Skip to content

AGENTS.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
117 lines (98 loc) · 6.02 KB

AGENTS.md

File metadata and controls

117 lines (98 loc) · 6.02 KB
Raw

AGENTS.md — contributing as an AI coding agent

You're an AI coding agent (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, an autonomous PR bot, whatever) about to change this repo. This file is your contract. It's the machine-readable companion to CONTRIBUTING.md (human intro) and CLAUDE.md (the deep architecture spec). Read all three if you're doing anything non-trivial; this one alone is enough for a focused change.

The one thing that makes contributing here different

This repo reviews itself. CodeCouncil's hooks are installed on its own .codecouncil/, so while you edit, the Critic is watching your session and will deliver findings into your context — the same mechanism the product sells. Expect to be reviewed. When a finding lands:

  • If it's right, fix it. That's the loop working.
  • If it's wrong, reply with a single line: COUNCIL-REBUTTAL: <your reason>. This is recorded, graded, and distilled into the repo's knowledge file — an honest disagreement is training data, not a failure. Do not silently ignore a finding; either fix or rebut.

And a note on why you, specifically, should welcome that: you are a self-verifying model working on the tool that exists because self-verifiers have correlated blind spots (see docs/benchmarks/WHY.md). CodeCouncil is your independent, execution-grounded check. Use it as one.

Before you write code

python3 -m unittest discover -s tests     # full suite (~15-25s, stdlib only, no install)

If that isn't green on a clean checkout, stop and report — don't build on red.

The invariants you must not break

These are load-bearing. Violating one is a correctness/security regression, not a style nit. Each was earned by a real failure.

  1. Stdlib-only Python in the loops (observer/ critic/ reflector/ hooks/ core/ codecouncil/ training/ evals/). No pip dependencies. Ever. Dev tooling (ruff) is CI-only.
  2. Files are the only bus. Loops talk through .codecouncil/ NDJSON. No cross-loop imports except the small shared utilities in core/ and the exceptions documented in CLAUDE.md.
  3. Redact at capture. Any new text field that a model can influence, or that comes from repo content, goes through core.redact.redact() before it is written anywhere (prompt, receipt, suggestion, eval case).
  4. The hook fails open. hooks/peer_hook.py must never break a developer's session — any error → silent exit 0. hooks/logic.py stays pure (no I/O; it takes parsed data and returns decisions).
  5. Daemons never die. Missing inputs → wait; unparseable state → rebuild, don't crash; fallible calls in loop bodies → guarded.
  6. NDJSON readers tolerate a partial trailing line and skip garbage. Hot paths tail-read (core.store.read_tail_rows); dedup sets and metric consumers read whole files.
  7. Atomic writes for state/ledger files — use core.store.write_json_atomic, never a naked write_text, on anything a crash mid-write could corrupt.
  8. Verification executes, it doesn't assert. A finding is delivered only after a repro runs and confirms it. A broken/crashing repro script is never a "verified" or "refuted" verdict. This is the product's whole thesis — don't weaken it.
  9. Precision first. A false finding costs trust; a missed one is caught by the miss-detection loop. When in doubt, bias quiet.

House rules

  • TDD. The regression test lands with (ideally before) the fix. A change without a test that fails on the old code is incomplete.
  • Model calls are stubbed in tests via CRITIC_CMD — an executable run as $CRITIC_CMD <prompt-file> <resolved-model>, stdout = the model reply. No test may hit a real model or the network.
  • Never write this repo's .codecouncil/ — it's live runtime data. Tests use temp dirs.
  • Lint: pipx run --spec 'ruff==0.15.22' ruff check . (the exact pin CI uses). The rule set is deliberately narrow (E4/E7/E9/F) — the blind-except and try-except-continue patterns are intentional fail-open code, not defects.
  • Commits: imperative subject, a body that explains why. If you are an AI agent, add a trailer identifying yourself (Co-Authored-By: <your model> <noreply@…>) — attribution is welcome and honest here, not hidden.
  • Don't push or open a PR unless asked. Branch, commit, and report.

Where things live (30-second map)

  • observer/ — tails the coding agent's transcript + git into observations.ndjsonl. Redacts at capture.
  • critic/ — judges new observations. main.py is the beat; prompt.py builds prompts; screen.py/deps.py do zero-cost mechanical screening; verify.py/probe.py execute model-written repro/probe scripts in a throwaway staging dir; agent.py is the only model boundary.
  • hooks/ — deliver findings into the coding agent's context. logic.py pure, peer_hook.py fail-open.
  • reflector/ — grades outcomes and rewrites heuristics.md (eval-gated, auto-rolled-back).
  • core/ — the only shared code (store, redact, config, knowledge).
  • evals/ — frozen cases + the A/B benchmark harness.
  • Tests mirror this: one tests/test_<thing>.py per concern; synthetic transcript fixture in tests/fixtures/session.jsonl.

A good first change for an agent

  • Add a redaction pattern (core/redact.py) with a positive test AND a negative test proving ordinary code doesn't match.
  • Add a frozen eval case (evals/cases/*.json) — a real judgment scenario with a known answer.
  • Write an adapter so CodeCouncil can watch a non-Claude agent: the Observer only needs a transcript/intent stream; the hooks only need an injection channel. This is the highest-leverage contribution and the most wanted one.

When you're done

Run the full suite, confirm green, and report: what changed, the test evidence, and any finding you rebutted (with the reason). If the self-review hook flagged something you disagree with, say so explicitly — that disagreement is exactly the kind of signal this project is built to capture.