mirror of
https://github.com/J3vb/OwnCord.git
synced 2026-09-03 03:50:00 +03:00
J3vbandClaude Opus 5
3af3489f71
* feat(bughunt-fix): add a circuit breaker for systematically failing runs A fix run had no abort condition. If something was systematically wrong - the operator on the wrong branch, a broken test runner, ledger coordinates gone stale after a rebase - it worked through every cluster, spending a high-effort agent on each, and only reported the wreckage at the end. Two trip points, because there are two distinct failure signals: - after the fix stage, a high blocked rate means the fixing itself is failing. Proving each of those costs a serial agent per cluster and cannot succeed, so phase 3 is skipped entirely. - inside the prove loop, a high revert-proof failure rate means the proving is failing. Break rather than attempt the rest. `declined` never counts as a failure - it is a judgement the fix prompt explicitly invites, and a run where several findings are correctly declined is a good run. Both points require a minimum number of attempts first, because "50% of two" is noise. Clusters never reached are marked blocked with a rationale naming the breaker, so nothing is left reported as fixed with no commit behind it, and the gate still runs over whatever committed before the trip. proveAttempts is incremented before the ok check so successes land in the denominator; inside the failure branch the ratio would be failures-over-failures and trip on the first failed cluster at any threshold. Verified with 6 new harness scenarios (21 -> 27, all green, bughunt.harness.mjs untouched at 21). The guard was also proved load-bearing: with the threshold temporarily raised to an unreachable 1.1, f16 runs all four clusters instead of stopping at three and f20 produces no breaker report - both fail for the reason the guard exists. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> * feat(bughunt): attribute confirmed findings to the finder that produced them The dual-model panel unions its two finders rather than voting between them, so the second model's entire value is what it finds alone - and the union threw that away, leaving no way to tell whether sonnet earns its cost. Tag each finding with its panel slot. Because dedupe keeps the first occurrence and opus is slot 0, a confirmed finding tagged sonnet is one opus missed, which is exactly the number that decides the question. The run logs the split. Three details worth naming: - the tag is taken from the panel slot, not from the position in the surviving list. Filtering the nulls out before reading the index shifts sonnet into slot 0 whenever opus dies and mislabels its finds as opus - precisely when the attribution matters most. - the tag is stripped in verifyPrompt, not at its two call sites, so every caller routes through the guard. The verifier prompt says "another model" on purpose; naming it is an authority cue that erodes refute-by-default. - dropping to a single finder would also weaken convergence, since a round only counts as dry when the full panel reported. The skill records this next to the count so the decision is made with both halves in view. Verified with 4 new harness scenarios (21 -> 25). The dead-opus case is the load-bearing one: it fails against the naive filter-then-index form. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> --------- Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>