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
ddb2574bbe
