usage, and system KPIs to enable adaptive timeouts and health assessment.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (shared module)**

| Metric Category | Specific Metrics | Usage |
|----------------|-----------------|-------|
| **Operation tracking** | Duration, status (success/failure/timeout), nested stack, min/max/avg | Adaptive timeout = max_observed × 1.5 |
| **Resource monitoring** | CPU%, memory RSS MB, disk I/O (via psutil snapshots) | Resource exhaustion detection |
| **Health score** | Weighted average: success rates + resource scores, penalized 0.8× if >10 in-progress ops | Zombie/stuck detection |
| **System KPIs** | Throughput (issues/hour, PRs merged/hour), Quality (first-attempt success rate), Efficiency (avg completion time, worker utilization) | System-level health |

---

### 22.80 R-80: Non-Return Guarantee Enforcement

**Goal**: The Product Builder must NEVER return prematurely. Fourteen specific scenarios are explicitly identified as NOT valid exit conditions.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (Product Builder self-constraint)**

| Category | NOT Valid Exit Conditions |
|----------|--------------------------|
| **Subjective** | "I feel done", "The monitoring loop feels repetitive", "Context is getting large" |
| **Transient** | "No immediate progress is visible", "A few supervisors have restarted", "Some issues appear stuck" |
| **Perceived completion** | "Most milestones look done", "I've been running for hours", "The system seems stable" |

**Only 3 valid exit conditions**: (1) Product Verifier returns `COMPLETE`, (2) User explicitly says stop, (3) Unrecoverable error (HTTP 401/403 indicating revoked credentials).

---

### 22.81 R-81: Tiered Worker Allocation Formula

**Goal**: Worker counts are derived from `CA_MAX_PARALLEL_WORKERS` (N) using a tiered formula that maximizes implementation throughput while capping discovery/fix agents.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (Product Builder configuration)**

| Tier | Formula | Pools | Rationale |
|------|---------|-------|-----------|
| **Full** (N) | `N` | Implementation Pool | Closes issues; maximum throughput |
| **Half** (N/2) | `max(1, N // 2)` | PR Review Pool | Must keep pace but not 1:1 |
| **Quarter** (N/4) | `max(1, N // 4)` | PR Fix, UAT, Bug Hunt, Test Infra | Discovery/fix agents; capping prevents scope explosion |
| **Singleton** | 1 | All 12 other supervisors | Strategic work requiring coherence |

---

### 22.82 R-82: Timeline Surgical Edit and Append-Only Protocol

**Goal**: Timeline updates must be surgical (change only what changed), append-only for historical sections, and follow strict formatting rules including PlantUML Gantt chart color codes.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (exclusive domain)**

| Rule | Enforcement | Rationale |
|------|-------------|-----------|
| **Append-only history** | NEVER modify existing schedule adherence entries; only append new | Historical integrity |
| **One entry per day** | If already updated today, update existing entry | Prevent duplicates |
| **Risk resolution** | Mark with strikethrough: `~~Risk~~ RESOLVED — reason` | Preserve risk visibility |
| **Gantt colors** | PaleGreen=100%, LightSkyBlue=in-progress, #E8E8E8=not-started, Gold=milestones | Visual consistency |
| **Conservative data** | If unsure whether data changed, leave unchanged | Accuracy over freshness |

---

### 22.83 R-83: Issue Comment Type Formatting Standards

**Goal**: Issue comments from automated agents must follow one of five structured templates with consistent visual formatting, collapsible sections, and security-sanitized content.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (centralized)**

| Comment Type | Visual Indicators | Use Case |
|-------------|-------------------|----------|
| `progress` | Progress bars (█░), circular (X/Y - N%), emoji checklists (✅⏳) | Status updates |
| `error` | Red alert icons, error detail blocks, stack traces | Error reports |
| `success` | Green checkmarks, deliverable summaries, file tables | Completion notices |
| `analysis` | Collapsible `<details>` sections, severity tables, metrics | Deep analysis |
| `status` | Dashboard layout, active operations table, health indicators | Periodic status |

**Sub-responsibilities**: Git-style diff block generation, read-time estimates, auto-linking to commits/files/issues, markdown injection prevention (input sanitization), content filtering to remove sensitive info from code blocks, comment quality scoring (readability, density, visual appeal, actionability).

---

### 22.84 R-84: Checkpoint and State Persistence via Forgejo Comments

**Goal**: Workers must persist their phase state to Forgejo comments (not local files) so that crash recovery can determine what was completed. Checkpoints use versioned JSON format embedded in `[CHECKPOINT]` comments.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (per worker)**

| Component | Format | Purpose |
|-----------|--------|---------|
| **Checkpoint comment** | `[CHECKPOINT]` prefix + metadata lines + JSON code fence | Phase state persistence |
| **Version field** | `"version": "1.0"` in JSON | Future migration support |
| **Phase resume map** | `clone_complete` → phase_2, `all_subtasks_complete` → phase_3, `commit_complete` → phase_4, `pr_created` → phase_4_monitoring | Crash recovery routing |
| **Anti-pattern** | NEVER write `/tmp/checkpoint.json`; NEVER include file contents | Forgejo-only persistence |

---

### 22.85 R-85: Agent Improvement Pattern Detection

**Goal**: The Agent Evolution supervisor must detect specific categories of agent failure patterns and propose targeted improvements — not generic suggestions but evidence-based fixes.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Eight Pattern Categories |
|-------|-------|------|------------------------|
| **1 (Detection)** | [Agent Evolution](#94-agent-evolution-supervisor) | Scans tracking issues, PR comments, and failure patterns for: (1) consistent task-type failures, (2) merge failures from unchecked CI, (3) early reviewer exits, (4) context exhaustion, (5) >50% model escalation rate, (6) duplicate work, (7) missing capability gaps, (8) repeated subtask-type failures. (Section [9.4](#94-agent-evolution-supervisor)) | Eight evidence-based pattern categories |
| **2 (Trigger)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Deep session introspection detects misbehavior (forbidden flags, policy violations, stuck loops, identical-call patterns) and creates `needs-feedback` issues. (Section [9.11.2](#9112-critical-audit-details)) | Behavioral problem detection |

**Six improvement types**: (1) Prompt improvements, (2) Workflow fixes, (3) Config adjustments (temperature, thresholds), (4) Permission updates, (5) Architecture changes (split/merge agents), (6) Model tier adjustments. One pattern per PR. Surgical changes only.

---

### 22.86 R-86: Open PR Awareness Before Bug Filing

**Goal**: Before filing a bug issue for a feature gap, agents must check if an open PR already addresses the gap. Filing a bug for work already in-progress creates noise.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1 (UAT)** | [UAT Test Pool](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor) | Before filing bug: search open PRs for keywords matching the feature area. If a PR exists (especially if approved/in-review), skip filing. (Section [8.5](#85-uat-test-pool-supervisor)) | PR keyword search before filing |
| **2 (Bug Hunt)** | [Bug Hunt Pool](#86-bug-hunt-pool-supervisor) | Finding validation rule 3: verify finding is actionable and not already being addressed. (Section [21.8](#218-bug-hunt-clone-failure-handling-and-finding-validation)) | Actionability verification |

---

### 22.87 R-87: Five-State Project Classification

**Goal**: On startup, the Product Builder must classify the project's current state to determine which phases to execute, avoiding redundant work.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (Product Builder)**

| State | Detection Criteria | Action |
|-------|-------------------|--------|
| **Fresh** | No spec, no code, no issues | Execute Phase A (bootstrap), B (spec), C (planning + implementation) |
| **Bootstrapped** | Structure exists but no spec | Execute Phase B (spec), C (planning + implementation) |
| **Designed** | Spec exists, few/no issues | Execute Phase C starting with planning |
| **In Progress** | Spec + issues, some completed | Execute Phase C starting with resume (adopt existing sessions) |
| **Near Complete** | Most milestones done | Execute Phase D (verification) |

---

### 22.88 R-88: UAT Feature Area Retest on Code Changes

**Goal**: When master advances, UAT workers must identify which previously-tested feature areas are affected by the changes and retest them, rather than testing stale code.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Step | Action | Details |
|------|--------|---------|
| 1 | Detect master advance | Compare current master SHA against last-tested SHA |
| 2 | Identify changed files | `git diff --name-only <old_sha>..<new_sha>` |
| 3 | Map files to feature areas | `src/cleveragents/api/` → api-clients, `src/cleveragents/cli/` → cli-tools, etc. |
| 4 | Invalidate tested areas | Remove affected areas from `tested_areas` set |
| 5 | Dispatch retests | Dispatch workers for invalidated areas before testing new areas |

**Space management**: If clone grows beyond 2GB, delete and reclone fresh. Clean up generated artifacts after each test cycle.

---

### 22.89 R-89: Documentation Generation by Type

**Goal**: Project documentation is generated across five distinct types, each with its own source, format, and output location.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (exclusive domain)**

| Doc Type | Source | Output Location | Generation Method |
|----------|--------|----------------|-------------------|
| **README** | Project state, spec, milestones | `README.md` | Extend, never overwrite |
| **API docs** | Code docstrings, type hints | `docs/api/` | Extracted from source |
| **Architecture** | Specification | `docs/architecture.md` | Derived from spec |
| **Changelog** | Git history, PR descriptions | `CHANGELOG.md` | Keep a Changelog format |
| **Module docs** | Per-module implementation | `docs/modules/` | Auto-generated per module |

**Constraint**: All documentation must be mkdocs-compatible. Must NOT modify `docs/timeline.md`.

---

### 22.90 R-90: Watchdog Alert Response and Dispatch

**Goal**: The System Watchdog must not only detect problems but dispatch appropriate one-off fix agents for immediate corrections.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (Watchdog as dispatcher)**

| Finding Type | Dispatched Agent | Action Taken |
|-------------|-----------------|-------------|
| Quality gate violation | [Quality Enforcer](#151-quality-enforcer) | Repair branch protection, create CI-Blocker issues |
| State label mismatch (bulk) | [State Reconciler](#152-state-reconciler) | Bulk-fix state labels across all issues |
| Master CI failure | (creates issues directly) | `Priority/CI-Blocker` skip issue + `Priority/High` fix issue |
| Struggling PR (3+ attempts) | (adds label) | Adds `needs feedback` label, requests human help |
| Forbidden API patterns | (re-launches) | Terminates and re-launches offending supervisor session |
| Stuck in error loop | (re-launches) | Terminates with fresh context |
| No recent Forgejo activity | (re-launches) | Immediate session re-launch |

---

### 22.91 R-91: Amend-Only Commit Protocol for CI Fixes

**Goal**: When fixing CI failures on existing PRs, the PR CI Test Fixer must amend the existing commit rather than creating new commits. This keeps the commit history clean and avoids "fix fix fix" commit chains.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (PR CI Test Fixer exclusive)**

| Step | Action | Details |
|------|--------|---------|
| 1 | Identify failing CI jobs | Maps 8 CI job names to artifact paths |
| 2 | Fetch CI logs | Via `ci-log-fetcher` subagent |
| 3 | Apply fix | Dispatches appropriate fixer subagent |
| 4 | Amend commit | `git add -A && git commit --amend --no-edit` (NEVER new commits) |
| 5 | Force push | `git push --force-with-lease` to BOTH origin and upstream |
| 6 | Verify | Wait for CI checks; loop back to step 1 if still failing |
| 7 | Stuck detection | After 5 attempts with same error signature, report "Stuck — need human help" |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category A — Development Lifecycle (Algorithmic Details)

### 22.93 R-93: Subtask Wave Dispatch and Parallel Conflict Resolution

**Goal**: Maximize implementation throughput by dispatching independent subtasks in parallel waves, with automated detection and resolution of merge conflicts between parallel outputs.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Phase | Agent | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|-----------------|
| **Dependency Analysis** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Classify each subtask by files/modules it will touch (inferred from description + spec). Build directed dependency graph. Topological sort into waves: Wave 1 = zero-dependency subtasks, Wave N = depends only on Wave N-1. Prefer parallel dispatch when dependency is uncertain. |
| **Parallel Dispatch** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Launch ALL subtasks in wave simultaneously via Subtask Loop. Send heartbeat before each wave. Provide enriched context (spec, issue comments, completed subtasks, wave info). |
| **Conflict Detection** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | After wave completes: `git status --porcelain` + `git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U`. Any unmerged paths indicate conflicts between parallel subtask outputs. |
| **Auto-Resolution** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Prefer spec-aligned implementation. Only auto-resolve files with ≤3 conflict markers. If auto-resolution fails: `git reset --hard HEAD`, re-run ALL conflicting subtasks sequentially with individual commits between each. |
| **Downstream Blocking** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | When a subtask fails: check keyword overlap and file references against future-wave subtasks. Mark blocked subtasks. Remove empty waves. Re-evaluate remaining wave plan. |
| **Out-of-Scope Discovery** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Small related work → add as subtask to future wave. Separate concern → create new issue via `new-issue-creator` with parent Epic, labels, milestone from current context. |

---

### 22.94 R-94: Deep Context Gathering Before PR Fixes

**Goal**: Before attempting any PR fix, gather comprehensive context from 7 distinct sources to avoid repeating previous failed approaches and understand the full picture.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Step | Source | What Is Gathered |
|------|--------|-----------------|
| 1 | [Spec Reader](#124-reference-and-knowledge-agents) | Specification sections relevant to the PR's module |
| 2 | `docs/timeline.md` | Project phase and current priorities |
| 3 | PR + Issue comments | FULL history (paginate to 100), filtered for reviewer feedback, fix attempts, design decisions |
| 4 | PR commit history | ALL commits with SHAs, messages, timestamps, files changed, diff summaries |
| 5 | Previous fix analysis | Normalize fix descriptions, count duplicates, flag approaches tried >1 time as "repeated — try different" |
| 6 | CI logs (for ci-fix) | Per-failing-job logs via `ci-log-fetcher`; extract error signatures for dedup |
| 7 | Actual code files | First 10 PR files, first 5000 chars each, for context |

---

### 22.95 R-95: Fix Attempt Loop Prevention and Stuck Detection

**Goal**: Prevent the implementation worker from endlessly retrying the same failed fix approach. Detect stuck loops via hash-based duplicate detection and escalate to humans after 3 stuck detections.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|-----------------|
| **1 (Self-detection)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Per-PR `attempt_history` dict tracking timestamp, work_type, ci_status, has_new_reviews. `is_stuck_in_loop()`: if last 3 attempts have same work_type AND all ci_status=="failure" → stuck. Hash review feedback; if same hash seen before → switch to alternative approach. Compare CI error signatures between attempts; identical → increment stuck_counter; different → reset to 0. |
| **2 (External)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 5b: independently detects PRs with 3+ failed fix attempts by scanning bot comments. |

**Escalation**: After `stuck_counter >= 3`: post detailed comment (last 5 attempts, failure patterns, approaches tried), add `needs feedback` label, exit with "Stuck in fix loop."

---

### 22.96 R-96: PR Lifecycle Monitoring Loop

**Goal**: After PR creation, continuously monitor the PR through review cycles until merge or human escalation, with structured wait intervals.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Phase | Wait | Check | Action on Trigger |
|-------|------|-------|-------------------|
| **Review cycle** | 5 min | New reviews? | Route to type-specific handler (R-97) |
| **Merge check** | 5 min | `merged == true`? | Exit with success |
| **Conflict check** | 5 min | `mergeable == false`? | Attempt rebase with stash protocol |
| **CI check** | 5 min | CI failing? | Invoke `fix_ci_failures()` |
| **Max cycles** | — | 10 cycles reached? | Add `needs feedback` label, exit |

---

### 22.97 R-97: Review Feedback Type-Based Routing

**Goal**: Parse review feedback into categories (code/test/docs/style) using regex patterns and route each to the appropriate specialist subagent.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Type | Regex Patterns | Routed To |
|------|---------------|-----------|
| `code` | "please change/modify/update/fix X in Y.py", "function should X", "consider refactoring" | Implementer |
| `test` | "please add tests for X", "missing test coverage", "test should verify" | Behave Tester or Robot Tester (keyword-based) |
| `docs` | "please update documentation", "readme should", "add docstring" | Direct markdown edit |
| `style` | "formatting issue", "fix linting errors", "style violation" | Lint Fixer |
| (unmatched) | — | Implementer (general code improvement) |

**Post-routing**: After all changes applied, run quality gates, fix failures, amend commit, force-push with lease, post acknowledgment comment listing addressed feedback.

---

### 22.98 R-98: Issue Dispatch Priority Ordering Rules

**Goal**: The Implementation Pool must dispatch workers in strict priority order to ensure critical work is done first and lower milestones complete before higher ones.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Priority | Rule | Rationale |
|----------|------|-----------|
| **1 (Highest)** | `Priority/CI-Blocker` issues | Fixes broken CI that blocks ALL PRs |
| **2** | `Type/Bug` + `Priority/Critical` across ALL milestones | Critical bugs anywhere |
| **3** | Lowest milestone number first | Complete milestones in order |
| **4** | `State/In Progress` before `State/Verified` | Resume work before starting new |
| **5** | Higher Priority label first (Critical > High > Medium > Low) | Urgency within milestone |
| **6** | Higher MoSCoW ranking (Must > Should > Could) | Strategic importance |
| **7** | Issues that unblock the most other issues | Dependency graph optimization |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category B — Quality Assurance (Algorithmic Details)

### 22.99 R-99: PR Merge Seven Criteria Checklist

**Goal**: Before any merge attempt, ALL seven criteria must be verified. No partial checks. No assumptions.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (protocol)**

| # | Criterion | Check Method | Failure Action |
|---|-----------|-------------|----------------|
| 1 | Approving review exists | 3-tier detection (R-54) | Skip PR |
| 2 | All CI checks pass | No failing, no pending | Skip PR |
| 3 | No merge conflicts | `mergeable != false` | Post conflict comment |
| 4 | Branch up-to-date | `merge_base == base.sha` | Auto-rebase (R-30) |
| 5 | Not labeled "Needs Feedback" | Label check | Skip PR |
| 6 | Not labeled "Blocked" | Label check | Skip PR |
| 7 | Linked issue in correct state | `State/In Review` | Skip PR |

---

### 22.100 R-100: Blocking Review Temporal Detection

**Goal**: A `REQUEST_CHANGES` review only blocks merge if it is MORE RECENT than the latest approval signal from any source. Older blocking reviews that have been superseded by approvals do not prevent merge.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (shared protocol)**

| Step | Action |
|------|--------|
| 1 | Find latest `REQUEST_CHANGES` review timestamp |
| 2 | Find latest approval timestamp from ANY of: formal `APPROVED` review, review body containing approval keywords, issue comment containing approval keywords |
| 3 | If `request_changes_timestamp > latest_approval_timestamp` → **blocking** (merge prevented) |
| 4 | If `latest_approval_timestamp > request_changes_timestamp` → **superseded** (merge allowed) |
| 5 | If no `REQUEST_CHANGES` reviews exist → **not blocking** |

---

### 22.101 R-101: Flaky Test 16-Pattern Detection Checklist

**Goal**: During code review, systematically check for 16 specific patterns that indicate non-deterministic tests. REQUEST_CHANGES immediately for any match.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Category | Specific Red Flags |
|----------|-------------------|
| **Unit Test** | `time.sleep()` in test code, `datetime.now()` without mock, `random.choice()`/`random.randint()` without seed, `uuid.uuid4()` in assertions, external HTTP calls without mock, `threading` without synchronization primitives, writes to shared filesystem paths |
| **Integration Test** | Sleep-based timing instead of condition waits, shared `/tmp` paths between tests, random port generation without retry, hardcoded timeouts |
| **CI Pattern** | Same test fails in some PRs but passes in others, timeout errors on specific tests, test order dependency (passes alone, fails in suite), different results on rerun |
| **Cross-PR** | Same test failing across multiple unrelated PRs = master branch flaky test (escalate to system monitoring) |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category C — Ticket Hygiene (Algorithmic Details)

### 22.102 R-102: Merged PR Issue Closure with Dependency Cleanup

**Goal**: After a PR merges, clean up ALL satisfied dependency links on the linked issue before closing it. This prevents "blocked by already-merged PR" situations from keeping issues open.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|-----------------|
| **1 (Immediate)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) and [PR Merge Pool](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor) | After verified merge: transition issue to `State/Completed`, close issue. |
| **2 (Dependency Cleanup)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 15: for each PR merged in last 24h, extract linked issues. For each still-open issue: fetch ALL dependency links. Check each: merged PR → satisfied (DELETE), closed issue → satisfied (DELETE), open blocker → unsatisfied (keep). After removing satisfied links, attempt closure. If remaining blockers exist, post diagnostic comment. |
| **3 (Reconciliation)** | [State Reconciler](#152-state-reconciler) | Rule 3: issues with merged PRs must be closed. Bulk-fixes any that slipped through. |

---

### 22.103 R-103: Wrong-Direction Dependency Auto-Fix

**Goal**: Detect and fix dependencies pointing in the wrong direction. The most critical case: an issue blocking its own PR creates a merge deadlock (PR can't merge because the issue it would close is "blocking" it).

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|-----------------|
| **1 (Detection & Fix)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 16: detects issue-blocks-PR (wrong, creates deadlock). Fixes by: DELETE wrong-direction link → POST correct direction (PR blocks issue). Also: removes satisfied dependencies on open PRs (closed/merged blockers), creates missing PR→issue links from `Closes #N` in PR body. |
| **2 (Enforcement)** | [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Phase 1: validates ALL dependency directions. Detects issue-depends-on-epic (wrong, should be reversed) and epic-depends-on-legendary (wrong). Fixes by removing incorrect and creating correct. Posts correction comment on BOTH child and parent. |

---

### 22.104 R-104: Priority Consistency Cross-Check

**Goal**: Detect situations where high-priority work is blocked by low-priority work, or where milestone ordering is inconsistent with priority labels.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|-----------------|
| **1 (Detection)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 5: flags `Priority/High` issues blocked by `Priority/Low` issues. Flags current-milestone low-priority issues while next-milestone has high-priority. |
| **2 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 4: verifies implementation work follows priority/milestone ordering. Detects work on later milestones while critical bugs exist in earlier ones. |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category E — Operational Health (Algorithmic Details)

### 22.110 R-110: Per-Gate Independent Tier Tracking

**Goal**: Each quality gate (lint, typecheck, unit_tests, integration_tests, coverage) maintains its own independent model tier, starting at Haiku. Failed gates escalate individually while passing gates stay cheap.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Component | Details |
|-----------|---------|
| **Data structure** | `quality_gate_tiers = {coverage: "haiku", lint: "haiku", typecheck: "haiku", unit_tests: "haiku", integration_tests: "haiku"}` |
| **Inner passes** | 5 stabilization passes per tier level. First pass: ALL gates in parallel. Subsequent passes: only re-run gates that (a) failed, or (b) passed but fixer modified files they depend on. |
| **Escalation** | After 5 inner passes: escalate ONLY failing gates (haiku→codex→sonnet→opus). Passing gates stay at their tier. |
| **Session tags** | `AUTO-SUBTASK-{GATE}-A{attempt}-P{pass}` for identification and crash recovery. |
| **Cost optimization** | A simple lint fix stays at Haiku ($0.001) while a complex type error escalates to Opus ($0.15), independently. |

---

### 22.111 R-111: Periodic Diagnostics at Opus Tier

**Goal**: When the system has been trying to implement a subtask at the highest tier (Opus) for many attempts, post detailed diagnostic comments to help humans understand what's stuck.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Trigger | Content Posted |
|---------|---------------|
| `tier == opus AND attempt >= 4 AND (attempt - 4) % 3 == 0` | Invokes `issue-note-writer` with: total attempts so far, which quality gates are still failing and with what errors, approaches already tried, current implementation state, suggested manual intervention points. |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category F — Human Interaction (Algorithmic Details)

### 22.105 R-105: Human Liaison 10-Step Monitoring Loop

**Goal**: The Human Liaison executes a precise 10-step monitoring loop every 2 minutes, ensuring all human activity is detected and responded to within one cycle.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Step | Action | Frequency |
|------|--------|-----------|
| 1 | Poll for new human issues (State/Unverified, created by non-bot) | Every cycle |
| 1a | Poll for new comments on open issues (filter out bot/claim/checkpoint) | Every cycle |
| 1b | Poll for new PR reviews from humans | Every cycle |
| 1c | Poll for label changes by humans | Every cycle |
| 1d | Poll for newly verified issues needing planning | Every cycle |
| 2 | Idle detection (if no new activity, fill with gap analysis + stale checks) | Every cycle |
| 3 | Triage new issues (full triage authority) | When detected |
| 4 | Respond to comments (Feedback Incorporation Protocol when needed) | When detected |
| 5 | Respond to PR reviews (guidance for struggling PRs) | When detected |
| 6 | Plan verified issues (ensure metadata, subtasks, DoD, parent Epic) | When detected |
| 7 | Epic/Legendary gap analysis | Every 10 cycles |
| 8 | Stale conversation check (4 patterns) | Every 15 cycles |
| 9 | Refresh spec knowledge via ref-reader | Every 20 cycles |
| 10 | Context self-management (discard tool outputs) | Every 20 cycles |

---

### 22.106 R-106: Closed Issue Comment Response Patterns

**Goal**: When humans comment on closed issues, respond appropriately without re-triaging. Four specific response patterns based on comment type.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Comment Type | Response Pattern |
|-------------|-----------------|
| **Question** | Answer helpfully from context. Do NOT re-triage, modify labels, or change state. |
| **Reopen request** | Refuse per CONTRIBUTING.md. Offer to create new issue instead. |
| **Related bug report** | Create new `Type/Bug` issue via `new-issue-creator`, link to same parent Epic. |
| **General feedback** | Acknowledge briefly. No action on closed item. |

---

### 22.107 R-107: MoSCoW Decision Framework

**Goal**: The Project Owner applies MoSCoW labels using an 11-signal decision framework. MoSCoW assignment is exclusive to the Project Owner — no other agent may assign these labels.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (exclusive authority)**

| Label | Decision Signals |
|-------|-----------------|
| **Must Have** | Spec says "MUST"/"required"; blocks other Must Have items; core milestone demo functionality; security fix; data integrity |
| **Should Have** | Spec says "SHOULD"/"recommended"; quality improvement; performance optimization; usability improvement; non-blocking for demo |
| **Could Have** | Spec says "MAY"/"optional"; polish/UX; advanced features; refactoring with no behavior change; documentation improvements |

---

### 22.108 R-108: Strategic Priority Re-evaluation

**Goal**: Priorities are not static. The Project Owner periodically re-evaluates MoSCoW labels and milestone health as the project evolves.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Check | Frequency | Specific Actions |
|-------|-----------|-----------------|
| **MoSCoW drift** | Every 10 cycles | Could Have blocking Must Have → elevate to Should Have. Must Have superseded → demote. Milestone behind → defer Could Haves. Post comment on every changed issue. |
| **Milestone health** | Every 10 cycles | If >50% Must Haves still open AND milestone >50% through time window → post warning. |
| **Scope health** | Every 10 cycles | If creation_rate > closure_rate × 2 → post `[SCOPE ALERT]`. If total issues grew >10% since last cycle → flag for human review. |
| **Stale high-priority** | Every 5 cycles | State/Verified + Priority/Critical/High + >48h no activity → tag assigned developer with reminder. |
| **Backlog review** | Every 5 cycles | Backlog items >1 week old → evaluate for elevation or State/Wont Do. |

---

### 22.109 R-109: Developer Assignment Decision Gate

**Goal**: Only delegate issues to specific developers when ALL four conditions are met. The system defaults to the primary bot account (HAL9000) to minimize coordination overhead.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Gate | Condition | Threshold |
|------|-----------|-----------|
| 1 | Expertise match | > 0.7 similarity score from git history analysis |
| 2 | Capacity available | Developer has < N active issues |
| 3 | Velocity impact | > 1.3× faster than HAL9000 estimate |
| 4 | No blocking risks | NOT: dependency conflicts, merge conflicts, critical path blocking, frequent coordination needs, shared components |

**Golden Rule**: "If ANY doubt about coordination, defaults to HAL9000."

**Five blocking scenarios** that override all conditions: (1) Issue has dependencies on HAL9000's active work, (2) Issue touches files with active merge conflicts, (3) Issue is on the critical path for milestone, (4) Issue requires frequent coordination with other in-progress work, (5) Issue modifies shared components with active changes.

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Category A continued

### 22.92 R-92: Proactive Specification Scan Protocol

**Goal**: Even without new merged PRs, the Spec Evolution supervisor must periodically perform deep module-by-module comparison of specification vs implementation to catch drift.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Layer | Agent | Role | Specific Actions |
|-------|-------|------|-----------------|
| **1** | [Spec Evolution](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor) | Every 5th idle cycle (~75 min): full module-by-module spec-vs-code comparison. Classifies discrepancies as "implementation-better" (update spec) or "implementation-deviates" (create fix issue). Must generate ≥1 proposal per scan if any discrepancy exists. If 0 proposals for 3 scans → deeper analysis. (Section [9.6](#96-specification-evolution-supervisor)) | Periodic deep scan, discrepancy classification, proposal generation |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Cross-Cutting Protocols

### 22.112 R-112: PR Concurrent Work Conflict Matrix

**Goal**: Before modifying a PR, agents must check for other agents concurrently working on the same PR and either wait or coordinate based on a defined conflict matrix.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (shared protocol)**

| Work Type | Conflicts With | Resolution |
|-----------|---------------|------------|
| `code-change` | `code-change`, `merge-attempt` | Wait 5 min, retry |
| `merge-attempt` | `code-change`, `merge-attempt`, `test-fix` | Wait 5 min, retry |
| `test-fix` | `code-change`, `merge-attempt`, `test-fix` | Wait 5 min, retry |
| `review` | (nothing) | Proceed immediately |

**15-minute stale override**: If the conflicting agent has been working >15 minutes, proceed anyway (they may be stuck).

---

### 22.113 R-113: Guaranteed Resource Cleanup via CleanupManager

**Goal**: All acquired resources (claims, clones, temp files, cookies) must be released even when exceptions occur. Cleanup failures must not suppress the original exception.

**Redundancy Depth: Universal**

| Resource Type | Cleanup Action | Guaranteed By |
|--------------|----------------|---------------|
| Work claims | Post `[RELEASE:<id>]` comment | `try/finally` |
| Clone directories | `rm -rf /tmp/isolated-*` (with safety checks) | `try/finally` |
| Temp files | `os.unlink()` | `try/finally` |
| Cookie files | `rm /tmp/*_cookies.txt` | `try/finally` |

---

### 22.114 R-114: Startup Credential Validation Gate

**Goal**: Every agent must validate all required credentials exist and match expected formats at startup, BEFORE performing any work. Missing or malformed credentials halt execution immediately.

**Redundancy Depth: Universal**

| Credential | Format Regex | Required By |
|-----------|-------------|-------------|
| `FORGEJO_PAT` | `^[a-f0-9]{40}$` | All agents |
| `GIT_USER_EMAIL` | `^[^@]+@[^@]+\.[^@]+$` | All cloning agents |
| `GIT_USER_NAME` | Non-empty string | All cloning agents |
| `FORGEJO_USERNAME` | `^[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+$` | CI log fetching agents |
| `FORGEJO_PASSWORD` | `^.{8,}$` | CI log fetching agents |
| `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` | `^[a-f0-9]{40}$` | PR Review Pool, PR Reviewer |

**Validation reports format**: "FORGEJO_PAT: ✓ Set" or "FORGEJO_PAT: ✗ Missing" — never shows actual values.

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Specialized Subagent Responsibilities

### 22.115 R-115: Issue Analyzer Structured Data Extraction

**Goal**: Extract and return structured data from a Forgejo issue — metadata, subtask states, DoD items, comment summaries, and dependency graph — so calling agents don't need to parse issue bodies themselves.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (subagent)**

| Output Field | Extraction Method |
|-------------|-------------------|
| **Metadata** | Parse `## Metadata` section: Branch, Commit Message, milestone, type, priority, MoSCoW, assignee, parent Epic |
| **Subtasks** | Parse `## Subtasks` section: preserve order, extract checkbox state (`[x]` vs `[ ]`), strip formatting |
| **Definition of Done** | Parse `## Definition of Done` section: list of criteria |
| **Comment summaries** | Read ALL comments (paginated), extract who/when/key-info, filter bot noise |
| **Dependency graph** | Query Forgejo dependency API: blocking and blocked-by with current issue state |
| **Missing sections** | Report explicitly rather than guessing |

---

### 22.116 R-116: Subtask Checker Fuzzy Match Checkbox Toggle

**Goal**: Match completed subtask descriptions (which may be paraphrased) to the closest subtask in the issue body and toggle its checkbox, without modifying any other content.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (subagent)**

| Rule | Enforcement |
|------|-------------|
| Matching is content-similarity, NOT exact string match | Handles paraphrased descriptions |
| ONLY modify `[ ]` → `[x]` | Never uncheck, never change text |
| Preserve ALL other formatting, whitespace, content | Issue body is not reformatted |
| Skip already-checked subtasks | Idempotent operation |
| Report unmatched descriptions | Caller can investigate |

---

### 22.117 R-117: Issue Note Writer Logical Reference Protocol

**Goal**: Implementation notes posted to issues must reference code by logical location (module path, class, method), NEVER by line number, and must include the git commit hash for traceability.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (subagent)**

| Mandatory Section | Content |
|-------------------|---------|
| Implementation summary | What was done and why |
| Design decisions | Chosen approach + rejected alternatives |
| Discoveries/assumptions | Found during implementation |
| Code locations | Module.class.method format (NEVER file:line) |
| Workarounds/deviations | From original plan, with justification |
| Test results | Before/after coverage numbers |
| Risk mitigations | Applied or needed |

---

### 22.118 R-118: PR Status Analyzer 5-Dimension Framework

**Goal**: Provide deep PR health assessment across five dimensions with structured output including blocking issues and fix recommendations.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (subagent)**

| Dimension | What It Checks | Depth Levels |
|-----------|---------------|-------------|
| **Basic info** | Open/draft/closed, title, linked issue | All levels |
| **Merge conflicts** | Conflict detection, complexity rating (trivial/moderate/complex) | Standard+ |
| **CI/CD status** | Check categorization, optional log fetching via ci-log-fetcher | Standard+ |
| **Review status** | Approval state against requirements | Standard+ |
| **Branch status** | Ahead/behind counts vs base | Standard+ |

**Three depth levels**: `quick` (basic + CI only), `standard` (all 5 dimensions), `comprehensive` (all 5 + log fetching + delta comparison).

---

### 22.119 R-119: Difficulty Evaluator 5-Criteria Assessment

**Goal**: Before implementation, assess subtask difficulty across five axes to recommend the cheapest viable starting model tier, saving cost on simple tasks while ensuring complex tasks get adequate reasoning power.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (pre-gate)**

| Criterion | Simple | Moderate | Complex | Very Complex |
|-----------|--------|----------|---------|-------------|
| **Scope** | 1-2 files | 3-5 files | 5-10 files | 10+ files |
| **Algorithmic** | CRUD, simple logic | Moderate algorithms | Complex algorithms, types | Concurrency, distributed |
| **Novelty** | Extending patterns | New within patterns | New architecture | Novel approach |
| **Integration** | Internal only | 1-2 interfaces | Multiple interfaces | System-wide |
| **Ambiguity** | Clear requirements | Some interpretation | Significant gaps | Major unknowns |

**Conservative bias**: When uncertain → recommend LOWER tier. `very_complex` should be RARE. Escalation handles under-estimation automatically; over-estimation wastes money with no recovery.

---

### 22.120 R-120: Milestone Reviewer Holistic Integration Review

**Goal**: After all issues in a milestone are merged, review the INTEGRATED codebase for cross-issue problems that per-PR reviews cannot catch.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (post-milestone)**

| Review Area | What It Catches |
|------------|----------------|
| **Integration gaps** | Missing glue code between components from different issues |
| **API consistency** | Naming, parameter ordering, error handling inconsistencies across public API |
| **Specification coverage** | Spec requirements without corresponding implementation or tests |
| **Test quality** | Integration test gaps between modules; trivial/meaningless tests |
| **Error handling coherence** | Inconsistent error propagation from module boundaries to top level |
| **Performance** | O(n²) patterns, unbounded queries, resource leaks introduced across milestone |
| **Documentation** | Undocumented new public APIs |
| **Technical debt** | TODO/FIXME/HACK introduced; dead code; orphaned files |

**Assessment**: PASS (all clean), PASS WITH ISSUES (tests pass but minor gaps → issues created), FAIL (tests fail, critical integration gaps, significant spec unmet).

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Product Builder Lifecycle Gates

### 22.121 R-121: Phase A Bootstrap Skip Condition

**Goal**: Skip the bootstrap phase entirely when the project already has its foundational structure, avoiding redundant work.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Detection | All FOUR must exist | Action if Missing |
|-----------|-------------------|-------------------|
| `pyproject.toml` | Build configuration | Invoke `project-bootstrapper` |
| `noxfile.py` | Task runner config | Invoke `project-bootstrapper` |
| `.forgejo/workflows/` | CI pipeline | Invoke `project-bootstrapper` |
| `CONTRIBUTING.md` | Development standards | Invoke `project-bootstrapper` |

If all four exist → skip Phase A entirely, proceed to Phase C.

---

### 22.122 R-122: prompt_async Mandatory for Supervisor Launch

**Goal**: Supervisors must be launched via `prompt_async` (fire-and-forget), NEVER via the Task tool. The Task tool blocks the caller until the subagent completes, and since supervisors run indefinitely, this would block the Product Builder forever.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (architectural constraint)**

| Method | Behavior | Use For |
|--------|----------|---------|
| `prompt_async` (via Async Agent Manager) | Returns 204 immediately | **Supervisors** (run indefinitely) |
| Task tool | Blocks until subagent returns | **One-shot subagents** (return results) |

---

### 22.123 R-123: All 18 Supervisors Mandatory Verification

**Goal**: After launching supervisors, verify ALL 18 have active session IDs. Partial launch is a CRITICAL ERROR — any missing supervisor creates a gap in system functionality.

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Verification Step | Action on Failure |
|-------------------|-------------------|
| Read `/tmp/supervisor-sessions.env` | Recreate file |
| Count session entries ≥ 18 | Immediately re-launch missing types |
| Verify each session ID active via API | Re-launch dead sessions |
| Log tiered worker counts per pool | Alert if allocation incorrect |

---

### 22.124 R-124: Convergence Check Algorithm

**Goal**: Determine when the product is potentially complete and invoke the Product Verifier. This is the gate between "keep building" and "verify completion."

**Redundancy Depth: Single**

| Step | Check | Outcome |
|------|-------|---------|
| 1 (every 10 heartbeats) | Query Forgejo for open issues in target milestones | If open_issues > 0 → continue |
| 2 | Query Forgejo for open PRs | If open_prs > 0 → continue |
| 3 | Check for pending spec PRs | If pending_spec_prs > 0 → continue |
| 4 | ALL zeros | Invoke Product Verifier (one-shot via Task tool) |
| 5a | Verifier returns COMPLETE | Proceed to Phase D (final report + exit) |
| 5b | Verifier returns INCOMPLETE | Verifier creates issues for gaps; supervisors discover them; continue Phase C |

---

### 22.125 R-125: Product Builder Never Edits or Merges Directly

**Goal**: The Product Builder is a process supervisor (like systemd), not a worker. Even when everything is down, it must not do the work itself — it must re-launch the appropriate supervisor instead.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (behavioral prohibition)**

| Forbidden Action | Required Alternative |
|-----------------|---------------------|
| Implement an issue | Re-launch Implementation Pool |
| Edit code directly | Delegate to Implementation Worker |
| Create a PR | Delegate to PR Creator via worker |
| Merge a PR | Re-launch PR Merge Pool |
| Review a PR | Re-launch PR Review Pool |
| Fix CI | Re-launch PR Fix Pool |

---

### 22.126 R-126: No Duplicate Supervisor Instances

**Goal**: Each supervisor type gets exactly ONE instance. Launching duplicates causes work duplication, coordination failures, and tracking issue conflicts.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Mechanism |
|-------|-------|-----------|
| **1 (Prevention)** | [Product Builder](#7-product-builder-tier-0-orchestrator) | Tracks active sessions by type. Checks for existing session with matching tag before launch. Skips launch for already-running types. |
| **2 (Detection)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 6: checks that ALL 16 expected supervisors are running and reports missing/duplicate ones. |

---

### Additional Responsibilities: Section 6 Universal Constraints

### 22.127 R-127: Label Creation Prohibition Enforcement

**Goal**: No agent may ever create new labels. All labels exist at the Forgejo organization level and were pre-configured during project bootstrapping. This is enforced through three independent mechanisms.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Mechanism | Scope |
|-------|-----------|-------|
| **1 (Permission Denial)** | Every agent's permission block explicitly denies `forgejo_create_label`, `forgejo_create_org_label`, `forgejo_create_repo_label` | 79 agent definitions |
| **2 (Bash URL Blocking)** | Every agent's bash permissions deny `*api/v1/orgs/*/labels*` and `*api/v1/repos/*/labels*` patterns | All bash-enabled agents |
| **3 (Delegation)** | Agents that need to apply labels must delegate to [Forgejo Label Manager](#2110-forgejo-label-manager-five-operations), which itself cannot create labels but can apply existing ones | All label-applying agents |

---

### 22.128 R-128: Valid State Transition Matrix Enforcement

**Goal**: Issue state transitions must follow the defined state machine. Invalid transitions (e.g., directly from `State/Unverified` to `State/In Review` without going through `State/Verified` and `State/In Progress`) are prevented.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| From State | Valid Transitions To |
|-----------|---------------------|
| `State/Unverified` | `State/Verified`, `State/Wont Do` |
| `State/Verified` | `State/In Progress` |
| `State/In Progress` | `State/Paused` (requires Blocked label), `State/In Review` (requires open PR) |
| `State/Paused` | `State/In Progress` (requires blocker resolved) |
| `State/In Review` | `State/Completed` (requires PR merged) |
| Any | `State/Wont Do`, `State/Completed` (maintainer decision) |

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1** | [Issue State Updater](#122-issue-management-agents) | Validates preconditions before each transition. Rejects invalid transitions. |
| **2** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 4/9: detects issues in impossible states and corrects them. |

---

### 22.129 R-129: Priority Ordering Rules for Milestone Work

**Goal**: Implementation work must follow strict priority ordering: lower milestones complete before higher ones, and within a milestone, critical work comes first. No agent should work on Milestone 3 while Milestone 1 has open critical bugs.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1 (Dispatch)** | [Implementation Pool](#81-implementation-pool-supervisor) | Issue dispatch ordering (R-98): CI-Blocker → Critical bugs across all milestones → lowest milestone → In Progress → Priority → MoSCoW → unblock score. |
| **2 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 4: verifies work follows priority/milestone ordering; detects later-milestone work while critical bugs exist in earlier milestones. |

---

### 22.130 R-130: Standard Issue Body Format Enforcement

**Goal**: Every issue must follow the CONTRIBUTING.md body format with three mandatory sections: `## Metadata` (Branch, Commit Message, Parent Epic), `## Subtasks` (at least one `- [ ]` checkbox), and `## Definition of Done`.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1 (At Creation)** | [New Issue Creator](#122-issue-management-agents), [Epic Planner](#92-epic-planning-supervisor) | Creates issues with compliant body format. Standard DoD includes: all subtasks complete, unit tests ≥97%, integration tests, quality gates pass, PR created and approved, PR merged. |
| **2 (Verification)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 11: checks for `## Metadata`, `## Subtasks`, `## Definition of Done` headings. Posts comment listing missing sections. |

---

### 22.131 R-131: Standard PR Body Format Enforcement

**Goal**: Every PR must follow the standard format with Summary, Changes, Design Decisions, Testing, Modules Affected, Related Issues sections, plus closing keywords (`Closes #N`) and a compliance checklist.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1 (At Creation)** | [PR Description Writer](#121-pr-management-agents) | Generates PR body with standard sections. Includes closing keywords for linked issues. |
| **2 (Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Checks CONTRIBUTING.md compliance including PR metadata (closing keywords, type label, milestone, title format). |

---

### 22.132 R-132: Subagent Specialization Principle

**Goal**: Functionality needed by multiple agents MUST be centralized in a single subagent. Duplicated logic across agent definitions is a code smell requiring refactoring.

**Redundancy Depth: Universal (architectural principle)**

| Centralized Function | Subagent | Why Not Duplicated |
|---------------------|---------|-------------------|
| Label operations | [Forgejo Label Manager](#2110-forgejo-label-manager-five-operations) | Name-to-ID mapping, conflict detection |
| Tracking issue lifecycle | [Automation Tracking Manager](#125-label-and-forgejo-agents) | Close-all protocol, cycle numbering |
| Cycle interval calculation | ATM's `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` | Rolling average formula |
| Announcement review cycle | ATM's `CYCLE_ANNOUNCEMENT_REVIEW` | Combined read + review + close |
| Merge verification | [Shared Merge Safety](#136-merge-safety-sharedmerge_safetymd) | 7-rule protocol |

---

### 22.133 R-133: Announcement Consumption Priority Protocol

**Goal**: Each agent reads announcements from specific other agents at specific minimum priority levels and depths, preventing low-priority noise from disrupting high-priority work while ensuring critical events are seen.

**Redundancy Depth: Universal**

| Consumer | Reads From | Min Priority | Read Depth |
|----------|-----------|-------------|------------|
| System Watchdog | All agents | All | Full (body + comments) |
| Product Builder | All agents | Medium+ | Full |
| Human Liaison | All agents | High+ | Full |
| Implementation Pool | Watchdog, Liaison, Groomer | High+ | Summary only |
| PR Review Pool | Watchdog, Liaison | Critical only | Summary only |
| PR Merge Pool | Watchdog | Critical only | Summary only (pauses merging if critical) |
| All other supervisors | Watchdog | Critical only | Title + priority label only |

---

### 22.134 R-134: Internet Access Restriction

**Goal**: No autonomous agent may access the internet. Only three user-facing primary agents (`build`, `build-opencode`, `plan`) have `webfetch: allow`. All autonomous agents work entirely from local files, the Forgejo API, and the OpenCode Server API.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (permission enforcement)**

| Agent Category | Internet Access | Rationale |
|---------------|----------------|-----------|
| User-facing (3 agents) | `webfetch: allow` | Human-invoked, may need external docs |
| All autonomous (76+ agents) | `webfetch: deny` (or not granted) | Security: autonomous agents must never fetch external resources, download dependencies, or access external services |

---

### Category H — Project Standards and CONTRIBUTING.md Compliance

### 22.135 R-135: File Organization Enforcement

**Goal**: All source code, tests, and documentation must follow the project's directory structure. No agent may place files in incorrect locations.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Location | Contents | Rule |
|----------|----------|------|
| `src/cleveragents/` | All production source code | Modules here, nowhere else |
| `features/` | Unit tests (Behave/BDD/Gherkin) | One `.feature` per capability |
| `features/mocks/` | Mock implementations | All mocks here, never inline |
| `features/steps/` | Step definitions | Step implementations |
| `robot/` | Integration tests (Robot Framework) | No mocking allowed |
| `benchmarks/` | Performance benchmarks (ASV) | Airspeed Velocity format |
| `docs/` | Documentation (mkdocs) | Spec, API, architecture, timeline |
| `.opencode/agents/` | Agent definitions only | Agent Evolution exclusive |

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1 (Implementation)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Delegates to specialist testers that know their target directories |
| **2 (Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Checks files are in correct directories per CONTRIBUTING.md |
| **3 (Hygiene)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 11: checks issue body metadata for correct branch/path references |

---

### 22.136 R-136: Static Typing and `type: ignore` Prohibition

**Goal**: All Python code must be fully statically typed. The `# type: ignore` comment is absolutely prohibited — Pyright must pass without suppression.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1 (Fixing)** | [Typecheck Fixer](#114-specialized-workers) | Runs `nox -e typecheck` (Pyright) and fixes errors. Explicit instruction: "Never uses `# type: ignore`." Must resolve the actual type error. |
| **2 (Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | CONTRIBUTING.md compliance check: scans diff for `type: ignore` strings, requests changes if found. |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 12/13: session spot-checks for `type: ignore` in tool outputs; flags as policy violation. |

---

### 22.137 R-137: Maximum File Size Enforcement (500 Lines)

**Goal**: No source file may exceed 500 lines. Files approaching this limit must be refactored into smaller modules.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1 (Implementation)** | [Implementation Worker](#101-implementation-worker) | Rule in system prompt: "Maximum 500 lines per file." Workers must split files that grow beyond this limit. |
| **2 (Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Checks file sizes in PR diff; requests changes for files exceeding 500 lines. |

---

### 22.138 R-138: Testing Framework Selection Rules

**Goal**: The correct testing framework must be used for each test level. Using the wrong framework (e.g., xUnit for unit tests, or mocking in integration tests) is a violation.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Test Level | Required Framework | Key Rules |
|-----------|-------------------|-----------|
| **Unit tests** | Behave (BDD/Gherkin) | Given/When/Then scenarios in `features/`. Never xUnit (pytest, unittest). Mocks in `features/mocks/`. |
| **Integration tests** | Robot Framework | Keyword-driven in `robot/`. NO mocking allowed — tests must use real component interactions. |
| **Performance** | ASV (Airspeed Velocity) | Benchmarks in `benchmarks/`. `time_*` and `mem_*` methods. |

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1 (Creation)** | [Behave Tester](#114-specialized-workers), [Robot Tester](#114-specialized-workers), [ASV Benchmarker](#114-specialized-workers) | Each tester writes in its designated framework only |
| **2 (Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Checks that new tests use correct framework; rejects xUnit-style tests |
| **3 (Infrastructure)** | [Test Infrastructure Pool](#87-test-infrastructure-pool-supervisor) | Verifies all three test levels exist per module; never weakens framework requirements |

---

### 22.139 R-139: Coverage Threshold Enforcement (97%)

**Goal**: Test coverage must be ≥97% at all times. No merge, no PR approval, and no milestone completion can proceed below this threshold.

**Redundancy Depth: Triple**

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement Point |
|-------|-------|-------------------|
| **1 (Pre-PR)** | [Coverage Improver](#114-specialized-workers) | Writes additional tests until coverage ≥97% before PR creation |
| **2 (Merge Gate)** | [PR Merge Pool](#83-pr-merge-pool-supervisor) | CI check includes coverage; failing coverage blocks merge |
| **3 (Audit)** | [System Watchdog](#911-system-watchdog-supervisor) | Audit 1: verifies recent master commits have passing coverage |

---

### 22.140 R-140: Conventional Changelog Commit Format

**Goal**: Every commit message must follow Conventional Changelog format enforced by Commitizen: `type(scope): description` where type is feat/fix/refactor/test/docs/chore/ci/style/perf.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Enforcement |
|-------|-------|-------------|
| **1 (Formatting)** | [Commit Message Formatter](#2118-commit-message-formatter-three-part-format) | Constructs three-part message: exact `type(scope): description` from issue Metadata, implementation body, `ISSUES CLOSED: #N` footer |
| **2 (Review)** | [PR Reviewer](#1212-pr-reviewer-detailed-specification) | Checks commit message format in PR; requests changes for non-conventional messages |

---

### 22.141 R-141: Supervisor Mandatory Startup Sequence

**Goal**: Every supervisor must execute a strict 4-step startup sequence. Deviating from this order causes data loss (reading state after creating a new tracking issue reads the empty new issue instead of the previous session's state).

**Redundancy Depth: Universal**

| Step | Action | Why This Order |
|------|--------|---------------|
| **1** | `READ_TRACKING_STATE` (recover from previous session) | MUST be first — `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` closes all old issues, destroying recoverable state |
| **2** | Parse recovered state (extract work items, health indicators, cycle number) | Uses data from Step 1 |
| **3** | `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` (closes all old status issues, creates new one) | Safe to close old issues because state was already recovered |
| **4** | Begin main processing loop using recovered state to inform first cycle | Longer offline = more aggressive first-cycle scanning |

---

### 22.142 R-142: Startup State Recovery Before Tracking Creation

**Goal**: When a supervisor starts or restarts, it must read its most recent tracking issue to recover state BEFORE creating a new one. Creating first destroys the recoverable state.

**Redundancy Depth: Universal**

| Agent Category | Recovery Behavior |
|---------------|-------------------|
| **Implementation Pool** | Parse worker table for PR/issue numbers. Check each on Forgejo. Resume in-progress work before scanning for new. |
| **PR Review Pool** | Parse recently-reviewed PR list. Check if those PRs still need attention (new commits since review). |
| **PR Merge Pool** | Parse merge candidate list. Re-check those PRs for merge readiness. |
| **System Watchdog** | Parse health indicators. Compare against current state to detect changes during offline period. |
| **Product Builder** | Parse supervisor session list. Cross-reference with active sessions to detect which need re-launch. |
| **All others** | Parse cycle number and summary. Longer offline = more aggressive scanning. |

---

### 22.143 R-143: Dual Status Issue Cleanup (Defense-in-Depth)

**Goal**: At most one open status tracking issue per agent prefix at any time. Two independent cleanup mechanisms ensure this invariant even under crash conditions.

**Redundancy Depth: Double**

| Layer | Agent | Mechanism | When |
|-------|-------|-----------|------|
| **1 (Primary: agent-side)** | Every supervisor via `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` | Closes ALL open status issues with same prefix before creating new one. Searches with `state: "open"`, no pagination limits. Posts "Superseded by Cycle N." | Every cycle |
| **2 (Safety net: groomer-side)** | [Backlog Groomer](#97-backlog-grooming-supervisor) | Pass 20: finds prefixes with >1 open status issue, closes all but newest. Catches: race conditions (two agents launched simultaneously), crash between create and close, Forgejo API returning success but not actually closing. | Every grooming cycle |

---

### 22.144 R-144: Tier Selector Pure Pass-Through Constraint

**Goal**: The four tier selector agents (`tier-haiku`, `tier-codex`, `tier-sonnet`, `tier-opus`) must act as pure pass-through proxies that only set the model via their frontmatter. They must NOT modify, interpret, filter, summarize, or add to the context they receive.

**Redundancy Depth: Single (architectural)**

| Tier Agent | Model Set | Constraint |
|-----------|-----------|------------|
| `tier-haiku` | `anthropic/claude-haiku` | Must invoke requested `worker_type` with UNMODIFIED context |
| `tier-codex` | `openai/gpt-5-codex` | Must invoke requested `worker_type` with UNMODIFIED context |
| `tier-sonnet` | `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6` | Must invoke requested `worker_type` with UNMODIFIED context |
| `tier-opus` | `anthropic/claude-opus-4-6` | Must invoke requested `worker_type` with UNMODIFIED context |

**Why this matters**: If a tier selector summarizes context, the worker receives degraded information. If it adds instructions, it overrides the worker's own specialized prompt. The tier selector's ONLY job is model selection.

---

### 22.145 Redundancy Analysis Summary

!!! info "How Deep Is the Defense?"

    This section provides a statistical overview of the redundancy model across all 144 responsibilities. The system's reliability comes not from any single agent being perfect, but from multiple independent agents checking the same invariants from different perspectives.

#### Redundancy Depth Distribution

| Depth | Count | Percentage | Meaning |
|-------|-------|-----------|---------|
| **Quadruple** | 3 | 2% | Four independent agents check the same invariant (R-09 Label Correctness, R-10 State Lifecycle, R-16 Bug Detection) |
| **Triple** | 22 | 15% | Three independent checks (e.g., R-01 Supervisor Liveness: PB session check + PB deep inspection + Watchdog behavioral analysis) |
| **Double** | 40 | 28% | Two independent checks (e.g., R-05 Code Review: PR Reviewer quality + Implementation Reviewer correctness) |
| **Single** | 55 | 38% | One agent responsible but with crash recovery or protocol enforcement |
| **Universal** | 14 | 10% | Applies to all agents via shared modules or permission blocks (e.g., R-64 Nox Routing, R-113 Cleanup Manager, R-114 Credential Validation) |
| **Multi-level** | 1 | <1% | Different recovery mechanism at each system level (R-21 Crash Recovery) |
| **Single (exclusive)** | 9 | 6% | Deliberately single-owner to prevent conflicting edits (e.g., R-17 Documentation/Timeline exclusive domains, R-107 MoSCoW exclusive authority) |

#### Highest-Redundancy Responsibilities

These responsibilities have the deepest defense-in-depth, reflecting their criticality:

| Responsibility | Depth | Agents Involved | Why Critical |
|---------------|-------|----------------|-------------|
| [R-09](#229-r-09-label-and-metadata-correctness) | Quadruple | Label Manager → Creating agents → Groomer → Watchdog → Reconciler | Wrong labels cascade: wrong priority → wrong work order → milestone delays |
| [R-10](#2210-r-10-issue-state-lifecycle-management) | Quadruple | State Updater → Groomer → Watchdog → Reconciler | Wrong state prevents work from progressing through the pipeline |
| [R-16](#2216-r-16-bug-detection-and-proactive-quality-assurance) | Quadruple | Bug Hunt (code) → UAT (spec) → Reviewer (per-PR) → Guard (structure) | Undetected bugs reach production |
| [R-01](#221-r-01-supervisor-liveness-and-health-monitoring) | Triple | PB session check → PB deep inspection → Watchdog behavioral analysis | Dead supervisor = entire capability gap |
| [R-06](#226-r-06-quality-gate-enforcement) | Triple | Pre-PR gates → Post-PR CI fixer → Post-merge Watchdog audit | Bad code on master breaks everything |
| [R-12](#2212-r-12-merge-safety-and-branch-protection) | Triple | Bootstrapper sets → Merge Safety enforces → Watchdog audits → Enforcer repairs | Bypassed protection = unreviewed code on master |

#### Most Cross-Referenced Agents

These agents participate in the most responsibilities, making them the system's most critical components:

| Agent | Responsibility Count | Role Pattern |
|-------|---------------------|-------------|
| **Backlog Groomer** | 24 | The universal safety net — verifies and auto-fixes work done by every other agent |
| **System Watchdog** | 24 | The universal auditor — detects violations across every system invariant |
| **Implementation Worker** | 30 | The universal executor — touches every phase of the implementation pipeline |
| **PR Reviewer** | 12 | The quality gatekeeper — checks code, tests, patterns, flaky tests, compliance |
| **Product Builder** | 12 | The orchestrator — manages supervisor lifecycle, convergence, and spec PRs |
| **PR Merge Pool** | 12 | The merge authority — verifies 7 criteria, 3-tier approval, post-merge state |
| **Epic Planner** | 8 | The planner — decomposes work, enforces hierarchy, manages closure |
| **Project Owner** | 12 | The strategist — MoSCoW, developer assignment, priority re-evaluation |

#### Redundancy Pattern Taxonomy

The system uses five distinct redundancy patterns:

| Pattern | Description | Example |
|---------|------------|---------|
| **Create → Verify → Audit → Bulk-Fix** | Agent creates, second verifies, third audits, fourth bulk-fixes | Labels: Creator → Groomer → Watchdog → Reconciler |
| **Self-detect → External-detect** | Agent detects its own problems, independent agent detects the same from outside | Worker stuck detection → Watchdog struggling PR detection |
| **Pre-action → Post-action → Post-merge** | Gate before, gate after, audit after merge | Quality gates: Subtask Loop → CI Fixer → Watchdog |
| **Primary → Backup → Safety net** | Main path, fallback path, emergency recovery | Merge: Merge Pool → Worker merge → Watchdog false-merge monitor |
| **Exclusive domain** | Deliberately single-owner to prevent conflicts | Documentation vs Timeline: separate agents, non-overlapping files |

---

## Appendix A: Complete Agent Registry

| # | Agent | Mode | Model | Tracking Prefix | Type |
|---|-------|------|-------|-----------------|------|
| 1 | product-builder | primary | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-PROD-BLDR | Orchestrator |
| 2 | implementation-pool-supervisor | all | (inherited) | AUTO-IMP-POOL | Pool Supervisor |
| 3 | pr-review-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-REV-POOL | Pool Supervisor |
| 4 | pr-merge-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-MERGE | Singleton Supervisor |
| 5 | pr-fix-pool-supervisor | *(removed — absorbed into implementation-pool-supervisor)* | -- | -- | -- |
| 6 | uat-test-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-UAT-POOL | Pool Supervisor |
| 7 | bug-hunt-pool-supervisor | subagent | gemini-2.5-pro | AUTO-BUG-SUP | Pool Supervisor |
| 8 | test-infra-pool-supervisor | subagent | gemini-2.5-pro | AUTO-INF-POOL | Pool Supervisor |
| 9 | architecture-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-ARCH | Singleton Supervisor |
| 10 | epic-planning-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-EPIC | Singleton Supervisor |
| 11 | human-liaison-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-LIAISON | Singleton Supervisor |
| 12 | agent-evolution-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-EVLV | Singleton Supervisor |
| 13 | architecture-guard-pool-supervisor | subagent | gemini-2.5-pro | AUTO-GUARD | Singleton Supervisor |
| 14 | spec-update-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-SPEC | Singleton Supervisor |
| 15 | backlog-grooming-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-GROOMER | Singleton Supervisor |
| 16 | documentation-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-DOCS | Singleton Supervisor |
| 17 | timeline-update-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-TIME | Singleton Supervisor |
| 18 | project-owner-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-PROJ-OWN | Singleton Supervisor |
| 19 | system-watchdog-pool-supervisor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | AUTO-WDOG | Singleton Supervisor |
| 20 | implementation-worker | subagent | gpt-5-codex | AUTO-IMP-WRK | Worker |
| 21 | pr-reviewer | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Worker |
| 22 | subtask-loop | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Worker |
| 23 | implementer | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 24 | behave-tester | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 25 | robot-tester | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 26 | lint-fixer | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 27 | typecheck-fixer | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 28 | test-fixer | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 29 | coverage-improver | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 30 | unit-test-runner | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 31 | integration-test-runner | subagent | (inherited) | -- | Specialist |
| 32 | tier-haiku | subagent | claude-haiku-4-5 | -- | Tier Selector |
| 33 | tier-codex | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Tier Selector |
| 34 | tier-sonnet | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Tier Selector |
| 35 | tier-opus | subagent | claude-opus-4-6 | -- | Tier Selector |
| 36 | async-agent-manager | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Infrastructure |
| 37 | async-agent-cleanup | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Infrastructure |
| 38 | async-agent-cleanup-all | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Infrastructure |
| 39 | async-agent-monitor | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Infrastructure |
| 40 | automation-tracking-manager | subagent | gpt-5-nano | -- | Infrastructure |
| 41 | session-persister | subagent | gpt-5-nano | AUTO-SESSION | Infrastructure |
| 42 | repo-isolator | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Infrastructure |
| 43 | git-committer | subagent | gpt-5-nano | -- | Infrastructure |
| 44 | git-commit-helper | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Infrastructure |
| 45 | branch-setup | subagent | gpt-5-nano | -- | Infrastructure |
| 46 | ci-log-fetcher | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Infrastructure |
| 47 | ref-reader | subagent | gemini-2.5-pro | -- | Knowledge |
| 48 | ref-material-loader | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Knowledge |
| 49 | spec-reader | subagent | gemini-2.5-pro | -- | Knowledge |
| 50 | difficulty-evaluator | subagent | claude-haiku-4-5 | -- | Knowledge |
| 51 | pr-manager | all | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | PR Management |
| 52 | pr-creator | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | PR Management |
| 53 | pr-editor | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | PR Management |
| 54 | pr-status-analyzer | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | PR Management |
| 55 | pr-ci-test-fixer | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | PR Management |
| 56 | pr-description-writer | subagent | claude-haiku-4-5 | -- | PR Management |
| 57 | issue-finder | subagent | gpt-5-nano | -- | Issue Management |
| 58 | issue-analyzer | subagent | claude-haiku-4-5 | -- | Issue Management |
| 59 | issue-note-writer | subagent | claude-haiku-4-5 | -- | Issue Management |
| 60 | issue-comment-formatter | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Issue Management |
| 61 | issue-state-updater | subagent | gpt-5-nano | -- | Issue Management |
| 62 | new-issue-creator | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Issue Management |
| 63 | subtask-checker | subagent | gpt-5-nano | -- | Issue Management |
| 64 | forgejo-label-manager | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Forgejo |
| 65 | forgejo-signature-appender | subagent | gpt-5-codex | -- | Forgejo |
| 66 | implementation-reviewer | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Quality |
| 67 | milestone-reviewer | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Quality |
| 68 | product-verifier | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Quality |
| 69 | quality-enforcer | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Quality |
| 70 | state-reconciler | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Quality |
| 71 | project-bootstrapper | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Bootstrap |
| 72 | final-reporter | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Reporting |
| 73 | commit-message-formatter | subagent | gpt-5-nano | -- | Utility |
| 74 | plan | all | (not specified) | -- | Planning |
| 75 | session-cleanup | primary | (not specified) | -- | Maintenance |
| 76 | asv-benchmarker | subagent | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Specialist |
| 77 | build | primary | (not specified) | -- | Primary Agent |
| 78 | build-opencode | primary | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Primary Agent |
| 79 | fix-pr | primary | claude-sonnet-4-6 | -- | Primary Agent |

!!! note "Non-Autonomous Agents"

    Agent 76 (ASV Benchmarker) is a **hidden subagent** called by the Subtask Loop during the testing phase, not a user-facing tool. Agents 77-79 are **primary agents** invoked directly by human users (not part of the autonomous supervisor hierarchy):

    - **ASV Benchmarker** (76): Writes Airspeed Velocity performance benchmarks in `benchmarks/`. Hidden subagent (`mode: subagent`, `hidden: true`).
    - **Build** (77): General-purpose development agent replacing the default build agent. Reads CONTRIBUTING.md before any changes.
    - **Build OpenCode** (78): Specialized agent for editing `.opencode/` agent definition files. The one exception to clone isolation (works on `/app/.opencode/` directly).
    - **Fix PR** (79): Primary agent for manual PR fixing invoked by users. Orchestrates subagents for comprehensive PR resolution.

---

## Appendix B: Revision History

!!! note "Section Number References"

    Section references in revision entries v1.0.0 through v1.14.0 use section numbers from the time they were written. Sections were renumbered in v1.15.0 when Sections 2 (Agent Definition Format) and 3 (Glossary) were inserted, shifting all subsequent sections by +2. The mapping is: old Section N → new Section N+2 for N ≥ 3.

| Date | Version | Changes |
|------|---------|---------|
| 2026-04-10 | 1.0.0 | Initial specification capturing all 75+ active agents |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.1.0 | Second pass: Added TDD Tags system, complete label taxonomy, state transition diagram, dependency direction rules, work item claiming protocol, standard issue/PR body formats, priority ordering rules, merge safety protocol, CI artifact mapping, detailed singleton supervisor workflows with subagent lists, Human Liaison 10-step loop with activity diagram, Agent Evolution two-step proposal workflow, Spec Update two-step proposal workflow, Architecture Guard 7 check categories, Backlog Grooming 19 analysis passes enumerated, announcement cleanup protocol, Implementation Worker PR-fix mode activity diagram, escalation state persistence, Forgejo coordination flow diagram, tracking ticket coordination diagram, detailed Quality Enforcer/State Reconciler/Bootstrapper/Verifier/Reviewer specifications |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.2.0 | Third pass incorporating recent git changes: 3-Tier Approval Detection system (4.17.1), Two-Step Review Protocol (4.17.2), Approval Count Policy (4.17.3), Label Delegation Enforcement (4.19), expanded PR Reviewer with flaky test detection, expanded Implementation Worker with Deep Context Gathering and Loop Prevention, expanded System Watchdog audits (7.11.2, 7.11.3) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.3.0 | Fourth pass: Fixed 6.3 PR Merge stale 2-tier approval; added PR management critical behavioral rules (10.1.1); added Ref Material Loader caching (10.4); added Difficulty Evaluator bias (10.4); added Async Agent Manager/Cleanup details (10.7); added Issue management agent details (10.2) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.4.0 | Fifth pass: Fixed announcement cleanup thresholds; added Sections 17 (Known Discrepancies) and 18 (15 behavioral specifications) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.5.0 | Sixth pass (accuracy verification): Verified all Appendix A frontmatter values; fixed both diagrams (added missing Tier 3 agents, distinguished IW modes, added 10 missing dispatch links); documented supervisor count discrepancy (17.5→17.6) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.6.0 | Seventh pass: PR Merge dual categorization note; fixed Singleton count to 12; added claim timeout discrepancy (18.5) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.7.0 | Eighth pass: Added Section 17 "Operational Model" (startup, shutdown, crash recovery, env vars, security); added spec to mkdocs.yml nav; renumbered sections 18-19; verified Kroki/markdown syntax |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.8.0 | Ninth pass: Script-verified all 79 Appendix A models and temperatures (zero mismatches); documented session tag vs tracking prefix dual-naming scheme (Section 5.5.1) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.9.0 | Tenth pass: Added 7 behavioral specs (19.16-19.22) for under-documented agents |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.10.0 | Eleventh pass: Added Sections 4.5 (visibility), 4.6 (edit permissions), 4.7 (internet access); renumbered 4.8-4.19; updated 13 cross-references |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.11.0 | Twelfth pass: Fixed PR Merge edit permission error (19.2); verified all 19 cross-references; numeric consistency audit clean |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.12.0 | Thirteenth pass: Added Section 6.9.1 Special Label Lifecycles for all 5 special labels; fixed Type/Refactoring→Type/Refactor |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.13.0 | Fourteenth pass: Expanded Section 18.2 with complete resource configuration tables; added 2 discrepancies (18.5, 18.6) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.14.0 | Fifteenth pass: Merge verification protocol, pre-merge rebase, PR-first enforcement, nox routing, cookie-based CI auth |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.15.0 | Eighteenth pass: Added Section 2 (Agent Definition Format) and Section 3 (Glossary); renumbered all sections 3→5 through 19→21 |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.16.0 | Nineteenth pass (spec vs implementation alignment): Replaced Section 20 "Known Discrepancies" with Section 20 "Design Decisions and Rationale" — removed 8 bug reports that described unintended behavior, retained 2 intentional design choices (two-tier claim timeout, config files as aspirational reference); **fixed 8 bugs in agent definition files**: config/models.yaml (updated all 16 stale agent names, fixed codex model ID to `openai/gpt-5-codex`, fixed sonnet model ID to `anthropic/claude-sonnet-4-6`); config/resources.yaml (updated all 16 stale agent names, fixed session naming pattern to `[{tag}] {display_name}`); epic-planning-pool-supervisor.md (fixed `State/Needs Verification` → `State/Unverified`); forgejo-label-manager.md (fixed `Signed-off:` → `Signed-off`, added missing `Automation Tracking`, `needs feedback`, `Priority/CI-Blocker` labels); shared/merge_safety.md (fixed `status_check_contexts` from `CI / CI` to `status-check`); session-cleanup.md (fixed `[CA-AUTO]` prefix to `[AUTO-`); product-builder.md (removed duplicate pr-merge-pool-supervisor launch entry) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.17.0 | Twentieth pass (post-commit review): Added Section 6.20 (Forgejo API Pagination Requirement), Section 6.21 (PR Ownership Detection), expanded Section 8.1.2 with three mandatory PR dispatch rules and updated work scoring table (added COMMENT review category at 85, changed awaiting-review from 40→60, removed stale-check category), added Section 21.22 (PR Reviewer Total Bash Lockdown), fixed Appendix A note to correctly identify ASV Benchmarker as subagent not primary; **fixed 6 bugs in agent definition files**: product-builder.md (fixed stale `implementation-orchestrator` reference in error handling text), async-agent-manager.md (updated entire `valid_agents` validation list from 15+ stale names to current `*-pool-supervisor` names), async-agent-monitor.md (fixed 2 stale `implementation-orchestrator` references in examples), shared/logging.md (fixed 2 stale `pr-self-reviewer` references to `pr-reviewer`), agent-evolution-pool-supervisor.md (fixed stale `continuous-pr-reviewer` reference to `pr-review-pool-supervisor`), shared/tracking_discovery_guide.md (fixed stale `implementation-orchestrator` reference in coordination example) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.18.0 | Twenty-first pass (deep functional audit): Fixed Appendix A build-opencode model from `(not specified)` to `claude-sonnet-4-6`; **fixed 6 functional bugs in agent definition files**: implementation-pool-supervisor.md (fixed task permission `timeline-updater` → `timeline-update-pool-supervisor`, fixed 2 stale task invocation references in timeline update section), test-infra-pool-supervisor.md (fixed worker launch `agent_name: test-infra-improver` → `test-infra-pool-supervisor` — workers were failing validation), uat-test-pool-supervisor.md (fixed worker launch `agent_name: uat-tester` → `uat-test-pool-supervisor` — workers were failing validation), human-liaison-pool-supervisor.md (fixed stale task invocation instruction to use Forgejo issue creation instead of direct agent invocation, fixed backtick-quoted `project-owner` → `project-owner-pool-supervisor`), async-agent-manager.md (updated documentation agent name list to match current names) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.19.0 | Twenty-second pass (cross-reference audit and config cleanup): Fixed 3 broken cross-references (Section 20.4 → inline text, Section 13.2 → Section 11.2 for escalation, removed stale `stale-check` work type from Section 10.1 worker types); **fixed 3 config file bugs**: models.yaml (removed deprecated `quality-gate-escalator` entry, added runtime model comments for `ref-reader` and `spec-reader`), resources.yaml (added missing `pr-fix-pool-supervisor` at 0.25 allocation and `pr-merge-pool-supervisor` as singleton); verified all 21 top-level sections sequential, all 23 Section 21 subsections sequential, Appendix A count matches 79 active agents (94 files minus 15 deprecated) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.20.0 | Twenty-third pass (permission block audit): **Fixed 3 agent definition bugs**: implementation-worker.md (moved `pr-creator` and `pr-ci-test-fixer` from `forgejo:` permission block to `task:` block — they were in the wrong section, preventing the IW from invoking them as subagents; also added missing `hidden: true` flag), pr-ci-test-fixer.md (fixed task permission `coverage-checker` → `coverage-improver` — coverage-checker is deprecated); verified all 79 agents' task permissions against spec subagent claims, all hidden flags correct, no other permission block misplacements |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.21.0 | Twenty-fourth pass (label deny and permission consistency audit): Expanded Section 6.19 from Automation-Tracking-Manager-specific to universal label application delegation rule documenting all 77 agents with deny + 2 intentional exceptions (forgejo-label-manager, issue-state-updater); **fixed 6 agent definition bugs**: pr-editor.md, pr-manager.md, pr-merge-pool-supervisor.md, async-agent-manager.md (all 4 missing `forgejo_add_issue_labels: deny` — could bypass label delegation), forgejo-signature-appender.md (missing deny AND broken YAML `permission: {}` creating disconnected forgejo block); verified 41 edit:deny agents match spec claim exactly, 3 webfetch:allow agents match spec claim exactly |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.22.0 | Twenty-fifth pass (directory layout, bash permissions, subsystem verification): Added Section 2.4 (Directory Layout) documenting `.opencode/` structure including agents/, shared/, config/, scripts/, deprecated stubs; **fixed 1 agent definition bug**: forgejo-signature-appender.md (missing `bash: "*": deny` and `edit: deny` — the only active agent without any bash restriction, could run arbitrary commands despite being a text-formatting-only agent); verified 3-Tier Approval Detection (Section 6.17) matches pr-merge-pool-supervisor implementation; verified Mandatory Merge Verification Protocol (Section 8.3.4) matches shared/merge_safety.md; confirmed zero remaining stale names, stale labels, or stale session prefixes across all agent files |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.23.0 | Twenty-sixth pass (deep automation tracking audit): Major rewrite of Section 5.2 (Status Issues) with one-at-a-time invariant, close-ALL-then-create protocol, and explicit "even from previous sessions" language; new Section 5.3.1 (Announcement Issue Lifecycle) with mandatory self-review every 3 cycles; new Section 5.3.2 (Tracking Issue Consumption Protocol) with per-agent triage table, read depth levels, and priority-based filtering; **fixed 4 agent definitions**: automation-tracking-manager.md (strengthened CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE to specify close-ALL-then-create invariant), backlog-grooming-pool-supervisor.md (added READ_ANNOUNCEMENTS from watchdog/liaison/owner + REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS every 3 cycles), pr-review-pool-supervisor.md (added READ_ANNOUNCEMENTS for critical watchdog/liaison + REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS), agent-evolution-pool-supervisor.md (added READ_ANNOUNCEMENTS for critical watchdog + REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS with 24h stale threshold); updated shared/tracking_discovery_guide.md with mandatory announcement review and consumption protocols |
| 2026-04-13 | 2.13.0 | Fourteenth pass (PR Merge blocking subagent migration): Changed `pr-merge-pool-supervisor` from async worker dispatch to **blocking subagent** model — it now calls `pr-merge-worker` via the Task tool and blocks until it finishes, instead of dispatching it as an async session via `async-agent-manager`. Updated 8 spec sections: Section 1.3 (added Blocking tier to worker allocation table, updated capacity examples to show ×11 singleton workers instead of ×12, adjusted session totals); Section 4.2.1 (struck through `AUTO-PRMRG-<N>` entry in session tag table since no async worker sessions exist); Section 4.3.2 (added PR Merge exception to worker health check); Section 5.5.1 (added exception note for `AUTO-PRMRG-<N>`); Section 8.3.1 (documented blocking subagent model in purpose); Section 8.3.5 (rewrote pre-merge rebase protocol to describe worker-based rebase with CI polling); Section 21.2 (updated subagent list: replaced `async-agent-manager` with `pr-merge-worker`, documented dispatch model difference); Section 22.30 R-30 (updated rebase layer 2 to reflect blocking worker). **Updated 6 agent definition files** in prior commits: pr-merge-pool-supervisor.md (replaced `async-agent-manager: allow` with `pr-merge-worker: allow` in task permissions, rewrote all dispatch language to blocking subagent), pr-merge-worker.md (updated description and intro), agent-type-info.md (updated PR Merge Pool entry and worker table), agent-prefix-info.md (changed worker tag pattern to "none", added exception paragraph), product-builder.md (added worker health check exception for PR Merge), system-watchdog-pool-supervisor.md (added supervisor health exception for PR Merge). |
| 2026-04-12 | 2.12.0 | Thirteenth pass: Reader experience and navigation improvements. Added 6th foundational principle to Section 1.1 ("Defense-in-Depth Redundancy") with cross-reference to Section 22. Added "How to Read This Section" tip box at top of Section 22 with 5 navigation paths (by responsibility, by agent, by category, by redundancy, by scale). Added introductory paragraphs to all 8 categories explaining scope, scale, and significance: A (50 responsibilities, core value chain), B (deepest redundancy — quadruple), C (Groomer + Watchdog strongest redundancy zone), D (bidirectional spec flow), E (invisible plumbing), F (2-minute human response), G (long-timescale governance), H (triple enforcement of standards). |
| 2026-04-12 | 2.11.0 | Twelfth pass: Consistency and quality audit. Fixed 3 R-items (R-41, R-77, R-79) missing from agent back-reference tables by adding them to the Universal Supervisor Responsibilities table (Section 7.9). Expanded 2 thin R-item detail sections: R-67 (Product Completion) expanded from 12 to 20 lines with full 10-point verification table showing check methods and failure outputs; R-88 (UAT Feature Retest) expanded from 12 to 17 lines with 5-step file→area mapping process. Verified: all 144 R-items have detail sections, all 144 are in category index tables, all referenced agents have back-reference tables. Zero broken cross-references. |
| 2026-04-12 | 2.10.0 | Eleventh pass: Added Section 7.9 (Universal Supervisor Responsibilities) — a shared baseline table of 13 responsibilities that ALL 18 supervisors inherit (R-141 Startup Sequence, R-142 State Recovery, R-20 Tracking, R-143 Dual Cleanup, R-133 Announcement Consumption, R-43 Announcement Lifecycle, R-44 Context Management, R-113 Resource Cleanup, R-114 Credential Validation, R-63 Bot Signature, R-78 Logging, R-127 No Label Creation, R-134 No Internet). Added "*In addition to universal supervisor responsibilities*" cross-reference notes to all 18 supervisor responsibility tables (Sections 8.1.7, 8.2.4, 8.3.6, 8.4.3, 8.5.4, 8.6.4, 8.7.4, 9.1.1, 9.2.1, 9.3.1, 9.4.1, 9.5.1, 9.6.1, 9.7.1, 9.8.1, 9.9.1, 9.10.1, 9.11.4). Expanded 4 thin agent tables: PR Fix Pool (+R-27, R-112), Documentation (+R-57, R-61), Timeline (+R-57), Agent Evolution (+R-57, R-135). Each supervisor's effective responsibility count is now its specific entries PLUS 13 universal = true total. |
| 2026-04-12 | 2.9.0 | Tenth pass: Final completeness pass. Added back-reference tables for the last 2 uncovered agent sections: 12.3.1 (Git and Repository Agents — Repo Isolator, Branch Setup, Git Committer, Git Commit Helper, CI Log Fetcher) and 12.4.1 (Reference and Knowledge Agents — Ref Reader, Ref Material Loader, Spec Reader, Difficulty Evaluator). Added Section 22.145 (Redundancy Analysis Summary) with: redundancy depth distribution table (Quadruple 2%, Triple 15%, Double 28%, Single 38%, Universal 10%), highest-redundancy responsibilities table (R-09/R-10/R-16 at quadruple depth), most cross-referenced agents table (Groomer 24, Watchdog 24, Worker 30), and redundancy pattern taxonomy (5 named patterns: Create→Verify→Audit→BulkFix, Self-detect→External-detect, Pre→Post→PostMerge, Primary→Backup→SafetyNet, ExclusiveDomain). Total agent back-reference tables: 29 (covering all agent sections in the specification). Final total: 144 responsibilities, 8 categories, 29 sub-categories, 29 agent tables. |
| 2026-04-12 | 2.8.0 | Ninth pass: Completed bidirectional cross-references by adding responsibility back-reference tables to 12 supporting agent sections that previously had none. Added tables at: 11.3.1 (Subtask Loop — 9 responsibilities), 11.4.1 (Specialized Workers — 9 workers × 2-4 responsibilities each), 12.1.3 (PR Management Agents — 5 agents with full responsibility mapping), 12.2.1 (Issue Management Agents — 6 agents), 12.5.1 (Label and Forgejo Agents — 3 agents including ATM with 5 responsibilities), 12.6.1 (Quality and Verification Agents — 5 agents), 12.7.1 (Session Management Agents — 2 agents). Total agent back-reference tables: 32 (up from 20). All 144 responsibilities now have bidirectional links: R-item → agent section AND agent section → R-item. |
| 2026-04-12 | 2.7.0 | Eighth pass: Added Category H (Project Standards and CONTRIBUTING.md Compliance) with 4 sub-categories (H.1 Code Standards, H.2 Testing Standards, H.3 Commit/PR Standards, H.4 Startup/Lifecycle Protocols). Added 10 new responsibilities: R-135 (File Organization — triple enforcement), R-136 (Static Typing & type:ignore Prohibition — triple enforcement), R-137 (Max 500-Line File Size — double enforcement), R-138 (Testing Framework Selection — BDD/Robot/ASV — triple enforcement), R-139 (97% Coverage Threshold — triple enforcement), R-140 (Conventional Changelog Commit Format), R-141 (Supervisor Mandatory Startup Sequence — 4-step protocol), R-142 (Startup State Recovery Before Tracking Creation — per-supervisor recovery behavior), R-143 (Dual Status Issue Cleanup — defense-in-depth), R-144 (Tier Selector Pure Pass-Through Constraint). Updated 6 agent back-reference tables (PR Review Pool +6, Implementation Worker +3, System Watchdog +2, PR Merge Pool +1, Test Infra +1). Final total: 144 responsibilities across 8 categories with 29 sub-categories. |
| 2026-04-12 | 2.6.0 | Seventh pass: Major organizational restructuring — added sub-category headers within all 7 categories (A.1-A.8 Planning/Implementation/Quality Gates/PR Creation/Fixing/Merging/Git/Lifecycle, B.1-B.4 CI Health/Testing/Code Quality/Bug Detection, C.1-C.6 Labels/States/Dependencies/Milestones/Format/Hygiene, D.1-D.2 Spec Lifecycle/Scanning, E.1-E.5 Supervisors/Tracking/Recovery/Protocols/Formatting, F.1-F.2 Triage/Communication, G.1-G.4 Scope/Evolution/Docs/Security). Added 8 new Section 6 universal constraint responsibilities: R-127 (Label Creation Prohibition — triple enforcement), R-128 (Valid State Transition Matrix), R-129 (Priority Ordering Rules), R-130 (Standard Issue Body Format), R-131 (Standard PR Body Format), R-132 (Subagent Specialization Principle), R-133 (Announcement Consumption Priority Protocol — per-agent triage table), R-134 (Internet Access Restriction). Updated Backlog Groomer back-references (+3). Final total: 134 responsibilities (R-01 through R-134, with R-56b), 7 categories with 25 sub-categories. |
| 2026-04-11 | 2.5.0 | Sixth pass: Added 15 final responsibilities (R-112 through R-126) from three gap areas. Cross-cutting protocols: R-112 (PR Concurrent Work Conflict Matrix), R-113 (Guaranteed Resource Cleanup via CleanupManager), R-114 (Startup Credential Validation Gate). Specialized subagent responsibilities: R-115 (Issue Analyzer Structured Data Extraction), R-116 (Subtask Checker Fuzzy Match Checkbox Toggle), R-117 (Issue Note Writer Logical Reference Protocol), R-118 (PR Status Analyzer 5-Dimension Framework), R-119 (Difficulty Evaluator 5-Criteria Assessment), R-120 (Milestone Reviewer Holistic Integration Review). Product Builder lifecycle gates: R-121 (Phase A Bootstrap Skip Condition), R-122 (prompt_async Mandatory for Supervisors), R-123 (All 18 Supervisors Mandatory Verification), R-124 (Convergence Check Algorithm), R-125 (PB Never Edits/Merges Directly), R-126 (No Duplicate Supervisor Instances). Updated Product Builder back-references (+7 entries). Final total: 126 responsibilities across 7 categories. |
| 2026-04-11 | 2.4.0 | Fifth pass: Added 19 algorithmic-detail responsibilities (R-93 through R-111): R-93 (Subtask Wave Dispatch & Parallel Conflict Resolution), R-94 (Deep Context Gathering Before PR Fixes — 7-step protocol), R-95 (Fix Attempt Loop Prevention — hash-based duplicate detection + stuck_counter), R-96 (PR Lifecycle Monitoring Loop — 10 cycles × 5 min), R-97 (Review Feedback Type-Based Routing — regex to code/test/docs/style), R-98 (Issue Dispatch 7-Level Priority Ordering), R-99 (PR Merge 7 Criteria Checklist), R-100 (Blocking Review Temporal Detection), R-101 (Flaky Test 16-Pattern Detection Checklist), R-102 (Merged PR Issue Closure with Dependency Cleanup), R-103 (Wrong-Direction Dependency Auto-Fix), R-104 (Priority Consistency Cross-Check), R-105 (Human Liaison 10-Step Monitoring Loop), R-106 (Closed Issue Comment 4 Response Patterns), R-107 (MoSCoW 11-Signal Decision Framework), R-108 (Strategic Priority Re-evaluation), R-109 (Developer Assignment 4-Condition Decision Gate), R-110 (Per-Gate Independent Tier Tracking), R-111 (Periodic Diagnostics at Opus Tier). Updated 9 agent back-reference tables. Total: 111 responsibilities across 7 categories. |
| 2026-04-11 | 2.3.0 | Fourth pass: Added 28 more granular responsibilities (R-65 through R-92): R-65 (Spec PR Monitoring), R-66 (Finding Validation Gate — triple redundancy across Bug Hunt/Test Infra/UAT), R-67 (Product Completion 10-Point Checklist), R-68 (Epic/Legendary Closure Evaluation), R-69 (Orphaned Issue Remediation), R-70 (TDD Workflow Awareness), R-71 (Never-Disable-Checks Constraint), R-72 (Stale PR Detection), R-73 (Spec Change Classification & Two-Step Proposal), R-74 (SHA-Based Idle Detection), R-75 (Session Naming & Tag Convention), R-76 (Async Session Health Detection), R-77 (Push Conflict Recovery), R-78 (Structured Logging Protocol), R-79 (Performance Monitoring & Health Scoring), R-80 (Non-Return Guarantee), R-81 (Tiered Worker Allocation Formula), R-82 (Timeline Surgical Edit & Append-Only), R-83 (Issue Comment Formatting Standards), R-84 (Checkpoint & State Persistence), R-85 (Agent Improvement Pattern Detection), R-86 (Open PR Awareness Before Bug Filing), R-87 (Five-State Project Classification), R-88 (UAT Feature Area Retest), R-89 (Documentation Generation by Type), R-90 (Watchdog Alert Response & Dispatch), R-91 (Amend-Only Commit Protocol), R-92 (Proactive Spec Scan). Updated 14 agent back-reference tables. Total: 92 responsibilities across 7 categories. |
| 2026-04-11 | 2.2.0 | Third pass: Added 16 more micro-responsibilities (R-49 through R-64): R-49 (PR Ownership Detection & Work Scoring), R-50 (Worker Session Adoption & Lifecycle), R-51 (Forgejo API Pagination & Truncation Recovery), R-52 (Dual-Account Review Authentication), R-53 (Anti-Pattern & Code Smell Detection), R-54 (Three-Tier Approval Detection), R-55 (Post-Merge State Verification), R-56 (Meaningful Change Verification), R-56b (Transient Error Classification & Retry), R-57 (Clone Isolation & Safety), R-58 (Label-Name-to-ID Resolution), R-59 (PR Description Preservation), R-60 (State Transition Precondition Enforcement), R-61 (Reference Material Caching), R-62 (Implementation Correctness Verification), R-63 (Bot Signature Standardization), R-64 (Nox Routing Enforcement). Updated 6 agent back-reference tables (IPS +3, PR Review Pool +2, PR Merge Pool +4, Implementation Worker +3, System Watchdog +2, Backlog Groomer already comprehensive). Total: 64 responsibilities across 7 categories. |
| 2026-04-11 | 2.1.0 | Second pass: Restructured Section 22 into 7 categories (A: Development Lifecycle, B: Quality Assurance, C: Ticket Hygiene, D: Architecture, E: Operational Health, F: Human Interaction, G: Strategic Governance). Expanded from 23 to 48 responsibilities — added 25 new granular responsibilities: R-24 (Work Claiming), R-25 (Test Writing & TDD), R-26 (PR Creation & Metadata Inheritance), R-27 (CI Log Retrieval), R-28 (Issue Closure & Post-Merge Cleanup), R-29 (Commit Formatting & Git Ops), R-30 (Branch Management & Rebase), R-31 (Progressive Model Escalation), R-32 (Master CI Emergency), R-33 (Flaky Test Detection), R-34 (Test Stability), R-35 (PR-Issue Label Sync), R-36 (Story Point Estimation), R-37 (Milestone Assignment & Scope Guard), R-38 (Issue Body & DoD Compliance), R-39 (Blocked Chain Analysis), R-40 (Spec-First Development), R-41 (Worker Dispatch & Sliding Window), R-42 (Tracking Issue Cleanup & Dedup), R-43 (Announcement Lifecycle), R-44 (Context Window Self-Management), R-45 (Cycle Interval Maintenance), R-46 (Feedback Incorporation Protocol), R-47 (Human Response Timeout Management), R-48 (Developer Expertise & Assignment). Expanded all 20 agent back-reference tables with new responsibilities. |
| 2026-04-11 | 2.0.0 | Added Section 22: Division of Responsibilities and Redundancy Model — initial pass with 23 system responsibilities, redundancy depth classification, per-agent role tables, cross-references; added 20 Responsibilities subsections to agent sections |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.36.0 | Final pass (structural integrity audit): Fixed duplicate section number (two §2.4 headings → renamed first to §2.3.1); verified all section cross-references valid (only historical reference to 20.4 in revision history); verified Appendix A model/mode data matches actual frontmatter for 10 sample agents; verified mkdocs.yml navigation entry; comprehensive stale-name sweep clean across all 79 active agents + 9 shared modules + spec body; final statistics: 3,593 lines, 21 sections, 128 subsections, 56 sub-subsections, 14 diagrams, 79 Appendix A entries |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.35.0 | Thirty-eighth pass (spec-wide dual-account coherence): Fixed 5 stale references in spec body: Glossary HAL9000 definition updated for dual-account, Section 6.17.2 "two-step" → "dual-account", Section 12.1.2 PR Reviewer table and description updated for dual-account review protocol with curl, Section 12.1.2 permissions rationale rewritten for MCP-deny/curl-allow, Section 19.5 Security Model rewritten from "single bot account" to dual-account with separate permission scopes; fixed stale "PR Self-Reviewer" references in pr-ci-test-fixer.md; fixed 2 remaining "Two-Step Review Protocol" → "Dual-Account Review Protocol" in spec |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.34.0 | Thirty-seventh pass (stale references, diagram, and count fixes): Fixed stale "PR Self-Reviewer" references in pr-ci-test-fixer.md (3 occurrences); fixed Section 6.17.2 diagram (removed 2 orphaned old nodes from single-account era, updated node labels to show curl+FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT); fixed Section 6.17.2 step descriptions to reference curl instead of MCP tools; fixed `edit:deny` count from 41 to 42 (forgejo-signature-appender was added in pass 7); added missing `---` separator after diagram |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.33.0 | Thirty-sixth pass (review template and credential completeness): **Fixed 3 agent definitions**: pr-reviewer.md (renamed from "PR Self-Reviewer" to "PR Reviewer", rewrote both APPROVE and REQUEST_CHANGES step templates to use curl instead of denied MCP tools, corrected step ordering to formal-review-first/backup-comment-second), pr-review-pool-supervisor.md (added all 3 reviewer credentials to stuck-PR prompt which was missing them entirely), spec Section 6.17 updated to include FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD in introduction |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.32.0 | Thirty-fifth pass (MCP token limitation and curl workaround): Added Section 6.17.0 documenting the fundamental MCP token constraint — MCP tools authenticate as a single server-level token, cannot be overridden per-call; PR Reviewer must use curl for write operations; rewrote Section 21.22 from "Total Bash Lockdown" to "Restricted Bash with curl"; **fixed 4 agent definitions**: pr-reviewer.md (added `curl *: allow`, denied `forgejo_create_pull_review` and `forgejo_create_issue_comment` MCP tools, added curl-based review/comment API call patterns with FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT), pr-review-pool-supervisor.md (passes all 3 reviewer credentials including PASSWORD, documents READ-via-MCP/WRITE-via-curl split), product-builder.md (passes FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD when launching review pool), shared/credential_security.md (already had FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD from previous pass) |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.31.0 | Thirty-fourth pass (dual-account completeness audit): Added missing `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PASSWORD` to spec Section 6.17 env table and Appendix C (needed by ci-log-fetcher when invoked by PR Reviewer); removed ALL stale "self-approval"/"shared bot account"/"same bot account" language from 6 agent definitions and 2 spec sections: implementation-worker.md (2 approval function docstrings), shared/merge_safety.md (approval function docstring + comment), pr-merge-pool-supervisor.md (2 stale self-approval references), pr-reviewer.md (stale self-approval fallback), project-bootstrapper.md (branch protection self-approval note), shared/credential_security.md (stale comment); updated spec Sections 8.3.2 and 8.3.3 to reference dual-account architecture |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.30.0 | Thirty-third pass (dual-account architecture): Rewrote Section 6.17 from "Shared Bot Account Problem" to "Dual-Account Architecture" — introduced `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_PAT` and `FORGEJO_REVIEWER_USERNAME` environment variables for a separate reviewer Forgejo account; formal APPROVED reviews are now the PRIMARY approval path (not a workaround); updated Section 6.17.2 from "Two-Step Review Protocol" to "Dual-Account Review Protocol" (formal review first, backup comment second); added environment variables to Appendix C table; **fixed 4 agent definitions**: pr-reviewer.md (rewrote review protocol to use reviewer credentials as primary), pr-review-pool-supervisor.md (passes reviewer credentials to dispatched pr-reviewer instances), pr-merge-pool-supervisor.md (updated approval detection to recognize reviewer account as primary approver), product-builder.md (passes reviewer credentials when launching review pool supervisor); updated shared/credential_security.md with dual credential scheme |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.29.0 | Thirty-second pass (subagent specialization, eliminate duplication): Added Section 6.0 (Subagent Specialization Principle — centralize, don't duplicate); moved interval calculation from 17 duplicated agent blocks into ATM `CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE` via new `sleep_interval_default` parameter; added ATM operation #11 `CYCLE_ANNOUNCEMENT_REVIEW` combining read + review + close in one call; updated spec Section 5.3.4 to document ATM-centralized interval calculation; updated Section 5.4 operations table to 11 operations; updated shared/tracking_discovery_guide.md to reference ATM-handled interval; **removed 17 duplicated rolling average calculation blocks** from all supervisor agents and replaced with single `--sleep-interval-default` parameter |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.28.0 | Thirty-first pass (body template field enforcement): Added `**Estimated Cycle Interval**` field to the actual tracking body templates in all 14 agents that had inline body strings without it (agent-evolution, architecture-guard, architecture, documentation, pr-review, test-infra, timeline-update, uat-test, backlog-grooming ×2, human-liaison, system-watchdog, product-builder, implementation-pool); fixed 2 non-standard body formats (project-owner-pool-supervisor had non-standard `[HEALTH]` header → standardized to `# Project Owner Status`, bug-hunt-pool-supervisor had body starting at `## Summary` without header → added standard header); added tracking body requirement note to pr-merge-pool-supervisor; all 18 status-creating agents now have `Estimated Cycle Interval` in their actual body templates |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.27.0 | Thirtieth pass (tracking reference ordering and interval fields): Fixed tracking operations reference ordering in ALL 17 supervisor/orchestrator agents — moved READ_TRACKING_STATE before CREATE_TRACKING_ISSUE with startup note, rolling average interval calculation, and Estimated Cycle Interval requirement; added `Estimated Cycle Interval` field to IPS tracking body template; all 17 agents now include rolling average default values based on their sleep intervals |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.26.0 | Twenty-ninth pass (cycle interval, dual cleanup, cycle continuity): Added Section 5.3.4 (Estimated Cycle Interval rolling average with 90/10 weighting), Section 5.3.5 (Dual Status Issue Cleanup — agent-side + groomer-side), Section 5.3.6 (Cycle Number Continuity Across Sessions); updated Section 5.6 body template to include mandatory `Estimated Cycle Interval` field; **fixed 3 agent definitions**: system-watchdog-pool-supervisor.md (replaced hardcoded interval lookup table with parsing from status issue body, changed staleness threshold from 1.2x to 2x per spec), backlog-grooming-pool-supervisor.md (added Pass 20: Automation Tracking Status Issue Deduplication for redundant one-at-a-time enforcement), automation-tracking-manager.md (added `estimated_cycle_interval` to READ_TRACKING_STATE return schema); updated shared/tracking_discovery_guide.md with rolling average calculation pattern |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.25.0 | Twenty-eighth pass (startup state recovery): Added Section 5.3.3 (Startup State Recovery Protocol) with mandatory read-then-delete-then-create sequence, agent-specific recovery table, and offline duration behavior rules; enhanced ATM `READ_TRACKING_STATE` operation to return full comments array, creation timestamp, and offline duration; **fixed startup sequence in 2 key agents**: implementation-pool-supervisor.md (added state recovery as mandatory first action before PR analysis, with branch/PR target extraction and resume-before-new-work logic), product-builder.md (replaced manual curl state detection with ATM READ_TRACKING_STATE); updated shared/tracking_discovery_guide.md with mandatory startup recovery protocol |
| 2026-04-10 | 1.24.0 | Twenty-seventh pass (tracking protocol complete rollout): **Fixed 12 agent definition bugs**: 5 supervisors missing `automation-tracking-manager: allow` task permission despite invoking it in their prompt (architecture-guard, bug-hunt, documentation, epic-planning, test-infra — tracking operations were silently denied); 5 remaining announcement-creating supervisors now have REVIEW_OWN_ANNOUNCEMENTS (architecture-pool, spec-update, uat-test, bug-hunt, product-builder); all 18 supervisors + product-builder now READ_ANNOUNCEMENTS per consumption table (6 added: architecture-guard, documentation, epic-planning, project-owner, timeline-update, test-infra); pr-fix-pool-supervisor added pre-dispatch announcement check + ATM permission; product-builder fixed stale `[AUTO-SYS-WATCH]` prefix → `[AUTO-WATCHDOG]` and converted to READ_ANNOUNCEMENTS; all 19 orchestrator/supervisor agents now have complete tracking protocol (create, read, review cycle) |
