feat(pabcd): make architect and executor delegation explicit - #177
thisisjun786 wants to merge 7 commits into
Conversation
P에서 구현 담당을 기록하고 B가 그 담당을 실행하도록 dev/pabcd 지침과 P/B 단계 안내를 연결하는 diff 수준 로드맵. wp2 문구, wp3 hook/CLI 배선, wp4 격리 CODEX_HOME 검증 절차를 각각 decade 문서로 확정했다. 독립 리뷰어 3라운드 감사 통과(blocker 5건 fold, 반박 0건).
…plementation CXC는 탐색 위임 기준만 갖고 있어서, 명세가 이미 확정된 구현도 메인이 직접 처리하기 쉬웠다. dev/SKILL.md에 Implementation delegation 절을 신설해 확정된 슬라이스는 설정된 executor에 우선 배정하고, 직접 구현은 이유를 밝히도록 했다. plan-output.md는 파일 변경마다 담당을 기록하게 하고, pabcd B는 그 기록을 실행하도록 연결했다. dispatch doctrine과 INDEX를 같은 소유자로 동기화했다. E7 지침이며 런타임 게이트는 추가하지 않는다. gate.mjs exit 0.
단계 안내가 wp2에서 만든 소유자를 실제로 가리키게 한다. hook.ts의 P/B directive에 한 줄씩 추가하고, orchestrate CLI의 P/B 진입 성공 출력에도 같은 포인터를 붙였다. 훅은 UserPromptSubmit에서만 도착하므로, 한 턴 안에서 CLI로 단계를 올리는 경로에는 안내가 전달되지 않았다. 포인터는 전이 출력에만 붙는다. A/C/D 종료와 status에는 붙지 않으며, 테스트가 exit 0과 실제 phase를 먼저 확인한 뒤 그 차이를 단언한다. dist 재빌드 포함.
…nter 격리된 CODEX_HOME에 이 브랜치를 설치해 훅 경로와 CLI 경로 양쪽에서 실제 주입 문자열을 관측했다. P와 B에는 포인터가 붙고 A와 status에는 붙지 않으며, 네 호출 모두 exit 0이라 거부 메시지가 음성 결과를 만든 경우가 아니다. 실제 설치본은 재귀 지문(3601개 파일) 기준 무변경.
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: a0163227e7
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Swish! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
|
@codex security review |
🛡️ Codex Security ReviewSecurity review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request. Reviewed commit: Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex. ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHubThis is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:
Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found. |
1 participant
Formal P and B entry points left implementation ownership and architect consultation easy to omit. This change makes those existing role responsibilities explicit while keeping the main agent responsible for decisions and integration.
The phase hints are guidance, not new consultation gates or automatic spawning. Ciphertext preservation does not add cross-provider decryption or support encrypted managed-dispatch markers.
Validation:
Verification records:
devlog/_plan/260914_executor_first_delegation/041_architect_receipt.md,042_runtime_completion.md, and051_codex_review_receipt.md. Raw runtime transcripts and temporary credentials are not included in this PR.