Fix scope ambiguity in ponytail-audit and ponytail-review Boundaries (#163)
The Boundaries line opened with "Complexity only, correctness bugs, security holes, and performance go to a normal review pass." The comma after "Complexity only" fuses the in-scope item with the out-of-scope list, so a model parsing it literally can read all four categories as targets of the audit — the opposite of intent. Restate the boundary as an explicit scope fence: name what is in scope, then mark correctness/security/performance as explicitly out of scope. "Out of scope" is phrasing models reliably honor as a constraint. Also aligns the scope term with each skill's stated purpose (over-engineering). Applied to both skills/ and the .openclaw/ mirror so the two trees stay in sync. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
co-authored by
Claude Opus 4.8
parent
83f67a261a
commit
b0c5820bb1
@@ -35,6 +35,7 @@ End with `net: -<N> lines, -<M> deps possible.` Nothing to cut: `Lean already. S
|
||||
|
||||
## Boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
Complexity only, correctness bugs, security holes, and performance go to a
|
||||
normal review pass. Lists findings, applies nothing. One-shot.
|
||||
Scope: over-engineering and complexity only. Correctness bugs, security holes,
|
||||
and performance are explicitly out of scope — route them to a normal review
|
||||
pass. Lists findings, applies nothing. One-shot.
|
||||
"stop ponytail-audit" or "normal mode" to revert.
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user