ddb2574bbe
design.md described what tireless does to an issue but never what it is for, and in one place said the opposite of the intent: §1 assigned "identifying what should be worked on" to the operator, which is the thing discovery automates. A reader — human or agent — would have concluded the system is human-triggered only and never built the lane. Rewrite §1 around continuous multi-repo development. Add §2.5, the autonomy boundary, as a table of which transitions are automatic and which are human, with the alternatives considered and why they lose. Add §2.6 on anchoring discovery to a tracking issue rather than making Job.issue a sum type, and what that buys. Add stage 6 for the lane, renumbering scheduling to 7 and hardening to 8, with the reasoning for placing a cheap stage late. Add §10 on tireless working on tireless: that a merged PR restarts the runner that opened it and why that is survivable but not free, which areas must be routed to the stronger lane because they are constraint-bearing, and the four questions dogfooding is expected to answer. Two new invariants. Admission is inherited (§2.5), and every constraint must be reachable from a binary's startup path — the rule the previous commit's orphaned guards violated. AGENTS.md symlinks CLAUDE.md: both agents look for their own filename, the implementation prompts tell them to, and a symlink is the only version of this that cannot drift. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013TxK1CWPkFXqdcXMJ4hVe6
Symbolic link
9 B
Symbolic link
9 B
CLAUDE.md