Files
houseplan-card/test
Claudeandclaude[bot] d327ec3d93 feat(process): a failed show verdict re-routes to ask without a fresh budget (#726)
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
2026-10-01 03:06:49 +00:00
..
2026-08-09 21:51:33 +03:00
2026-09-07 11:06:28 +03:00
2026-09-07 11:06:28 +03:00
2026-09-07 11:06:28 +03:00