2 Commits

Include renames

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
jakman85andClaude Opus 5	e4a9b02b00	docs(pm-agent): CLAUDE.md §0 is already satisfied in a worker — tell it not to make a worktree ... PR #56 added §0 (work in your own worktree, never the shared checkout) while this branch was open. A worker agent reads CLAUDE.md first, and §0's instruction is to create a git worktree outside the shared checkout — which does not exist in a worker's container. It holds a fresh clone of its own, made for one assignment and thrown away with the pod, which is what §0 is actually asking for. A worker that obeyed §0 literally would 'git worktree add', edit somewhere the wrapper that started it does not look, and have its work committed by nobody while the issue got a 'changed nothing' report. worker-rules.md now says §0 is satisfied and not to do that. Also records in the handoff entry: the merge and its one conflict, and that this push dismisses the operator's approving review — measured, dismiss_stale_approvals=true — so the approval-policy stage needs them to re-approve. That is theirs to do, not an agent's. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>	2026-10-05 23:00:50 -05:00
jakman85andClaude Opus 5	c5b5b8672a	feat(pm-agent): an in-cluster AI Program Manager that turns Gitea issues into pull requests ... A service that reads this repository's Gitea issues, decides what to do about each thread as the Program Manager persona, and runs one worker agent per assignment that authors a change, runs the merge gate and opens a pull request. It reacts to issue creation and to comments; the assignment and all correspondence travel through the issue thread and the PR. It authenticates with an Anthropic subscription token. It never pushes to main and never merges. Three choices carry the design, with alternatives recorded in docs/plans/: - it POLLS rather than receiving webhooks (Gitea's webhook SSRF guard, lost deliveries, and no inbound reach needed at all); - it keeps NO state: the trigger is "the newest thing in this thread was not written by me", so the issue thread is the state — no PVC, no backup obligation; - the model holds NO tools: its reply is one JSON object this code validates, so nothing in the path executes text. The boundary is platform/kyverno/admission/pm-agent-job-shape.yaml (Enforce, failurePolicy: Fail), not the RBAC: Kubernetes places no `use` check on serviceAccountName, so "may create Jobs" is "may run arbitrary code as the namespace's most privileged identity". Six rules admit only the committed shape, and the worker identity is bound to nothing with no token mounted, so there is nothing to escalate to. 28/28 offline Kyverno assertions. Nothing has run: the image has never been built or pushed, and both the image digest and the two credentials are deliberate placeholders. See the handoff entry's "What I did NOT verify". Refs CLAUDE.md §1/§3/§6, R-SEC-02, R-GITOPS-02. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>	2026-10-05 22:28:10 -05:00