chore: sync .cursor from suite
ci/woodpecker/push/build-arm Pipeline was successful

This commit is contained in:
Oleksandr Bezdieniezhnykh
2026-05-09 05:18:08 +03:00
parent a6408de5dd
commit 87535984bf
18 changed files with 131 additions and 40 deletions
+11 -5
View File
@@ -25,7 +25,8 @@ For each task the main agent receives a task spec, analyzes the codebase, implem
- **Dependency-aware ordering**: tasks run only when all their dependencies are satisfied
- **Batching for review, not parallelism**: tasks are grouped into batches so `/code-review` and commits operate on a coherent unit of work — all tasks inside a batch are still implemented one after the other
- **Integrated review**: `/code-review` skill runs automatically after each batch
- **Completeness before testing**: product implementation is not done until code is checked against task outcomes, included scope, architecture/component promises, and unresolved scaffold/native placeholders — not just task AC tests
- **Completeness before testing**: product implementation is not done until code is checked against task outcomes, included scope, architecture/component promises, named runtime dependencies, and unresolved scaffold/native placeholders — not just task AC tests
- **Runtime dependency reality**: production code cannot satisfy a task by exposing only a protocol, fake runner, deterministic fallback, or "native bridge" placeholder when the task/architecture promises a concrete internal capability such as BASALT VIO, FAISS retrieval, LightGlue matching, or a full A-Z localization pipeline. Stubs are allowed only for external systems and tests.
- **Auto-start**: batches start immediately — no user confirmation before a batch
- **Gate on failure**: user confirmation is required only when code review returns FAIL
- **Commit per batch**: after each batch is confirmed, commit. Ask the user whether to push to remote unless the user previously opted into auto-push for this session.
@@ -66,6 +67,7 @@ TASKS_DIR/
## Prerequisite Checks (BLOCKING)
1. `TASKS_DIR/todo/` exists and contains at least one task file for the selected context — **STOP if missing**
- Exception for Product implementation re-entry: if no selected product tasks remain in `todo/`, but the active autodev state is Step 7 or the latest product completeness report is missing/invalid/contains `FAIL`, skip directly to Step 15 (Product Implementation Completeness Gate). This gate may create remediation tasks and return to Step 1. Do not write a final implementation report from this state.
2. `_dependencies_table.md` exists — **STOP if missing**
3. At least one task is not yet completed — **STOP if all done**
4. **Working tree is clean** — run `git status --porcelain`; the output must be empty.
@@ -129,7 +131,7 @@ For each task in the batch, transition its ticket status to **In Progress** via
For each task in the batch **in topological order, one at a time**:
1. Read the task spec file.
2. Respect the file-ownership envelope computed in Step 4 (OWNED / READ-ONLY / FORBIDDEN).
3. Implement the feature and write/update tests for every acceptance criterion in the spec. If a test cannot run in the current environment (e.g., TensorRT requires GPU), the test must still be written and skip with a clear reason.
3. Implement the feature and write/update tests for every acceptance criterion in the spec. Tests for internal product behavior must exercise the production implementation path. If a test cannot run in the current environment (e.g., TensorRT requires GPU), the test must still exist and skip/block with a clear prerequisite reason, but that skip does not make missing production code complete.
4. Run the relevant tests locally before moving on to the next task in the batch. If tests fail, fix in-place — do not defer.
5. Capture a short per-task status line (files changed, tests pass/fail, any blockers) for the batch report.
@@ -255,9 +257,13 @@ For each completed product task:
1. Read these sections from the task spec: `Description`, `Outcome`, `Scope / Included`, `Acceptance Criteria`, `Non-Functional Requirements`, `Constraints`, and explicit named technologies or integrations.
2. Compare those promises against actual source code, not only tests or report prose.
3. Search the task's owned component files for unresolved implementation markers: `placeholder`, `stub`, `reserved`, `TODO`, `NotImplemented`, `pass`, `deterministic`, `fake`, `mock`, `scaffold`, `native bridge`, and empty native/readme-only integration directories. Ignore test fixtures/mocks only when they are under test-owned paths and not used as production behavior.
4. Verify that each named runtime dependency in the task promise is either integrated behind the approved boundary or explicitly documented as a blocked prerequisite in the task/report. Examples: if a task promises FAISS, DINOv2, BASALT, LightGlue, OpenCV, RANSAC, a database, cloud service, or hardware SDK, the production code must contain that integration boundary; a deterministic fallback alone is not complete.
5. Verify tests exercise the real implementation path where local prerequisites exist. Environment-gated tests may skip only with an explicit prerequisite reason; they do not make missing production code complete.
6. Classify each task:
4. Verify that each named runtime dependency in the task promise is integrated as production behavior, not merely represented by an interface. Examples: if a task promises FAISS, DINOv2, BASALT, LightGlue, OpenCV, RANSAC, a database, cloud service, or hardware SDK, the production code must either call that dependency or contain an adapter that loads and executes the real dependency package. A deterministic fallback, fake runner, empty `native/` package, or "bridge to be supplied later" is **FAIL** unless the task itself explicitly scoped the dependency out before implementation started.
5. Distinguish internal implementation from external prerequisites:
- Internal product capabilities (VIO, anchor verification, cache retrieval, safety wrapper, FDR, MAVLink emission) must be implemented in production code before the task can pass.
- External systems/hardware/data (Jetson device, physical camera, ArduPilot process, QGC, third-party service credentials, unavailable licensed dataset) may be `BLOCKED` only when production code exists and the missing prerequisite is outside the product boundary.
6. Verify tests exercise the real implementation path where local prerequisites exist. Environment-gated tests may skip only with an explicit prerequisite reason; they do not make missing production code complete.
7. For any architecture promise that describes an end-to-end user outcome, verify there is an executable production pipeline connecting the relevant components. Isolated component contracts and test-only harness orchestration are not enough.
8. Classify each task:
- **PASS**: task promises are implemented or explicitly out of scope in the task itself.
- **BLOCKED**: production code exists but cannot be fully verified due to external hardware/data/license/runtime prerequisites; the blocker is explicit and tests report blocked/skipped with reason.
- **FAIL**: promised production behavior is missing, only scaffolded, or only represented in tests/reports.