fix(templates): pick up manual edits when regenerating artifacts#1368
Conversation
…g the next one The continue/propose/ff workflow instructions said to "read dependency files for context," but an agent that already saw those files earlier in the session treats them as read and regenerates downstream artifacts from its stale in-context copy. Editing spec.md and deleting design.md/tasks.md to regenerate them silently produced artifacts based on the pre-edit spec. The step guidance, the guardrails, and the `openspec instructions` dependency block now say explicitly: re-read dependency files from disk even if seen earlier in the conversation, because the user may have edited them. Discussion: #909 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Path: .coderabbit.yaml Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughWorkflow instructions and continue, fast-forward, and propose templates now require rereading dependency artifacts from disk before generating subsequent artifacts. Template parity hashes and patch release metadata were updated accordingly. ChangesDependency reread guidance
Estimated code review effort: 2 (Simple) | ~10 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers: 🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 5✅ Passed checks (5 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches📝 Generate docstrings
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
alfred-openspec
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Verified that the skill and command variants plus the instructions dependency block all require a fresh disk read, with parity baselines updated and full CI green. This fixes stale regeneration without widening runtime scope.
Resolve parity-hash conflicts by unioning both sides: ff-change hashes from this branch, sync-specs/archive hashes from main (#1360). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
alfred-openspec
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Verified the rebased head carries the fresh disk-read guidance across continue, propose, fast-forward, and the CLI dependency block, with parity hashes correctly retaining main’s #1360 updates. The diff is clean and CI is green.
Regenerate the parity hashes and the committed skills/ distribution from the merged templates, picking up the store-aware archive/sync paths (Fission-AI#1360) and the re-read-dependencies guidance (Fission-AI#1368) alfred flagged. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Status: Ready for review. Tests green (the 17 zsh-installer failures locally are the known oh-my-zsh environment issue; unaffected in CI).
What was wrong: Edit
spec.md, deletedesign.md/tasks.md, run/opsx:continue— and the regenerated files ignore your edits. The workflow instructions say to "read dependency files for context," but an agent that already saw those files earlier in the session treats them as read and regenerates from its stale in-context copy. Reported in discussion #909, and it's why the delete-and-continue workaround people land on in #600, #1291, and #705 feels unreliable.How it was fixed: The continue, propose, and fast-forward instructions (skill + command variants) and the
<dependencies>block emitted byopenspec instructionsnow say explicitly: re-read dependency files from disk before creating the next artifact, even if you saw them earlier in the conversation — the user may have edited them.Proof: Guidance-only change — no behavior code touched.
npm run buildregenerated the templates and the golden hashes inskill-templates-parity.test.tswere updated fromdist/; the parity suite and the full test suite pass (1,858 tests).Notes: This doesn't add staleness detection or a regeneration command (that's issue #705 / the
add-artifact-regeneration-supportproposal). It just makes the existing "delete the downstream file and continue" path reliably see current file contents.Discussion: #909
🤖 Generated with Claude Code
Summary by CodeRabbit