Skip to content

Add a full-send path to brigade for items the owner names - #701

Merged
creedants merged 4 commits into
mainfrom
landing/e63
Oct 29, 2026
Merged

creedants merged 4 commits into
mainfrom
landing/e63

Conversation

@creedants

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Add a full-send path to brigade for items the owner names

The owner wants a way to run one item end to end with tstack's full-send method (full-send, sol-loop, file-pr, babysit-pr) instead of a poteto-mode playbook, with an Opus writer and Sol review rounds. Until now brigade could only seat an item through the standard worker roles. A full-send item had no brief shape, no seat, and no way to park on a usage limit, because roles.py rejects any role it does not know.

This change adds that path, gated on the owner's own "full send" message in the coordinator thread.

  • brigade.py fire --station full-send starts the item. Its brief links the four tstack skills at the commit tstack.json pins, in place of the poteto-mode playbook line, the Mode: lines, and the seat rule. The brief tells the worker to run each sol-loop round as a read-only delegate_task on codex/gpt-6.1-sol at high, draft the PR into reports/<item>-pr.md, open no PR, and leave babysit-pr and the merge to the coordinator and the landing queue.
  • brigade_lib/full_send.py holds the defaults. The writer is claudeAgent/claude-opus-5-5 at xhigh, and the sol-loop and gate are codex/gpt-6.1-sol at high. brigade.py launch prints the writer seat without roles.py and exits 1 while a claudeAgent seat is cooling. brigade.py dish --usage-limit records the cooldown and parks a full-send item, with no backup seat.
  • full-send.md sets the trigger and says the worker's own Sol rounds never count as the gate. The item lands only through the landing queue after one independent gate review on Sol.
  • tstack.json pins the tstack repository, commit 1085050f3baed1ac724caa4a8166145fb2ac88af, the four skill paths, the MIT license, and the author. Nothing from tstack is copied. scripts/sync_tstack.py prints what changed in the four skills since the pin, and --bump moves the pin and every link under t3/ and docs/; the build then regenerates skills/. It refuses when a skill is missing at the new commit. scripts/check.py reports a tstack link whose commit disagrees with the pin.

Proved by: new tests for the full-send brief, launch, cooldown refusal, and usage-limit park, which fail with the fix removed, plus tests for the pin check and the sync script against a modeled GitHub; briefs for the seven playbooks in light and full mode rendered byte-identical at the base and at head; and a fresh-child run that put "full send T1" on the full-send path and routed a plain request to the bug-fix playbook.

Coordinated by claudeAgent/claude-opus-5-5. Written by claudeAgent/claude-opus-5-5. Reviewed by codex/gpt-6.1-sol.

When the owner asks for full send on an item, fire --station full-send
gives the worker tstack's full-send, sol-loop, file-pr, and babysit-pr
skills at the commit tstack.json pins, in place of a poteto-mode
playbook. The writer is Opus at xhigh and the sol-loop and gate are
Sol at high. launch and a usage limit never ask roles.py for a seat.
The worker drafts the PR into the reports directory, and the item lands
through the landing queue after an independent gate review.

scripts/sync_tstack.py shows what changed upstream and --bump moves the
pin. scripts/check.py reports a tstack link that disagrees with the pin.
Briefs for every other station are unchanged.
…it from full-send briefs

The landing trunk need not be origin/main, and the standing rules ask a
worker to save failed test output under reports/.
…hrases from full-send

The author is t3dotgg in tstack.json. The landing queue opens a PR only in
some landing modes, and the peak split is not a term the skill defines.
Applies the review's edits from reports/D57-review-1.md at 5dd7bd27634099104f299ea0022aa39de4944b69.
@creedants
creedants merged commit 350d4ac into main Oct 29, 2026
15 checks passed
@creedants
creedants deleted the landing/e63 branch October 29, 2026 05:59
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant