Conversation
Write was producing invalid tool names (readFile), invalid modelTier (mid), and unknown fields (instructionFile) because the schema didn't specify valid values. Review wasn't catching these because its checklist only covered instruction content quality, not structural correctness. Changes: - write: schema lists valid defaultModelTier values, valid tool names for pick, and allowed fields per expert. Add instruction quality guidance (domain constraints only, no implementation procedures). - review: add structural correctness section to checklist (valid field names, valid tool names, valid modelTier values, required fields). - Bump to 1.0.25. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
"low","middle","high"), valid tool names for pick (full list), allowed fields per expert (reject unknown fields likeinstructionFile)Context
Generated perstack.toml had
readFile(invalid),"mid"(invalid),instructionFile = true(non-existent field), and massive procedural instructions. Write didn't know the valid values, review didn't check for them.Test plan
🤖 Generated with Claude Code