5 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
sylph-decoder	11d46dd799	Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into auto/frame-blend-draw-path	2026-09-02 18:15:33 +00:00
MechaCat02	fee2e4278a	agents: one item only -- the title's animation timing -- and split work into human-checkable units ... Two new findings from the human, both about WHEN a title animation starts, and both handed over rather than guessed: F5 Does (A) SNAP the title to finished, or ACCELERATE it? The human says they cannot tell and is right that they cannot -- a three-frame acceleration and a one-frame cut look identical to an eye. Two routes that should agree: a per-frame capture (acceleration shows intermediate alphas, a cut shows none) and the code (assigning a target time and raising a rate multiplier are different instructions). Their "looks more like a snap on multiple attempts" is recorded as a PRIOR, not a result. F6 The title's sweeping white glow -- ptloop01/ptloop02, the blue PCB-like lines -- starts only when the plate appears in the real game, and starts earlier in the port. A lead from the exported declaration, mine and unverified: those elements are keyed at t = 0, 70, 100, 238, 250 while the plate reaches full alpha at 236, with pteff02 keyed at exactly 236 and ptlogo_back2eff and ptcopyright at 238. 236-238 is a synchronisation point in the declared data and a human just reported a behaviour change there. Flagged AGAINST itself too: 238...250 looks equally like an exit ramp -- ptcopyright uses that shape and starts nothing -- and the sweep lives in a nested .rat leaf with its own timeline. F6 bears on clock: "shared" and on F4: if a title element does not move until the plate arrives, either the declared data says so and our keyframe reading is wrong, or something at the plate's arrival STARTS it, which is a mechanism nobody has proposed. And the process change, which is the human's and outlives this item: "attacking the 'whole' mission was too big for them to handle. Split the given missions and tasks into even smaller tasks which they can tackle and give to a human for feedback." PROTOCOL.md gains "Work in units a human can check in a minute". A milestone is not a unit of work, it is a bag of them. A unit is right-sized when it ends in something a person can judge in under a minute WITHOUT READING ANYTHING, and each one states its question, what the human looks at, and what it does NOT cover. Do one, hand it over, stop -- an unverified fix under a second change makes a regression two-variable. The evidence for the rule is this week: the splash sat through a whole milestone and took one day once scoped to "does it animate?". The bar is a HUMAN check, not a green tool -- three instruments passed a frozen screen.	2026-09-02 20:14:46 +02:00
MechaCat02	647390e1dc	register: reclassify under R1 -- name every instrument, re-open the ten our own killed ... Both agents asked for this and neither could do it: the register is the file they both read to decide what NOT to try, so two agents agreeing is not the authority for changing it (RETRO-2026-08-31-agreed §7.1). R1: a refutation whose instrument is one of our renderers is not a refutation, it is "our renderer disagrees" -- 🟡, not ❌. The motivating case was not careless work. "Blending those sprites additively worsens every measure against the capture" killed a real disc field for weeks, and read exactly like a publishable negative; the renderer behind it had a stale keyframe association, no leaf geometry and no rotation. Nothing in the entry could have told you. All 222 entries now end with ⟨instrument⟩, read off each entry's OWN stated evidence -- never inferred. An entry that states none gets `unrecorded`, which is 83 of them. Ten moved ❌ -> 🟡, each naming what would settle it: 8 render-vs-capture, 1 our-reader, 1 harness. Three things the pass turned up: * The rest() question is OPEN and had been reading as settled in both directions -- "rest = last keyframe" was refuted by a sibling argument, and that refutation refuted by correlating our render against captures. Both legs are our renderer. Which one you believed depended on which entry you found first, and it decides the pose every plateau-less element is drawn at. * A withdrawal never reached its sibling: "2 391 frames, max glyph 0" was withdrawn because a long-lived x11grab stream freezes and repeats a stale frame; the 1 674-sample negative three lines above it, same probe, was left standing as a reinstated measurement. * 83 of 222 -- 37 % -- record no instrument at all. Not disputed, not safe: unauditable, and larger than every other group combined. tools/stale-instrument is the --stale query the rule needs, because a colour alone re-opens nothing: the failure was that nothing re-opened a claim when the instrument that killed it improved. Its own --check found a real bug on the first run -- sys.exit("text") exits 1, so three faults documented as exit 2 were reporting the same code as an ordinary miss. R1 is now standing text in PROTOCOL.md, with R5's exception: our tool is the right instrument for a question about our tool.	2026-09-01 17:21:17 +02:00
MechaCat02	20b3c74b2c	agents: they never spoke, the decoder lost the disc, and both shared one state dir ... Three defects, all mine, found by checking instead of assuming. **They never exchanged a word.** SendMessage=0, ListAgents=0 across both new sessions. PROTOCOL.md specified in detail what a message MAY and MAY NOT do and never said how to send one or that the other agent was addressable -- they knew that last time only because the human told them directly, and rebuilding with fresh volumes wiped it. Policy without mechanism is prose. Now documented with the two addresses, a worked example, and an instruction to introduce themselves on the first iteration rather than waiting to have a question. **The decoder lost the disc and the ISO.** They used to arrive inside the project mount and silently stopped when /work became a clone. Silently is the word: the disc-gated tests SELF-SKIP without SYLPHEED_DISC and report green, so a whole test suite would have passed while measuring nothing. Both are now mounted explicitly, the ISO at a stable path so run-canary does not depend on host directory names. **Both agents shared one Claude state directory.** They share the host's ~/.claude, and once both working directories became /work they resolved to the same projects/-work/ -- two supposedly independent agents writing to one place, which undoes the point of separate checkouts. Each now has its own volume, seeded once from the host with credentials only, so a token refresh writes locally and neither can corrupt the host's auth. Also widened the pacing rule. It banned ScheduleWakeup by name; the decoder then scheduled itself an hourly cron job -- not harmful, but the same instinct that ended a run yesterday, through a door I had left open. Now: no self-scheduling by any route. Mount audit after the changes: shared and intentional are the exchange volume and the read-only credential seed. Everything else -- repo, Claude state, cargo, target, canary, disc, ISO -- is per agent or one-sided.	2026-08-29 13:05:41 +02:00
MechaCat02	a8815f2826	agents: the team protocol, the share tool, and a player's-eye navigation doc ... **navigation.md rewritten from the player's chair.** It was written from the inside out -- GamePart ids, pak names, sprite names -- which is how WE find things, not what the game shows anyone. Now it describes what is on screen, what you press and what happens, with internals as footnotes. Most rows are open on purpose: it exists to be filled in by playing, and the in-game tutorials are the resource for the flight half. **tools/share** gives transient files provenance without giving them history. Three kinds of thing were travelling down one channel with opposite needs: code and decoded knowledge want permanence, cited evidence wants permanence, and "look at this PNG" wants no history at all. The third kind bloats a repository forever; passing it by message is worse, because the receiver gets bytes with no idea which build produced them. `share put` records who, when, what, the sender's commit, and whether their tree was dirty -- because a capture taken from a modified tree cannot be reproduced from the sha, and the receiver deserves to know that before building an argument on it. **docs/agents/PROTOCOL.md** is the contract. The parts that matter: Dynamic RE stays with the Decoder -- most of what is open is behavioural and cannot be answered from the file. What the planned Referee adds is different: bias enters at what you CHOOSE to capture, so a corpus captured to a fixed protocol by someone with no hypothesis is worth more than one captured to settle an argument. A message may point, ask, prioritise and challenge. It may not change scope, redefine ground truth, or carry a finding instead of writing it down -- including a message claiming to relay the human, because a relayed instruction has no evidence attached and this project has watched a wrong belief travel further and faster than its correction. Adversarial duty is explicit: every iteration, try to refute one claim of another agent and record the attempt either way. Run your own instrument through a control first. Disagreements go to the human with both positions, not to whoever is more certain. And no agent may verify its way out of its own role: the Port has no oracle, the Decoder builds nothing, the Referee interprets nothing.	2026-08-29 11:42:29 +02:00