-
plan_work_graph(): real `claude --agent <org_node> -p` call, produces a graph_manifest (4 nodes for brd/prd/sdd/benchmark, dependency-chained sdd->prd->brd, each edge tagged zero_token/needs_judgment per 03-C §3.4), recorded as a work_graph_run row (status='planning' -- 04-P p_work_graph_execution start_state). Does not execute the plan or produce real artifacts -- 03-C §3.4 says so explicitly ("不执行，只规划"). Real call surfaced a genuine, undocumented constraint: --json-schema is silently ignored when combined with --agent (structured_output never appears; the identity itself works fine -- the response referenced the migrated SOUL.md's own principle numbering). First attempt at this Unit failed against the real API for exactly this reason. Fixed by asking the model to fence its JSON and parsing it out of `result` instead (_extract_graph_manifest, tolerant of bare JSON / fenced blocks / an extra wrapper key). Documented centrally in 05-实施约束与依赖.md §5.4.1.1 since this will matter for any future Unit needing agent-identity + structured output together, not just this one. Also corrects the same class of Done-line overreach as U-009/U-010 (development-plan.md claimed U-011 alone satisfies REQ-02's happy case, but c_work_graph_plan's own contract explicitly excludes execution) and flags a real, previously-invisible gap found while tracing REQ-02's actual dependencies: no Unit in development-plan.md's 43-unit breakdown owns c_artifact_write (03-C §3.7), despite REQ-02's happy AND failure cases both requiring it directly. Not fixed here -- noted for whichever Unit (U-012/ U-013, most likely) needs it first. 15 new mocked stdlib unittest cases + 1 gated real test (re-run and passing after the --json-schema fix). 98 total mocked tests across U-001-011, all passing. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> -
trigger_org_node_full(): guards (TASK_NOT_READY -- wrong task.status or required artifacts not validation_status=passed; CONCURRENCY_LIMIT_REACHED -- only on the planner/queued transition, per 04-P's guard column; USAGE_LIMIT_REACHED -- detected from the underlying claude error text, best-effort against REQ-14's cited "hit your session limit" phrasing) then calls U-005's trigger_org_node for the real subprocess call, then advances task.status: queued->planning_brd_prd_sdd (planner), planning_brd_prd_sdd ->coding (coder, gated on brd/prd/sdd/benchmark all passed), coding->validating (validator, gated on code_diff/test_report both passed). Verified for real: all three Org Agents actually triggered in sequence (chained claude --agent calls, ~15s/~$0.15 total) with task.status advancing correctly at each step -- not just planner like U-004/U-005's tests, all three personas confirmed invokable. Also corrects two more development-plan.md issues found while scoping this Unit, same class as U-002/U-009/U-036: - U-010's Done line cited '架构文档 §11"手工调用验证"里程碑' -- that phrase doesn't exist in architecture doc §11 at all. The real source is 05 §5.5's rollout step 2 ("手工调用验证...三个 Org Agent 分别可被触发"), whose "分别" (separately/respectively) is the load-bearing word: verify each CAN be triggered, not that a full artifact-validated chain runs end to end. That distinction is why this Unit's scope is exactly what got built -- not chasing planning_failed/coding_failed retries or validator PASS/FAIL routing, which need real Work Graph output (U-011+) or Org-level Loop routing (U-015/016, PH2) that don't exist yet. - Added an explicit scope note spelling out exactly which 3 transitions this Unit owns vs. which parts of p_org_task_lifecycle it deliberately doesn't touch, so nobody has to re-derive this from the code later. 11 new mocked stdlib unittest cases + 1 gated real chained-trigger test. 87 total mocked tests across U-001-010, all passing; the real test independently re-run and confirmed passing. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> -
create_task(): validates goal_text/project_id/task_type (INVALID_PARAM per 03-C §3.1), inserts the task row (status=queued, assigned_org_node=planner, loop_round=0 -- 04-P p_org_task_lifecycle start_state) plus a task_status_changed execution_event, both in one transaction (explicit rollback on failure between the two inserts, tested by dropping execution_event mid-call). c_project_create isn't reimplemented -- it's already complete in U-002 (project_scaffold.create_project). Corrects another Done-line overreach found while scoping this Unit: development-plan.md claimed U-009 alone satisfies all three REQ-01 cases (happy/boundary/failure), but the happy case ("依次触发 planner/coder/ validator...task.status 按状态机正确流转") needs c_org_node_trigger's full implementation -- U-010's own Done criterion is almost that exact sentence, and U-009 doesn't depend on U-010 or even touch org-node triggering. Same class of issue as the U-002/U-036 corrections earlier this session (an SDD/plan line claiming more than the Unit's actual dependencies support), judged low-stakes enough (doesn't change what code to write, just when the REQ-01 happy case gets marked satisfied) to fix directly rather than stop and ask, per the graduated caution this session has been using. Boundary (concurrency limit doesn't block task *creation*, only later scheduling) and failure (INVALID_PARAM) are both fully real at U-009's scope and tested; happy completes cumulatively once U-010 lands. 12 new stdlib unittest cases. 75 total across U-001-009, all passing. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> -
Resolves the A-2 assumption with a real `claude --agent planner -p` call (--permission-mode auto, $0.05) against a deployed target project: the migrated identity comes through correctly, not the default assistant persona. Verdict is "部分成立" (partially confirmed), per the criterion development-plan.md's U-004 line pre-registered for exactly this outcome -- Planner/Validator's SOUL.md migrated almost verbatim, but Coder's SOUL.md needed real rewriting: the original hardcoded a live Feishu Base API token (redacted, never committed), strongly bound its task-claiming to `lark-cli`/Base status vocabulary, and told itself to shell out `claude --dangerously-skip-permissions` (conflicts directly with 05 §5.3.1's `auto`-mode decision). All three replaced with graphlemon's own task table / c_org_node_trigger / task.status vocabulary. Also resolves a second, higher-stakes conflict found while scoping this Unit: where does `.claude/agents/<org_node>.md` actually live? Architecture doc §13.1 says graphlemon's own platform repo; 03-C §3.3 and 05 §5.1 (both core SDD, not the architecture PRD) explicitly say the target project -- matching how Claude Code's --agent flag actually discovers subagents (relative to invocation cwd). User confirmed 03-C/05 win. Resolved as two different files, not a contradiction: agents/<org_node>/SOUL.md (+ validator/AGENTS.md) here is the canonical migrated source (01-M 1.9 agent_profile.soul_file_path, a singleton with no target-project reference); src/agent_profile.py compiles that into the deployable .claude/agents/<org_node>.md and writes it into a target project via deploy_agent_definitions(). Does not reopen the U-002 correction from the previous commit -- .graphlemon/ scaffolding and agent deployment are different, non-conflicting concerns. validator's tools/disallowedTools frontmatter encodes qa/AGENTS.md's original workspace-permission contract (read-only on source, no git mutation commands) as actual Claude Code permissions instead of prose. 14 new stdlib unittest cases (test_agent_profile.py, all real) + 1 gated real-agent test (test_agent_e2e.py, RUN_REAL_AGENT_E2E=1, mirrors graphloop's pattern per CLAUDE.md's Testing constraint -- this is the first Unit that actually shells out to `claude`, so this is also where that harness gets built, per the harness-ownership decision from the earlier "什么还需要" review). 41 total tests across U-001-004, all passing. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
-
Implements c_project_create (03-C §3.0) as a plain function for U-007 to wire up later: idempotent by target_folder_path, creates .graphlemon/ + one init commit in an existing git repo, PATH_NOT_FOUND/PATH_NOT_WRITABLE/ GIT_INIT_DECLINED per contract, never silently `git init`s (02-V §2.1). Also corrects a real SDD-vs-plan conflict found while scoping this Unit: development-plan.md's U-002 line cited architecture doc §7.3's directory tree (.claude/agents/, skills/, top-level runs/) as what to create inside a target project. But §13.1 (a later, confirmed decision) states those are graphlemon's own platform-repo assets (U-003 scope), and 01-M's own graphlemon_subdir_initialized field already points at §13.2, whose target- project tree is only .git/ + .graphlemon/ + the target's pre-existing src/. §7.3 predates the "target project is an independent code space" pivot and was superseded by it. Corrected development-plan.md, unit_matrix.json, CLAUDE.md, and 05-实施约束与依赖.md accordingly (user confirmed, 2026-07-31). 23 stdlib unittest cases (src/test_schema.py + new src/test_project_scaffold.py), all passing. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
-
Establishes the first commit for graphlemon before U-001 work begins: architecture/SDD docs (including the PH5 self-hosting design already folded into 01-M/03-C/04-P/mvcp-contract v1.7.0), the A-1 spike results, the graphloop-adapted supervisor/isolation utilities, PH3 wireframe prototypes (now cross-referenced from 02-V), and this session's development-plan review (U-024 dependency split, U-035 regression requirement, new U-004.5 e2e-harness unit, src/ directory convention). Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>