Commit graph

3 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
38f237fc5c CB-WP-0009-T01: the meta budget measures the pass it governs
ADR-0006 D1. cb-cost gains pass_costs, which buckets responses into
workplan windows in a single read of the transcripts — calling collect()
once per boundary would re-read every transcript per window, and status
is supposed to stay cheap enough that nobody replaces it with ls.

make status now reports the share over a trailing three passes with the
per-pass breakdown, keeps the lifetime figure labelled NOT the metric,
and prints the D2 exemption so the next reader does not re-derive the
standoff where the budget blocked its own repair. One pass would be a
coin flip: a meta pass reads 100%, a product pass 0%. Three is the
smallest window where the ratio means something and still moves.

First reading: 36% over the last three passes against 49% lifetime,
with CB-WP-0008 at 0%.

The first run reported $0.00 for every window. Transcript stamps are
UTC Z and git prints a local offset, so the string comparison put every
response before the first boundary. Both the fix and a self-test for it
are in; reverting the conversion turns four checks red.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-01 15:38:35 +02:00
b79ea9690d CB-WP-0007 T01+T03: window the metric, budget it, cap meta at 25%
Scope cut first, on the maintainer's decision after a spend review: the
project is 38% product / 62% loop-meta, cost per response is 2.9x worse
than its best window, and INTENT stage 0 still lacks a CLI player and
bots. CB-WP-0005 and CB-WP-0006 cost ~$74 — 31% of all spend — for zero
measured efficiency gain. T02 and T04 are cancelled unstarted.

T01: SH-1/SH-2/SH-3 now report over the window since the last commit, and
the cumulative figure is retained but labelled "history, NOT the metric".
The prediction held decisively — window 655,744 mean context against
cumulative 255,307, a 2.6x gap against a 20% refutation threshold. A
cumulative mean over 1,094 responses cannot detect a worsening trend
because the history outvotes the present.

T03: `make shape-budget`, modelled on CB-01/CB-02. Soft thresholds are the
existing SessionShape targets; hard is 1.5x, set before the next
measurement per §Step 4. Deliberately not in `make all` — failing the
build on context would block committing, and committing is what closes the
attribution window and is the natural point to compact, so a gate that
blocks the remedy is a trap. It fires HARD on its first run: 656,574
against a 300,000 ceiling.

InnerLoop v1.5 establishes the soft 25% meta budget. Workplans declare
kind: product|meta|mixed and `make status` reports the share; mixed splits
50/50 and says so. Soft on purpose — a task already started may be
finished, because stopping mid-task to satisfy a ratio wastes the work.
What it forbids is opening new meta work above the line. A pass that
exceeds it must say so in its evidence and name the product work
displaced.

First reading: 68% OVER, of $74.22 attributed. Product reads $0.00 because
the only product workplan, CB-WP-0001, predates qualified task ids and its
bare T## labels collide across passes — stated in the output rather than
papered over.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-01 14:12:07 +02:00
6281cd546e CB-WP-0004 T03: make status — one-shot orientation
49 turns and $6.87 per CB-RES-0003 went to grep/ls/wc answering "what is
the state of this repo". tools/status.py answers it in 22 lines: commit
and working-tree state, every workplan with task counts, the next todo
task, spend since the last commit against CB-01/CB-02, and the three fast
gates.

Two constraints are deliberate. It does not build — a status command that
takes two minutes gets replaced by `ls` within a day. And it states its
own limit in the output ("slow gates not run here"), so a green status
cannot be misread as a green `make all`; the self-test asserts that line
is present, and that the whole report stays under 40 lines.

The positive control is the refusal to be confidently empty: a parser
that found zero workplans and zero tasks would print a clean, wrong
picture, which is worse than the greps it replaces. It also caught a
dot-all regex that returned twenty paragraphs of the preceding task's
prose as the "task heading".

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-07-31 10:20:27 +02:00