Донести detector signals до repair prompt
This commit is contained in:
@@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ The status payload also exposes `effective_stage_status`, `effective_stage_statu
|
||||
|
||||
Use `python scripts/stage_agent_loop.py continue --manifest docs/orchestration/<stage_loop>.json` as the safe one-command continuation layer. From a cold start it materializes `domain_pack_loop.command.txt` without launching the long live loop; after a GUI review it can prepare a repair iteration and materialize `run-repair --dry-run` automatically; it will not run the real coder pass unless `--execute-repair` is passed, and it waits for a `--run-id assistant-stage1-<id>` when the next required step is post-repair rerun/ingest validation.
|
||||
|
||||
It also writes `stage_repair_handoff.md/json` next to the stage summary. That handoff is the preferred input for the next coder pass: it lists primary repair targets, detector result signals, and sample user-facing failures without forcing the coder to reread the entire GUI conversation first.
|
||||
It also writes `stage_repair_handoff.md/json` next to the stage summary. That handoff is the preferred input for the next coder pass: it lists primary repair targets, detector result signals, and sample user-facing failures without forcing the coder to reread the entire GUI conversation first. `prepare-repair` preserves those detector signals in the repair iteration plan, prompt, and checklist so the coder sees the concrete detector, issue code, message, and evidence preview.
|
||||
|
||||
For live stage-pack failures, prefer `lead_coder_handoff.md` over immediately preparing a coder pass. The intent is: strong business audit first, Lead Codex code repair second, same replay/GUI validation third.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user