The avatar is now applied rather than deferred: BotFather's /setuserpic is a
conversation in which you send a photo, so the file is uploaded and sent as
a message. It is content addressed -- replacing the file is what triggers an
update, and the digest is recorded only after BotFather confirms, so a failed
upload retries rather than being remembered as done. The image is validated
before the conversation starts, because an image rejected halfway leaves the
bot registered without a picture.
Adds `provision preflight`: spec, avatar, OpenBao reachability, credentials,
session presence, salt and the resulting plan, checked in one run that writes
nothing and never contacts Telegram. Every failure it reports is one that
would otherwise surface after a phone number had been spent.
Two bugs it found immediately. The avatar path is documented as repo-relative
but resolved against the spec's own directory, so the real campaign spec
failed to find its own asset. And the OpenBao error named both variables when
only one was missing, sending the reader to check the one already set.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0172sgCZEEDJcnQmr4SGDvKa
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1361245@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: b3b428ef-f3e6-4688-b091-01f71461d66a
Completes the provisioner's write path. internal/tg drives BotFather as a
conversation rather than pretending it is an endpoint, creates channels,
claims usernames with fallbacks, and grants post_messages. internal/apply
sequences it: bot before administrator, test channel before public, and
state saved after every step that changed the world -- a channel that
exists but is unrecorded is worse than one that does not exist, because
the next run creates a second.
The operator session lives in OpenBao, not on disk. gotd's FileStorage
would leave a full-account credential in the working directory, where it
outlives the run and can be committed by accident.
The bot token goes straight from BotFather's reply to OpenBao and is
cleared from memory; if that write fails the error says how to recover by
hand and warns against re-running, since a retry creates a second bot.
Closes T05: the redaction salt is create-if-absent with no overwrite path,
and the test asserts it, because rotating it invalidates every longitudinal
comparison with no visible failure.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0172sgCZEEDJcnQmr4SGDvKa
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1361245@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: b3b428ef-f3e6-4688-b091-01f71461d66a
Go, per the toolchain decision. cmd/provision with internal/spec,
internal/state and internal/plan; plan computation is pure and takes live
observation through an interface, so the refusal logic is testable without
a Telegram account. It runs against the real campaign spec today.
Separates two refusals the design had treated as one. A deferral is the
design working -- the public channel waiting on a checked rendering, normal
on every first run. A block is the world disagreeing with the state file:
drifted rights, a taken-over username, a bot that is no longer reachable.
Collapsed together, a first run could never apply anything, because it
always defers the public channel.
The rights clamp and the private/public username rule are enforced in Go
and asserted against the same cases the JSON schema rejects, since mirroring
the schema in code is a drift risk worth a test rather than a comment.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0172sgCZEEDJcnQmr4SGDvKa
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1361245@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: b3b428ef-f3e6-4688-b091-01f71461d66a
Loosen the all-or-nothing stance on provisioning: where a platform has no
API to seed access, a guided runbook is the right answer. docs/seeding-runbook.md
covers the three Telegram steps that cannot be automated, and each carries a
"why not automated" line so the judgement can be revisited rather than
inherited. Telegram's steps resist automation incidentally -- nobody built
the endpoints -- unlike a control such as KYC, which resists by design and
where a weak component would be a defect rather than an opening.
Fix the schema's $id, which was a relative path and broke $ref resolution in
ordinary validators, and add the visibility/username constraint the field
descriptions already claimed. Both specs now validate, and the rejections are
tested.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0172sgCZEEDJcnQmr4SGDvKa
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1361245@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: b3b428ef-f3e6-4688-b091-01f71461d66a
Align AGENTS.md with the FT-WP- prefix the hub already registered, and
rewrite INTENT.md and SCOPE.md, which were still the generated stubs and
carried none of the composed-post framing the interface is built around.
Fix two artifact inconsistencies: R-1's retry comment still described
POST /v1/hall-entries idempotent on entry_id, from before the reframe to
composed posts; and the seed pressure record listed only one of the two
hypotheses that cite it. Rename it to match its id.
Replace the manual T01-T03 route with FT-WP-0002. The Bot API cannot
create a bot or a channel, so provisioning is an MTProto client acting as
a designated operator account (Canon INT-03), driven from a declared
presence spec owned by the campaign. One bounded human bootstrap remains
and docs/provisioning.md says why it cannot be removed.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0172sgCZEEDJcnQmr4SGDvKa
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1361245@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: b3b428ef-f3e6-4688-b091-01f71461d66a
T05b and T05c were refused: work-record ids must have numeric suffixes.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014KmVxhJ35tCo7rE7UnLwWu
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1116572@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8ba9bb93-a72a-4883-b189-2499cce5c400
The channel publishes a post written from a hall entry -- condensed,
personal, reach-optimized -- not the entry itself. That changes what
this interface is for and where its boundary sits.
Composition is deliberately outside the interface. Composing is a
probabilistic editorial task, and Blueprint 48.1 forbids an LLM in the
mandatory request path, so an interface that composed on demand would be
non-deterministic exactly where determinism is the whole claim. It is
also editorial: a post speaks about a named person's work in
HelixForge's voice, and a review step inside the request path is a
review step nobody performs.
The contract now takes a composed post with a required reviewer, a cited
source entry and a consent basis. A post carrying none of those is
refused. Absence of objection is not consent, and in an audit trail an
unfaithful post looks exactly like a faithful one -- the defence is that
a human read it, the source is named, and both are recorded.
The first experiment is rebuilt accordingly. The old competition asked
how to fit a whole entry into Telegram; that question no longer exists.
The new one asks whether the portrait earns the 3072 characters of
caption limit it costs, which is a delivery question this interface
actually owns. Competition over editorial voice belongs to the campaign
and runs on the per-variant engagement this interface reports.
Adds T05b (composition and review), T05c (consent basis for the 94
existing participants, blocking public publication) and T11 (extracting
the campaign into pr-hall-of-helix).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014KmVxhJ35tCo7rE7UnLwWu
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1116572@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8ba9bb93-a72a-4883-b189-2499cce5c400
Its FLUID-WP-0001 id already belongs to fluid-core, which shares this
topic. FT-WP-0001 is this repository's work.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014KmVxhJ35tCo7rE7UnLwWu
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1116572@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8ba9bb93-a72a-4883-b189-2499cce5c400
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014KmVxhJ35tCo7rE7UnLwWu
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1116572@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8ba9bb93-a72a-4883-b189-2499cce5c400
Adds the governing intent, the R-1 contract and descriptor, the adapter's
connector contract, the observation and redaction configuration, a
runbook, and the seed evidence for the first experiment: a measured
pressure record and two competing hypotheses about how a long hall entry
should reach a reader.
The interface is declared at FLUID-2 deliberately. It publishes under
HelixForge's name to an audience that did not consent to being
experimented on carelessly, and the cost of a bad post is reputational
rather than recoverable.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_014KmVxhJ35tCo7rE7UnLwWu
Assistant: claude-code
Assistant-Model: opus
Assistant-Process: 1116572@bnt-lap001
Assistant-Session: 8ba9bb93-a72a-4883-b189-2499cce5c400
