From f87d71ac18a1c11a6366fcd0f9d7f19abb391c11 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sergey Matyunin Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 14:02:24 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] docs: infrastructure-only work runs outside the product flow MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Practice had already diverged from the documents: #105, #112, #114 and #116 were all done without a spec and without review, and that was right. Nothing said it was allowed. The test is mechanical — not a single class A file — rather than left to the executor's judgement, because a loose reading is exactly how product changes would learn to skip review. Issue: #118 User-Visible: no --- AGENTS.md | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) diff --git a/AGENTS.md b/AGENTS.md index e7771107..102da78d 100644 --- a/AGENTS.md +++ b/AGENTS.md @@ -139,6 +139,23 @@ Author and reviewer are different models, which is what "a fresh session without implementation context" means in practice. The reviewer never edits product code; the author never grades their own work. +**Infrastructure-only work runs outside this flow.** CI, scripts, labels, demo +stands, the landing page and distribution are Claude's alone, and running them +through spec-writing and review buys nothing: the spec would restate what is +already unambiguous, and author and reviewer would be the same role. So no spec +file, no spec review, no code review, no walk through `S1`…`S8`. + +The test for "infrastructure only" is mechanical: **not a single class A file** — +nothing under `src/**`, no `custom_components/**/*.py`, no manifests, no i18n. A +task that touches class A even once is not infrastructure and takes the full flow; +there is no such thing as "mostly infrastructure". The strictness is deliberate: +a loose reading would turn this into the route by which product changes skip +review. + +What stays mandatory either way: an issue exists, both trailers are on every +commit, `typecheck`, `test` and `build` are green, and any non-obvious decision is +written down in the code or the issue rather than kept in someone's head. + **Review starts by itself.** Applying `S4-spec-review` or `S7-code-review` fires the pipeline, which reviews without anyone asking and takes ten to forty-five minutes.