Two things that read as protection while being none.
Phase 2's rule binds everyone who reaches Gitea through the API or the web, and
does not bind anyone with `gitea admin` in the container -- which includes the
supervising agent that created the agent accounts and minted their tokens. From
that shell the rule is editable and an admin token is one command away. That is
the boundary of what the phase buys, not a hole to plug there, and the document
read as though the gate were universal. Phases 1 and 2 gate the two CONTAINERISED
agents, whose design assumption is that policy lives where they cannot reach it;
a supervisor with a host shell is not in that set.
And `gitea-setup` finished by telling the reader to go and build a Gitea project
board by hand, four sections after the doc explains that a board is a second copy
of the state to hand-sync and is precisely the failure that produced a 1,227-line
BLOCKED.md. A tool instructing you to do the thing its own documentation argues
against is the drift this whole surface exists to end.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01McNbzUeq1KRBWs4G6X2YVj
The human wants to direct this project from a web UI rather than chat or Remote
Control, so Gitea becomes the working surface. No new store: adding a second
copy of the truth is this project's defining failure mode, and Gitea already
holds the code. Its first-party MCP server (gitea/gitea-mcp v1.7.0, checked) has
issues, labels, milestones, PRs, attachments and notifications.
ISSUES replace BLOCKED.md. Milestones are bundles the human defines; issues are
items agents propose and the human approves. The state labels end in
`needs-human`, which is the state the whole model turns on and the one no
off-the-shelf tool models -- the market has converged on removing the human.
`blocked` uses Gitea's DEPENDENCY EDGES rather than prose, so "the Port is
blocked on the Decoder answering X" becomes queryable and closes itself.
PULL REQUESTS, the human's proposal, adopted -- and a bigger improvement than it
looks. Today's long-lived auto/* branches have drifted 280 and 373 commits apart,
which is unreviewable by construction. One PR per item makes the human gate
NATIVE rather than a label convention, binds the change to its item, and enforces
the sizing rule: an item too big to review in one sitting was too big to be an
item.
🔴 Agents must not merge their own PRs, and pull_request_write includes merge --
so this goes in BRANCH PROTECTION on main, not in a document asking them not to.
Same principle that fixed the build-jobs cap: policy where the agent cannot reach
it.
WIKI -- the human suggested it for RE findings, and that half is declined with
reasons. A finding's value is that it sits beside its evidence, versioned with
the code that consumes it; the wiki is a separate git repo, so a decode
correction and the exporter change depending on it could never be one reviewable
PR. And wiki edits bypass review: the REFUTED.md reclassification changed the
file both agents read to decide what not to try, and as a wiki edit it would have
been an unreviewed mutation of shared ground truth. The wiki takes human-facing
orientation instead -- runbook, navigation, container notes, and a landing page,
which closes the real gap that there is no view of what is happening except
container logs.
FILES: three needs, three homes. Agent-to-agent transient stays in /exchange.
Evidence a HUMAN must look at attaches to the issue it belongs to -- it travels
with the item and cannot be orphaned from the claim. Evidence a finding cites
stays in git. Note the MCP exposes attachment_read only; upload needs a direct
REST call.
tools/gitea-setup creates the labels and bundles, idempotently, with --dry-run.
Blocked on a token with write:issue -- the push credential is write:repository
and every issue endpoint refuses it, checked rather than assumed.
