@@ -435,3 +435,63 @@ Please pick one of the valid options.
### Prompt 2.2
In light of initialization.md, §2.5 and orchestration-v2-redesign.md, §17.1 - I wonder if my knee-jerk reaction and statement "I do not want the Administrator to write anything to the repository." was ill-conceived. It seems the exception is overly cumbersome. Would a cleaner resolution be to allow the Administrator to write to the repository during its Phase 1? Then in Phase 2 remove that authorization? I don't want to create overly complicated systems. I also have a question on the use of {admin-state-dir} and agent-statusline.sh: Please confirm that the various sessions and roles are not instructed to write to the same file concurrently. As I undertstand each session writes to {admin-state-dir}/agent-state-{role}.md and the Administrator session reads those file(s) to understand what sessions are active on any given machine. If a role is not active on a machine, the Administrator should expect the git repository to contain artifacts of that {role}. Would you give me a detailed expression of the way that the respository (and local filesystem) is used to communicate between the agents and the Administrator(s)? A communication-paths.md would be a nice place to summarize that. Thank you!
```
● All three v2.2 tasks complete; five new commits.
v2.2 summary
Five commits added on lr_reduction-new_workflow-repairs:
1. 67d1276 — plan: orchestration.md v2.2 — phase-scoped Administrator push allowlist. Walks back v2.1's blanket read-only restriction. §3 contract: "phase-scoped"; §5 init-check-* row restored as Administrator (Phase 1) or v1
table updated; §13.1 runbook step 1 updated to reflect "walks §1-§11 in full ... drops to strictly read-only".
2. 11d1708 — plan: Administrator-prompt.md v2.2 — Phase-1 §2.5 itself; Phase-2 read-only. Phase 1 body rewritten to walk initialization.md §1-§11 in full, including §2.5 with the seven-command push test wrapped in explicit-exit
checks; §9 cleanup pass deletes every init-check-* ref before declaring "Phase 1 complete"; verification grep confirms zero remain. Removed the "ask the user to confirm" gate. Phase 1 → Phase 2 transition explicitly irrevocable.
Push allowlist section rewritten to v2.2 phase-scoped form.
banner: re-narrows the v1 fallback's primary use-case to "re-verify write capability after a credential rotation without disturbing a running Administrator Phase 2 loop" (since the allowlist transition is irrevocable, you can't ask
the running Administrator to re-do §2.5).
4. 620513c — plan: add communication-paths.md + cross-reference from §6 and role prompts. The new doc — single source of truth for inter-agent communication. Eight sections: the two channels (git refs cross-machine; local filesystem
per-machine), roles/sessions/clones, ref-by-ref table, the one multi-writer ref (analysis/{effort-name}) with regular-merge recovery, file-by-file table with atomicity guarantees, single-writer-per-file invariant proven
file-by-file, statusline render path, Stop-hook restore path, worker→Administrator visibility (state-file read + ls-remote; what a missing state file means), multi-machine semantics (multiple Administrators OK because Phase 2 is
read-only). Cross-referenced from orchestration.md §6 preamble and from each of the four role prompts' "Read these in order" lists.
5. 85c0f46 — plan: redesign §17.1 SUPERSEDED + §17.7 v2.2 walk-back + §10 status. §17.1 marked SUPERSEDED with an inline pointer to §17.7. §17.7 records the walk-back: reviewer's reflection quoted, the v2.2 phase-scoped allowlist
documented, four "why this is the right size" bullets (spirit preserved, ergonomics restored, v1 fallback narrowed but retained, no new failure modes), the concurrency Q&A confirming single-writer-per-file by construction, the
documentation outcome (communication-paths.md), the four v2.2 commits + this one. §10.0 status table gains a v2.2 row pointing at this commit set.
On your two specific questions
Concurrency confirmation. Yes — by construction, no two processes ever write the same file concurrently. Each agent-state-<role>.json has exactly one writer (the role itself, on the one machine where it runs). Each
<clone>/.claude/settings.local.json has exactly one writer (the one session in that clone). Each statusline-backup-<sessionId>.json has exactly one writer (the session whose ID is in the filename). The agent-state writes use the
atomic .tmp.$$ + mv -f pattern, so a concurrent reader (Administrator polling, or the statusline command rendering) sees either the prior or the new full file — never a partial write. The only multi-writer entity in the protocol is
the git ref analysis/{effort-name} (Analyst + Developer both push), and git's regular-merge / non-ff recovery handles that case (already documented in orchestration.md §12). The full file-by-file analysis lives in
plan/communication-paths.md §4.3.
"If a role isn't active on a machine, expect git artifacts of that role." Confirmed and codified in communication-paths.md §5.1: a missing local state file means the role isn't running locally, not that no role exists in the effort.
The Administrator distinguishes "role not running anywhere" from "role running on another machine" by checking whether the role's git refs are advancing (recent SHA changes on triage/* for Analyst presence, feature/* and qa/* for
Developer presence, review/* for Integrator presence). Only when both a state file is missing locally and the role's refs show no recent activity does the Administrator emit ATTENTION role=<role> reason=offline for human resolution.
No push, no edits to lr_reduction, no parent-repo gitlink bumps, no dry-run. Same hands-off scope as the prior turns.
```
❯ Ok! Thank you. I'm signing off now to start a new dry-run with the new plan.
```
● Sounds good. Quick handoff for the next session:
v2.2 commits to test against (on lr_reduction-new_workflow-repairs, tasking submodule, not yet pushed): 67d1276 11d1708 6061a71 620513c 85c0f46. Plus the v2.1 set (26e6173 98ec73e fdf3749 410b2b6 25c7369) and the v2 set before that.
Suggested launch order:
1. Push the tasking branch first so the dry-run agents read the v2.2 docs from a clean clone (git push agentic lr_reduction-new_workflow-repairs — your call).
2. Administrator session in <path-to-session-4> per plan/Administrator-prompt.md. It should walk initialization.md §1-§11 in full (including the §2.5 push test under its phase-scoped init-check-* allowlist), clean up its scratch
refs, and report "Phase 1 complete." If §2.5 fails, the v1 Initialization-prompt.md fallback still works.
3. Three workers per the v2.2 prompt files; tell the Administrator who's where so it enters Phase 2.
4. After the run: PREFIX=dry-run-<date> ./plan/scripts/cleanup-dry-run-refs.sh (list-only first, then --apply).
End-state to verify (per communication-paths.md §7 / orchestration.md §3 v2.1+ contract): for each slug, one feature/{slug} + (PR or {slug}-escalate); no surviving qa/*, non-escalate review/*, triage/*, or init-check-*; analysis/
retained.
If anything in v2.2 is over- or under-specified, the next session can land a v2.3 — the §17 walk-back precedent is set. Good luck.
