mirror of
https://github.com/Matysh/houseplan-card
synced 2026-10-02 12:49:56 +00:00
Claudeandclaude[bot]
d327ec3d93
A non-green show verdict that found "something to decide" went down the same path as "fix the code": S6 with a limit of 2. Promoting the task to track:ask was left to the agent's memory, with no named criterion and no trace, and the exhausted budget only surfaced on the next S7 - after a fix nobody would read. The structured verdict now carries `route` (fix | reclassify) and an optional `criterion` (one of the six show criteria of PROCESS.md section 5). The trust boundary reads a missing route as fix, rejects one outside the dictionary and rejects reclassify on a green verdict. `reviewRoute` in process-track.mjs is the single decision: on a code review of an unconfirmed show it moves the task to track:ask and S3-spec; on an owner-confirmed show it adds `blocked` and asks the owner; anywhere else reclassify degrades to fix with a note. The verdict that spends the last cycle sets review-4 at once; the stage budget is shared across tracks, so promotion changes the limit (4), not the count. The "Решение по вердикту" step makes one `process-track.mjs route` call (from dev, like the track step) and only executes its output: comment from a file, labels from add/remove lists, status via status-label.mjs as before. The track step also emits `confirmed` and a `route_note` for the review prompt; the review document anchor gains a route tail that the old reader still parses; wait-verdict reports the two new pipeline comments. The guard's own spent >= limit check stays as the safety net. Issue: #726 User-Visible: no Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_018qZfe7YS4rqEMKoVeS3GKd