Correct director and advisor container naming scopes #818

New issue

Closed

opened 2026-07-09 16:58:04 +00:00 by coilyco-ops · 2 comments

coilyco-ops commented

2026-07-09 16:58:04 +00:00

Member

Goal

Correct the warded container naming split after ward#811.

Director surface containers should be named:

director-<agent>-<suffix>

The first component is the literal role director, not session.

Issue-scoped advisors should not use the director/session suffix shape. Advisors are issue scoped, so advisor containers should follow the same issue-scoped naming pattern as engineers, using the advisor role literal in place of engineer. In other words, they should be shaped like:

advisor-<agent>-<repo>-<issue>

matching the existing engineer pattern:

engineer-<agent>-<repo>-<issue>

Context

ward#811 changed director/session suffixes to use the o2r dictatable ID format. This issue refines the role prefix and advisor split:

Director surface containers are not issue scoped and should use the o2r suffix form.
The role prefix should be director, not session.
Advisors are issue scoped and should keep issue-addressable deterministic names like engineers.

Scope

Update container name planning so director surface containers use director-<agent>-<suffix>.
Ensure the suffix for director containers remains the o2r dictatable ID format from ward#811.
Ensure issue-scoped advisor containers follow the engineer naming form: advisor-<agent>-<repo>-<issue>.
Do not change engineer naming.
Update tests that still expect session-... for director containers.
Add or update tests proving advisor names are issue scoped and director names are suffix scoped.
Update docs if any visible docs mention session-... or advisor container names.

Acceptance

A director surface container is named with literal prefix director, not session.
Director names match director-<agent>-<o2r suffix>.
Issue-scoped advisors match the engineer-style issue-scoped pattern with literal prefix advisor.
Existing engineer names are unchanged.
Tests cover director and advisor naming separately.
Repo validation passes through ward.

## Goal Correct the warded container naming split after ward#811. Director surface containers should be named: ```text director-<agent>-<suffix> ``` The first component is the literal role `director`, not `session`. Issue-scoped advisors should not use the director/session suffix shape. Advisors are issue scoped, so advisor containers should follow the same issue-scoped naming pattern as engineers, using the advisor role literal in place of engineer. In other words, they should be shaped like: ```text advisor-<agent>-<repo>-<issue> ``` matching the existing engineer pattern: ```text engineer-<agent>-<repo>-<issue> ``` ## Context ward#811 changed director/session suffixes to use the o2r dictatable ID format. This issue refines the role prefix and advisor split: * Director surface containers are not issue scoped and should use the o2r suffix form. * The role prefix should be `director`, not `session`. * Advisors are issue scoped and should keep issue-addressable deterministic names like engineers. ## Scope * Update container name planning so director surface containers use `director-<agent>-<suffix>`. * Ensure the suffix for director containers remains the o2r dictatable ID format from ward#811. * Ensure issue-scoped advisor containers follow the engineer naming form: `advisor-<agent>-<repo>-<issue>`. * Do not change engineer naming. * Update tests that still expect `session-...` for director containers. * Add or update tests proving advisor names are issue scoped and director names are suffix scoped. * Update docs if any visible docs mention `session-...` or advisor container names. ## Acceptance * A director surface container is named with literal prefix `director`, not `session`. * Director names match `director-<agent>-<o2r suffix>`. * Issue-scoped advisors match the engineer-style issue-scoped pattern with literal prefix `advisor`. * Existing engineer names are unchanged. * Tests cover director and advisor naming separately. * Repo validation passes through ward.

coilyco-ops commented

2026-07-09 16:58:13 +00:00

Author

Member

WARD-RESERVATION: held 🔒

reservation details

Holder: container engineer-codex-ward-818 on host kais-macbook-pro-2.local.

Reserved by ward agent --harness codex (reserved 2026-07-09T16:58:11Z). Concurrent ward agent runs are blocked until it finishes or the reservation goes stale (1h TTL). --force overrides.

Do not comment on or edit this issue to steer the run while it is reserved. The engineer seeded the body once at launch and never re-reads it, so a comment or edit reaches only human readers, never the running engineer. A correction goes to a new issue, dispatched fresh. That is the only channel that reaches a run in flight. Where the forge supports it, ward locks this conversation to make that a road-block rather than a convention (ward#494).

run seed context — what this run is carrying (ward#609)

Resolved: coilyco-flight-deck/ward#818 · branch issue-818 · harness codex · workflow pull-request-and-merge
Run: engineer-codex-ward-818 · ward v0.493.0 · dispatched 2026-07-09T16:58:11Z
Comment thread: 0 included in the pre-flight read, 0 stripped (ward's own automated comments).

Static container doctrine and seed boilerplate are identical every run and omitted here (they ride ward v0.493.0).

— Codex, via ward agent

WARD-RESERVATION: held 🔒 <details><summary>reservation details</summary> Holder: container `engineer-codex-ward-818` on host `kais-macbook-pro-2.local`. Reserved by `ward agent --harness codex` (reserved 2026-07-09T16:58:11Z). Concurrent `ward agent` runs are blocked until it finishes or the reservation goes stale (1h TTL). `--force` overrides. **Do not comment on or edit this issue to steer the run while it is reserved.** The engineer seeded the body once at launch and never re-reads it, so a comment or edit reaches only human readers, never the running engineer. A correction goes to a **new issue, dispatched fresh**. That is the only channel that reaches a run in flight. Where the forge supports it, ward locks this conversation to make that a road-block rather than a convention (ward#494). <details><summary>run seed context — what this run is carrying (ward#609)</summary> - **Resolved:** `coilyco-flight-deck/ward#818` · branch `issue-818` · harness `codex` · workflow `pull-request-and-merge` - **Run:** `engineer-codex-ward-818` · ward `v0.493.0` · dispatched `2026-07-09T16:58:11Z` - **Comment thread:** 0 included in the pre-flight read, 0 stripped (ward's own automated comments). Static container doctrine and seed boilerplate are identical every run and omitted here (they ride ward v0.493.0). </details> </details>  — Codex, via `ward agent`

coilyco-ops referenced this issue from a commit

2026-07-09 17:10:17 +00:00

fix director and advisor container naming

coilyco-ops referenced this issue from a pull request that will close it,

2026-07-09 17:10:48 +00:00

fix director and advisor container naming #820

coilyco-ops closed this issue

2026-07-09 17:14:13 +00:00

coilyco-ops commented

2026-07-09 17:14:45 +00:00

Author

Member

WARD-OUTCOME: done ✅

details

workflow: pull-request-and-merge; review summary: skipped (review gate skipped by --skip-review / --no-review-gate)
felt: straightforward after the helper split, with one lint-only gocyclo bump
confidence: high
surprises: CI failed on golangci-lint after the first push, not on test
follow-ups: none

WARD-OUTCOME: done ✅ <details><summary>details</summary> workflow: pull-request-and-merge; review summary: skipped (review gate skipped by --skip-review / --no-review-gate) felt: straightforward after the helper split, with one lint-only gocyclo bump confidence: high surprises: CI failed on golangci-lint after the first push, not on test follow-ups: none </details>