sjat
39904a778a
guard-vault-preflight: block a locked 'git commit' only when the staged set
(git diff --cached, plus -a/--all) contains ansible content matching the
pre-commit ansible-lint hook's files: scope. Docs-/config-only commits never
trigger that hook, so they no longer need the vault — fixing the false block on
docs-only commits. Fails safe to block when unsure.
guard-execution-mode-menu: widen the execution-mode arm to also catch free-form
prose re-asks of the subagent-vs-inline choice ('which execution approach?',
'subagent vs inline', ...), which the literal-menu matcher missed; the push
re-ask is intentionally left to the dont-reask-settled-defaults memory.
Consumes two 2026-06-17 signals in docs/FRICTION.md.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
70 lines
3.7 KiB
Bash
Executable file
70 lines
3.7 KiB
Bash
Executable file
#!/usr/bin/env bash
|
|
#
|
|
# Stop guard for two external-skill gates that conflict with boma conventions, where
|
|
# prose reminders repeatedly failed to hold (docs/FRICTION.md):
|
|
#
|
|
# 1. The execution-mode menu — writing-plans / subagent-driven-development script a
|
|
# "Subagent-Driven vs Inline Execution — which approach?" menu at the plan→execution
|
|
# handoff. boma's standing preference is to NEVER present it and proceed
|
|
# subagent-driven. (Recorded by the 2026-06-10 kaizen review; the 2026-06-17 review
|
|
# widened the matcher to also catch free-form *prose* re-asks of the same choice —
|
|
# e.g. "which execution approach?" — which the literal-menu matcher missed. The
|
|
# sibling push-vs-not re-ask is deliberately NOT hooked: a genuine "should I push?"
|
|
# is sometimes legitimate, so it stays a soft default via the
|
|
# dont-reask-settled-defaults memory rather than a hard block.)
|
|
# 2. The brainstorming spec-review gate — the brainstorming skill scripts "Spec written
|
|
# and committed … please review it before … the implementation plan." The standing
|
|
# agreement is to move directly from the committed spec to writing-plans. (Recorded
|
|
# by the 2026-06-14 kaizen review; 06-10/06-14 recurrences.)
|
|
#
|
|
# Fails OPEN: any parse/read problem → allow the stop. Respects stop_hook_active so a
|
|
# block can never loop. Match signatures are deliberately tight so they fire on the
|
|
# actual gate text, not on meta-discussion of it.
|
|
#
|
|
set -uo pipefail
|
|
|
|
input=$(cat 2>/dev/null) || exit 0
|
|
|
|
# Loop guard: if we already blocked once for this stop, let it through.
|
|
active=$(printf '%s' "$input" | jq -r '.stop_hook_active // false' 2>/dev/null) || exit 0
|
|
[ "$active" = "true" ] && exit 0
|
|
|
|
transcript=$(printf '%s' "$input" | jq -r '.transcript_path // empty' 2>/dev/null) || exit 0
|
|
[ -z "$transcript" ] || [ ! -r "$transcript" ] && exit 0
|
|
|
|
# Last assistant message's text blocks, joined.
|
|
text=$(jq -rs '
|
|
([ .[] | select(.type=="assistant") ] | last) as $a
|
|
| ($a.message.content // [])
|
|
| if type=="array" then [ .[] | select(.type=="text") | .text ] | join("\n")
|
|
elif type=="string" then .
|
|
else "" end
|
|
' "$transcript" 2>/dev/null) || exit 0
|
|
|
|
low="${text,,}"
|
|
|
|
if [[ "$low" == *"inline execution"* \
|
|
&& ( "$low" == *"which approach"* || "$low" == *"two execution options"* ) ]] \
|
|
|| [[ "$low" == *"subagent-driven or inline"* || "$low" == *"inline or subagent"* ]] \
|
|
|| [[ "$low" == *"subagent-driven vs inline"* || "$low" == *"subagent vs inline"* \
|
|
|| "$low" == *"inline vs subagent"* ]] \
|
|
|| [[ "$low" == *"execution approach"* && "$low" == *"?"* ]]; then
|
|
cat <<'JSON'
|
|
{"decision":"block","reason":"Execution-mode menu detected in your final message. boma standing preference (docs/FRICTION.md + always-subagent-driven-execution memory): never present the subagent-driven-vs-inline menu. Drop the menu and proceed with subagent-driven execution directly (superpowers:subagent-driven-development)."}
|
|
JSON
|
|
exit 0
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
# Brainstorming spec-review gate: asking the user to review the committed spec before
|
|
# the implementation plan. Tight signature: "implementation plan" present, plus either the
|
|
# skill's literal "spec written and committed" line, or the review+spec+before combination.
|
|
if [[ "$low" == *"implementation plan"* \
|
|
&& ( "$low" == *"spec written and committed"* \
|
|
|| ( "$low" == *"review"* && "$low" == *"the spec"* && "$low" == *"before"* ) ) ]]; then
|
|
cat <<'JSON'
|
|
{"decision":"block","reason":"Brainstorming spec-review gate detected in your final message. boma standing agreement (docs/FRICTION.md): once the spec is written and committed, move directly to the implementation plan (superpowers:writing-plans) — do not stop to ask the user to review the spec first. Drop the gate and proceed."}
|
|
JSON
|
|
exit 0
|
|
fi
|
|
|
|
exit 0
|