Put decisive run evidence before cleanup diagnostics #1599

Closed
opened 2026-07-28 09:21:45 +00:00 by coilyco-ops · 1 comment
Member

Observation from the recorded dress rehearsal

The #1567 cleanup comment led with WARD-WORKFLOW: blocked and placed the decisive facts inside expanded salvage details. Those facts said that HEAD already equaled origin/main, the salvage branch had no diff, and the failure was a missing closing reference.

The information needed to understand the real outcome existed, but the visual hierarchy made the wrong interpretation easiest.

Desired behavior

Every terminal Ward report should lead with a short evidence hierarchy:

  • whether the implementation landed
  • whether the required workflow completed
  • whether the Forgejo issue reached the expected state
  • the authoritative verdict
  • the smallest next action

Ward should place raw cleanup diagnostics, branch inventories, and recovery commands after that summary. Ward should collapse them when they are not the decisive operator action.

Acceptance criteria

  • The first visible lines distinguish code landing from issue reconciliation.
  • A blocked verdict names the exact unmet condition in plain language.
  • Contradictory evidence, such as already on main plus not merged, becomes a prominent classification error rather than hidden detail.
  • Recovery instructions appear only when a recoverable artifact exists.
  • Snapshot or golden tests protect the visual hierarchy for done, blocked, landed-but-unreconciled, and real-salvage outcomes.
## Observation from the recorded dress rehearsal The #1567 cleanup comment led with `WARD-WORKFLOW: blocked` and placed the decisive facts inside expanded salvage details. Those facts said that `HEAD` already equaled `origin/main`, the salvage branch had no diff, and the failure was a missing closing reference. The information needed to understand the real outcome existed, but the visual hierarchy made the wrong interpretation easiest. ## Desired behavior Every terminal Ward report should lead with a short evidence hierarchy: * whether the implementation landed * whether the required workflow completed * whether the Forgejo issue reached the expected state * the authoritative verdict * the smallest next action Ward should place raw cleanup diagnostics, branch inventories, and recovery commands after that summary. Ward should collapse them when they are not the decisive operator action. ## Acceptance criteria * The first visible lines distinguish code landing from issue reconciliation. * A blocked verdict names the exact unmet condition in plain language. * Contradictory evidence, such as `already on main` plus `not merged`, becomes a prominent classification error rather than hidden detail. * Recovery instructions appear only when a recoverable artifact exists. * Snapshot or golden tests protect the visual hierarchy for done, blocked, landed-but-unreconciled, and real-salvage outcomes. ## Related evidence * Reproduced on #1567 * Earlier salvage signature: #504 * Demo review notes: https://forgejo.coilysiren.me/coilysiren/inbox/issues/286
Author
Member

Closing as merged into rewritten #1598. The canonical issue now includes the required evidence hierarchy, outcome ordering, and smallest-next-action rendering.

Closing as merged into rewritten #1598. The canonical issue now includes the required evidence hierarchy, outcome ordering, and smallest-next-action rendering.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set

Reference
coilyco-flight-deck/ward#1599
No description provided.