Commit Graph

3 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Tom Boucher
653f95e39f chore(#2801): remove the hostBehaviors.reviewerCli deprecated alias (#3272)
* test(#2801): failing-first suite for the hostBehaviors.reviewerCli alias removal

Inverts the Phase 5a rows that assert the derived legacy alias still
contributes a reviewer slug, and adds the removal-warning coverage the
alias's exit needs (ADR-2782 D9).

RED against unmodified production code, by design: the six shipped
manifests still declare the key and collectReviewerWarnings emits nothing
for hostBehaviors.

Refs #2801

* chore(#2801): remove the hostBehaviors.reviewerCli deprecated alias

ADR-2782 D9, Phase 7 — the final phase of epic #2782.

The derived legacy alias survived one release (Phase 5a shipped in 1.9.0;
1.9.1 and 1.10.0 have since gone out), so it goes. A declared reviewer
body is now the only route onto the reviewer roster.

- deriveReviewerSlugs no longer reads runtime.hostBehaviors.reviewerCli
- the key is stripped from the six manifests that carried it; each already
  declares a reviewer body whose slug equals its capability id, so the
  derived roster is unchanged at the same twelve slugs
- collectReviewerWarnings emits a presence-based, non-fatal removal notice
  for any manifest still declaring the key, reaching both the build-time
  registry generation and the third-party overlay load path. The check runs
  before the reviewer-body early-return, because the manifest it exists for
  is the alias-only one that has no body.
- hostBehaviors stays an open, unvalidated bag for its other 59 keys; this
  adds one keyed removal notice, not general validation

Refs #2801

* refactor(#2801): give the reviewer-warning channel a typed IR

Review finding: the new tests asserted with String#includes() on the
warning prose, which CONTRIBUTING.md's 'Prohibited: Raw Text Matching on
Test Outputs' bans in favor of a typed intermediate representation.

Adds the IR beside the renderer rather than replacing it, which is the
shape that section prescribes and bin/verify-reapply-patches.cjs already
models:

- REVIEWER_WARNING, a frozen code enum
- REMOVED_REVIEWER_CLI_FIELD, so the emitting site and its test share one
  symbol instead of duplicating a literal
- collectReviewerWarningRecords(cap), returning typed records

collectReviewerWarnings(cap) keeps its exact string[] contract as a thin
map over the records, so both production consumers are untouched. Every
section-K row now asserts on record.code/field/capId and none on the
rendered message. Locks the code surface, asserts the renderer stays
one-to-one with the records, and migrates the pre-existing Phase 2 test
on the same channel off prose matching.

Refs #2801

* test(#2801): invert the section F alias fall-through regression row

Caught by the remote runner: 2 unique failures on both Node lanes out of
31,692. tests/reviewer-lane-declarations.test.cjs section F — Phase 5a's
isolated-security-review regressions — asserted that a blank reviewer.slug
falls through to the hostBehaviors.reviewerCli alias rather than dropping
the lane. That is the direct inverse of this phase's contract.

The original rationale held only while the alias existed. With it gone
there is nothing to fall through to: a blank body is not a declaration,
and a declaration is the only route onto the roster.

Inverted rather than deleted — the row carries the adversarial-review
provenance for the slug trim, and removing a security regression guard to
make a change pass is backwards. The duplicate row added earlier in
section C is dropped instead; section F is its canonical home.

Also corrects two count strings Phase 5b left at eleven while asserting
twelve, which would misreport on failure.

Refs #2801

* docs(#2801): give the removed reviewerCli flag a migration path

The Reference edit alone satisfied CI — a file under docs/ moved, so
lint-docs-required.cjs was green — while the task-oriented quadrant said
nothing about the removal. A maintainer whose lane had just gone silent
would have found the field documented as removed and no page telling them
what to do about it.

Adds a migration section to the how-to: the symptom, the verbatim warning
they will see, the before/after manifest, and the note to keep the
reviewer slug equal to the capability id so existing
review.default_reviewers entries and --<slug> flags survive.

Refs #2801

* chore(#2801): backfill changeset pr number to 3272

* feat(#2801): close the runtime.hostBehaviors vocabulary

ADR-1016 closes twelve descriptor axes and rejects an open escape hatch
in the descriptor. It never mentioned runtime.hostBehaviors, and that
silence was read as permission: 59 keys across 18 manifests, 39 of them
set by a single capability, validated by nothing. The reference docs went
further and attributed the open seam to ADR-1016, which does not mention
the field at all.

KNOWN_HOST_BEHAVIORS enumerates the vocabulary. An undeclared key yields a
non-fatal UNKNOWN_HOST_BEHAVIOR record on the same D4.3 channel as the
alias removal notice, reaching both build-time generation and overlay
install.

Warning, never error, for the reason this phase exists: an error would
hard-break an out-of-tree descriptor carrying a bespoke key with no
deprecation window, which is what reviewerCli was given a release to
avoid. Escalation is a separate decision.

reviewerCli is excluded from the unknown-key sweep so it keeps its own
notice with the migration pointer rather than drawing two records.

A parity test binds the vocabulary to the shipped manifests in both
directions, and a second asserts no shipped capability draws a notice, so
the closure is provably inert in-tree.

Records the decision and the miscitation as an ADR-1016 amendment.

Refs #2801

* fix(#2801): bound and sanitize the unknown-key diagnostics

Two findings from an isolated adversarial review of the closure commit,
both proven by execution rather than asserted.

MAJOR, introduced by the closure: the new Object.keys(hostBehaviors) sweep
had no ceiling. An installed third-party manifest is bounded only by
MANIFEST_MAX_BYTES, and an 8.69MB manifest with 800,000 keys produced
800,000 records and ~139MB of message text, retained for the registry's
lifetime in OverlayMeta.diagnostics. Now capped at ten records plus a
summary carrying omittedCount, mirroring capability-loader's existing
slice(0,3) idiom. The same manifest now yields 11 records and 1748 chars.

MINOR, newly reachable: manifest-supplied key names were interpolated raw.
Unlike cap.id, which validateCapability gates on KEBAB_RE before these
diagnostics run, hostBehaviors keys have no grammar check anywhere, so
ANSI escapes and CRLF reached stderr and OverlayMeta.warnings intact. New
describeKey replaces C0/C1 controls and clips at 80 chars. The file
already had describeValue for this and applied it only to values.

Both fixes land on the pre-existing reviewer.* sweep too — it carried the
identical pair, and fixing only the new copy would leave the same defect
one screen from its own fix.

Refs #2801

---------

Co-authored-by: sim <sim@local>
2026-08-09 19:18:56 -04:00
Tom Boucher
49793465d7 docs(#2915): how-to for listing a reviewer lane, and correct the stale listing section (#2917)
* docs(#2904): how-to for listing a reviewer lane in the registry

#2912 shipped the Reviewer Lane Registry, which lands in 1.9.1. Two docs
consequences.

New: docs/how-to/list-your-reviewer-lane.md. A Diataxis how-to for the
publish task -- which of the three catalogs applies (and why a runtime
carrying a reviewer body lists under its primary install shape instead),
opening the required discussion thread BEFORE the PR, the three fields
that reject entries most often (slug grammar differs from id, flags stay
kebab when the slug is snake, install/uninstall must be copy-pasteable),
regenerate-don't-hand-edit, and register-once-then-Releases. Links the
registry README for the field table rather than duplicating it -- the
spec is reference, this is the task flow.

Corrected: ship-a-reviewer-lane.md said "Listing your lane is not wired
yet" and pointed at #2904 as future work. #2906 merged at 11:25Z and
#2912 at 12:11Z, so that section shipped false the moment the registry
landed. Replaced with the publish pointer.

Indexed the new guide and the generated catalog in docs/README.md, and
added the guide to develop-a-capability.md's ecosystem list.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs(#2904): caveat credential-bearing configKeys in both the guide and the spec

Isolated security review found the worked entry's `configKeys:
["acme.api_key"]` modelled storing a live credential with no note on
where that value ends up.

Verified: config values are written in plaintext to
.planning/config.json (docs/CONFIGURATION.md:227 -- masking is
display-only, "that file is the security boundary"), and
planning.commit_docs defaults to true (:466). So a credential declared
that way lands in the installing user's git repository unless they have
gitignored .planning/. None of the twelve first-party lanes does this --
they own only review.models.*, host, and prompt-budget keys.

The pattern originates in docs/registries/README.md:221, shipped by
#2912, so the caveat goes on BOTH surfaces rather than only on the copy
that inherited it -- the spec's example is what future authors will read
first.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* chore(#2915): backfill changeset PR number

pr: 0 -> 2917.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: sim <sim@local>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 09:29:51 -04:00
Tom Boucher
557d46984e docs(#2782): how-to for declaring a reviewer lane in a capability (#2906)
* docs(#2782): how-to for declaring a reviewer lane in a capability

ADR-2782 shipped the Reviewer Lane capability surface in 1.9.0, but the
only documentation was reference (capability-manifest.md) and rationale
(ADR-2782). A capability author had no task-oriented path from "I have a
review CLI" to "/gsd:review invokes it".

Adds docs/how-to/ship-a-reviewer-lane.md: role selection, the spawn and
openai-http worked examples, federated config ownership, the
review-lane query surface as the verification step, what the install
disclosure and egress-host re-verification mean for the author, and the
data-only boundary with the two named CLIs that do not fit today.

Also corrects the manifest reference's `invoke` row, which understated
three enums against the shipped validator: promptChannel omitted `argv`,
effortChannel omitted `env`, and the openai-http sub-shape plus the
required-with-file-arg `outputArg` were undocumented entirely.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs(#2782): correct four claims found by the two orthogonal reviews

Security review (1 major, 2 minor):
- "a reserved slug" implied the gsd-/anthropic- namespace rule, which
  guards the capability id, not reviewer.slug. The slug guard is
  isReservedName (__proto__/constructor/prototype), a prototype-pollution
  barrier. Both rules are now stated and kept apart.
- Added ADR-2782 D5's own caveat verbatim: disclosure and host pinning
  make the channel visible, pinned and revocable, not safe, and
  consent-at-install is a weaker gate for a standing egress channel than
  for a hook.
- Named integrity/SHA pinning and engines.gsd as the controls that make
  the disclosure tamper-evident and the version range enforceable.

Correctness review (1 major, 1 minor):
- Claimed a name collision is "a hard failure at install". It is not.
  installCapability never runs validateCrossCapability; the check runs in
  loadRegistry, and a colliding overlay is dropped from acceptedMap with a
  warning while the install reports success. Documented as the quiet
  failure mode it is, with the symptom to look for.
- The feature-only field list omitted hooks and activationKey, both of
  which FEATURE_FIELDS_FORBIDDEN_ON_REVIEWER rejects.

Both worked examples re-validated against validateCapability() -> [].

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs(#2782): restore Kimi Code to the cross-AI reviewer list

set-up-cross-ai-review.md named eleven reviewers; twelve lanes ship. The
kimi-code lane (added by #2718, declared as manifest data by #2798) was
never added here — the same roster-drift class as #2781, which #2800's
parity gate covers for COMMANDS.md and FEATURES.md but not for how-to
prose.

Also points readers at the declared-lane model rather than a static list:
the roster is now generated, a capability can ship its own lane, and
`gsd-tools review-lane sections` answers "what do I actually have".

Verified against the twelve declared bodies in capabilities/*/capability.json.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs(#2782): use the invocation form the runtime descriptors actually declare

The new guide used /gsd:review. Nothing in this repo produces that form.

- capability-validator VALID_COMMAND_STYLES is {slash-hyphen, shell-var};
  there is no colon/namespaced style in the vocabulary at all.
- 18 of 19 runtime capabilities declare commandStyle "slash-hyphen",
  claude included; codex is "shell-var". Every artifactLayout prefix is
  "gsd-".
- A plain-file command install never namespaces, so .claude/commands/
  gsd-review.md is typed /gsd-review.
- The Claude Code plugin surface would namespace on plugin.json "name",
  which is "gsd-core" -- so the plugin form would be /gsd-core:review.
  The commands/gsd/ subdirectory is cosmetic and contributes nothing to
  the invoked name.

So /gsd:review is neither the installed form nor the plugin form. Uses
/gsd-review, matching set-up-cross-ai-review.md and the 18 descriptors.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs(#2782): state that lane listing is not wired yet

The guide could describe authoring, validating, and installing a lane but
implied a publishing path that does not exist. Neither discoverability
catalog can accept one: a Community Capability Registry entry requires a
non-empty loopExtensionPoints plus hookKinds, and a role:"reviewer"
capability is forbidden from declaring steps/contributions/gates, so both
fields are unsatisfiable rather than merely unset. The EoS Registry is
ADR-1239 host integrations, which a lane is not.

The registry schema predates the reviewer role by 17 days (#2182 Jul 11,
ADR-2782 Jul 28) and registry-schema.cjs has zero occurrences of
"reviewer". Tracked for a 1.9.x point release by #2904.

Says so explicitly, and tells authors NOT to file a loop extension point
they do not use to get past validation -- a schema satisfiable only by
lying is one that will be lied to.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* chore(#2782): backfill PR number and fix the changeset invocation form

pr: 0 -> 2906.

Also corrects /gsd:review -> /gsd-review in the fragment body. The
fragment renders into CHANGELOG.md, which is a reader-facing docs surface
and is never passed through the install-time converter -- so the colon
form would ship the #2903 drift into a permanent release artifact.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

* docs(#2907): propagate the invocation-form fix and restore lane order

Two findings from an isolated review of the post-review delta.

- docs/README.md and develop-a-capability.md still said /gsd:review in
  the cross-links added for the new guide. The form was corrected in the
  guide itself but not in the two entries pointing at it, leaving three
  docs making the same claim in two different forms.
- set-up-cross-ai-review.md inserted Kimi Code between Antigravity and
  Ollama. REVIEWER_LANES is ordered by write_reviews order and kimi-code
  is 12th, appended after llama_cpp; the prose list mirrored declaration
  order before this change and now does again.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

---------

Co-authored-by: Test <test@example.com>
Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 07:25:01 -04:00