Retrospective walk

Retrospective Walk

Guide a change review as a narrative with evidence. Prefer this when the user needs the story of a change set, not just hunk-level inspection.

Inputs

Accept these fields when the user supplies them, and infer conservative defaults when they do not:

{
  "scope": "diff | commit-range | worktree | job-id | episode-ref",
  "target": "diff text, HEAD~5..HEAD, path, job id, or episode reference",
  "mode": "guided | agent-driven | summary-only",
  "capture_comments": true,
  "models_for_why": [],
  "include_prior_evidence": true
}

Default mode to guided for a human in the loop, agent-driven for automated review, and summary-only only when explicitly requested or when interaction is not possible. Default capture_comments to true.

Scope Resolution

Resolve the target into immutable evidence before analysis:

• diff: use the supplied diff text. If the target is empty, capture git diff --no-ext-diff and git diff --cached --no-ext-diff.
• commit-range: capture git diff --stat <range>, git diff --name-status <range>, and per-commit metadata from git log --format=fuller <range>.
• worktree: capture status, dirty file list, staged diff, and unstaged diff. Do not stash, reset, or mutate the target worktree. If deeper model/tool analysis may write files, create a disposable isolated worktree or analyze a read-only evidence packet instead.
• job-id: fetch llm_job_status and llm_job_result; include cli, correlationId, sessionId, timestamps, exit status, captured output, and the bounded normalized progress snapshot actually returned. Page progress by afterProgressSeq when its event history matters, and record its capability and dropped count. Do not treat privacy-safe progress messages as raw reasoning, tool arguments, paths, or output evidence. Do not invent an output digest when the result has none. Personal Agent Config Kit deliberately withholds compiled context, provider output/error, and native handles from durable history; after a restart its job result may therefore be an explicit withheld marker rather than reconstructable output.
• episode-ref: resolve through the caller's available episode/DAG context. If no episode tool is available, record the unresolved reference and continue from any linked diff, job, receipt, or review artifacts the user supplied.

If include_prior_evidence is true, collect linked validation runs, receipts, review reports, approval records, job ids, and session/cache state that are available through gateway tools or local artifacts. Treat summaries as claims; prefer raw diffs, job outputs, receipt ids, commands, and file:line evidence.

Change Units

Group hunks and files into logical change units before narrating them. Favor semantic intent over file boundaries, but keep units small enough to review.

Use these grouping signals:

• Shared feature, bug, invariant, or user-facing behavior.
• Production code plus its tests and docs.
• Config/schema/migration changes that must be deployed together.
• Review-only or evidence-only changes, such as verification reports.

Assign stable ids: cu_001, cu_002, etc. For each unit, record:

{
  "change_unit_id": "cu_001",
  "title": "Short noun phrase",
  "files": ["src/example.ts"],
  "diff_refs": ["commit abc123", "hunk @@ -42,7 +42,9 @@"],
  "what": "Semantic summary of the delta",
  "why": "Intent, rationale, alternatives, and unresolved assumptions",
  "who_when": [
    {
      "actor_type": "human | model | agent | git-author | unknown",
      "identifier": "name, model key, job id, or commit author",
      "timestamp": "RFC3339 if known",
      "provenance": "commit, job, session, receipt, or user statement"
    }
  ],
  "evidence": ["file:line", "job id", "validation receipt id", "command digest"],
  "comments": []
}

What, Why, Who

For each change unit:

1. Extract what directly from the diff, file reads, tests, and docs.
2. Derive why from commit messages, issue/DAG context, review findings, prior receipts, job prompts/results, and nearby code intent.
3. Attribute who / when using git author/committer metadata, gateway job metadata, session ids, model keys, review outputs, and explicit user statements.
4. Mark inference boundaries. Use inferred: when intent or authorship is reasoned from evidence rather than directly stated.
5. Surface missing evidence as an open question instead of filling the gap with confidence.

Use multi-llm-review or direct gateway model calls only when why-synthesis is ambiguous, high stakes, or explicitly requested. Dispatch those review/model calls through the current local stdio gateway MCP surface, never a direct provider CLI, connector/shadow gateway, SDK, or shell fallback. Omit model unless the user requested specific variants. Use approvalStrategy:"mcp_managed" only for a Claude request, where the gateway creates a request-scoped strict config from provisioned gateway-owned local MCP definitions, excluding dynamic npx, ambient PATH, and Codex-config overrides. Use approvalStrategy:"legacy" and omit approvalPolicy for every other provider, then use async handling from async-job-orchestration for longer analysis. Ask models for intent/rationale synthesis, not for unverified approval.

If the user asks the retrospective to trigger an explicit full-access final review, switch to the full protocol in multi-llm-review. Start a freshly built target-checkout stdio gateway, reapply the provider-native grants per iteration, preserve ambient native MCP configuration, and provide the verification report as a corrective-program specification with the exact base, diff or changed-file list, and durable evidence. A retrospective narrative or model comment is not approval. On a user-required 90-second cadence, do not poll the resulting jobs earlier than 90 seconds.

Comment Capture

When capture_comments is true, comments are evidence. Capture them at the change-unit level and, when possible, at the file/hunk/line location.

In guided mode, walk one unit at a time:

1. Present the unit's what/why/who and evidence.
2. Ask for comments, concerns, approvals, suggestions, or intent corrections.
3. Normalize each answer into the schema below.
4. Continue only after comments are captured or the user skips the unit.

In agent-driven mode, create agent/model comments only when they add evidence, concern, approval, or intent clarification beyond the narrative. In summary-only mode, do not stop for comments; include an empty comments array unless comments were supplied up front.

Comment schema:

{
  "comment_id": "cmt_<ulid>",
  "retrospective_id": "retro_<ulid>",
  "change_unit_id": "cu_001",
  "author": {
    "author_type": "human | model",
    "identifier": "werner or claude-4-opus",
    "model_key": "optional; only for model comments"
  },
  "timestamp": "RFC3339",
  "type": "note | concern | approval | suggestion | intent_clarification",
  "text": "Comment body",
  "location": {
    "file": "optional path",
    "hunk_range": "optional @@ range",
    "semantic_unit": "optional semantic code-search node or future semantic id",
    "line_start": 1,
    "line_end": 2
  },
  "linked_receipts": ["validation receipt ids"],
  "linked_jobs": ["async job ids"],
  "metadata": {
    "namespace.key": "freeform extension values"
  }
}

Generate ids in a stable, sortable form when the runtime has a ULID helper; otherwise use retro_<timestamp>_<short-hash> and cmt_<timestamp>_<sequence>.

Output Contract

Emit both a readable retrospective and a machine-readable block. Keep the machine block fenced as json and make it complete enough to persist.

Markdown structure:

# Retrospective Walk: <target>

Retrospective ID: retro_<id>
Scope: <scope>
Mode: <mode>
Evidence baseline: <commands, commits, jobs, receipts>

## Narrative

<overall story: what happened, why, and remaining uncertainty>

## Change Units

### cu_001 - <title>

What: ...
Why: ...
Who / when: ...
Evidence: ...
Comments: ...

## Open Questions

- ...

## Evidence Package

- validation_receipt: <id or unavailable: reason>
- linked_jobs: [...]
- linked_receipts: [...]

Machine-readable shape:

{
  "retrospective_id": "retro_<id>",
  "schema_version": "retrospective-walk.v0.1.0",
  "scope": "commit-range",
  "target": "HEAD~5..HEAD",
  "mode": "guided",
  "created_at": "RFC3339",
  "provenance_context": {
    "commands": [],
    "commits": [],
    "jobs": [],
    "receipts": [],
    "episodes": []
  },
  "change_units": [],
  "comments": [],
  "narrative": "",
  "open_questions": [],
  "validation_receipt": {
    "status": "minted | linked | unavailable",
    "validation_id": "optional",
    "receipt_id": "optional",
    "reason": "optional"
  }
}

Validation Receipts

Use existing gateway validation receipt machinery when the retrospective is backed by a terminal validation run and the validation surface is registered:

• For a prior validation ID, call validation_receipt({validationId:"<id>"}) or read validation-receipt://<id> and link the own-or-not-found result.
• For review or why-synthesis model jobs launched during the retrospective, preserve job ids and retrieve receipts if those jobs are part of a validation run that can mint one.
• If no receipt-capable validation run exists, set validation_receipt.status to unavailable and include a reason. Do not claim a receipt was minted when the current gateway surface only produced a retrospective artifact.

Personal Agent Config Kit disables validation tools and is limited to local Claude/Codex/Mistral execution. Do not expect a validation receipt in Kit mode.

DAG Plan

Use this plan shape when embedding the retrospective in a DAG or episode:

[plan]
name = "retrospective-walk"
version = "0.1.0"
description = "Guided retrospective over changes with what/why/who and comment capture as evidence"
owner = "verivus-oss"

[[node]]
id = "resolve-scope"
type = "data"
outputs = ["change_units", "provenance_context"]

[[node]]
id = "analyze-changes"
type = "compute"
inputs = ["change_units", "provenance_context", "models_for_why"]
outputs = ["analyzed_units"]

[[node]]
id = "capture-comments"
type = "human-or-agent"
inputs = ["analyzed_units"]
outputs = ["comments"]

[[node]]
id = "synthesize-retrospective"
type = "compute"
inputs = ["analyzed_units", "comments", "provenance_context"]
outputs = ["retrospective_markdown", "retrospective_json"]

[[node]]
id = "emit-evidence"
type = "side-effect"
inputs = ["retrospective_json", "comments", "analyzed_units"]
outputs = ["validation_receipt_id"]

Only update a DAG or episode when the caller provided a parent context and an available tool supports that write. Otherwise emit the retrospective and the evidence package without side effects.

Security And Isolation

• Prefer read-only evidence capture. Do not mutate user worktrees while walking changes.
• Use a disposable isolated git worktree for model/tool operations that may edit files, especially for scope = worktree.
• Keep secrets, local account names, and machine-specific paths out of persisted comments and receipts unless the user explicitly requires them.
• Treat model-generated comments as model evidence, not human approval.
• Preserve provenance for every comment, job, receipt, and inferred rationale.
• Approval records are separate managed-Claude decisions. Their prompt preview is redacted by default and they contain neither a job ID nor correlation ID; do not use them to reconstruct a complete dispatch.
• If the retrospective includes a mandatory review, apply the strict completion contract from multi-llm-review: only APPROVED_UNCONDITIONALLY completes a reviewer, and a failed or unavailable reviewer is BLOCKED_EXTERNAL with its exact error.