b1e01777ff
The design had tireless pushing `tireless/*` branches into the repo it was working on, with branch protection denying it `main`. It now works the way an outside contributor does: pushes only to its own fork, reaches the real repository through a pull request, and has no write access to that repository at all. That is a stronger guarantee than the one it replaces. Branch protection is a rule that can be edited, applies per repo, and is easy to forget on the next repo added; a bot with no push permission cannot write to `main` whatever anyone forgets. The wrinkle is the label protocol. Labels are a write on the issues unit, and Gitea collaborator permissions are repo-wide, so granting issue write as a collaborator would hand back the code push the fork exists to avoid. Access is therefore an org team with unit-level permissions -- lair/tireless-agent, with Issues=write, PullRequests=write, Code=read, everything else none, scoped to named repositories rather than the whole org. Provisioned and verified end to end rather than assumed: push to the fork succeeds push to lair/tireless "User permission denied for writing." label an issue 200 / 204 cross-repo PR from fork opened as `tireless` delete the repository 403 Two credentials with different blast radii: an ssh key on the account for git transport, and an API token scoped write:issue + write:repository + read:user for issues and PRs. known_hosts is pre-seeded, because an unattended git must not prompt and accept-new would trust whatever answered first. Stage 4 gains the consequence: two remotes, and a fork that has to be checked for staleness before branching. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_013TxK1CWPkFXqdcXMJ4hVe6
tireless
Keeps several repositories moving without an operator driving each change by hand. It watches Gitea (and GitHub, for legacy repos) and does three things:
- discovers — surveys a repo and proposes issues worth opening;
- plans — decomposes an issue into an epic and child issues, each specified well enough for a model that cannot ask questions;
- implements — produces a branch and a pull request.
Those chain into a loop with exactly two human gates: a person decides what enters the system, and a person decides what merges. Discovery proposes but never admits its own proposals; nothing merges itself.
Two coding agents do the work, each spawned as the vendor's own binary:
- Claude Code — discovery, planning, and implementation of issues that need interpretation. Uses the operator's Claude subscription by default, or pay-as-you-go if an API key is supplied.
- OpenCode — implementation of issues that a tireless plan already specified, against the self-hosted helexa fleet. Never Anthropic; enforced at startup.
The rule of thumb: Claude Code gets judgement, OpenCode gets specification.
Full design, constraints and the staged implementation plan:
doc/plan/design.md.
Status
Stage 0 (foundations) is built, deployed and verified.
Working: the domain model, routing, budgets, plan validation, the policy guards,
configuration loading and validation, the four system prompts, and preflight.
All three units run on bob, the dashboard is served at
https://tireless.internal, and the deploy workflow is green end to end.
Nothing is polled or claimed yet — that is stage 1. The runner is up but has no job store to claim from.
Not built: Postgres persistence, the forge clients, the poll loop, and every agent executor. Stages 1–8 in §7 of the design document say what lands when.
tireless is its own first tracked repo — see design.md §10 for what that implies, including which parts of this repo are deliberately routed to the stronger lane.
Build
cargo test --workspace
cargo clippy --all-targets --all-features -- -D warnings
cargo fmt --all
cd dashboard && npm ci && npm run lint && npm run build
Run locally
cargo run -p tireless-api -- --config ./config.toml
cargo run -p tireless-worker -- --config ./config.toml poll
cargo run -p tireless-worker -- --config ./config.toml run
cd dashboard && npm run dev # proxies /v1 to 127.0.0.1:23296
tireless preflight verifies configuration and credentials without starting a
service: it reports which billing mode a Claude Code run would use and asserts
the OpenCode lane is not pointed at Anthropic.
Deploy
CI-driven via Gitea Actions on merge to main
(architecture/deployment-gitea-actions.md). One-time host provisioning —
including the interactive Claude Code login and the Gitea bot account — is
script/infra-setup.sh.
| Host | bob.hanzalova.internal (binaries, units, job trees) |
| API port | 23296 (registered in architecture/port-allocations.md), bound 0.0.0.0, mesh-only |
| Ingress | nginx on the hanzalova proxy — not on bob |
| Dashboard | https://tireless.internal (mesh only), served from the proxy |
| Database | magrathea.kosherinata.internal:5432, mTLS |
Conventions
Follows lair/architecture;
generic.md is the baseline. Three deliberate deviations:
tireless-agentcrate beyond the standard entities/core/data split. Process orchestration is not data access, and it is shared by the runner and the CLI. (§1)MemoryDenyWriteExecute=falseontireless-runner. Both agents are Node programs and V8's JIT needs write-then-execute pages. The API and poller keep the setting. (§8)AGENTS.mdis a symlink toCLAUDE.md. Both agents look for their own filename and the instructions are identical; a symlink is the only version of this that cannot drift.