Skip to content

docs(archon): flip integration design + setup to shipped; record real-API findings#9

Merged
Velascat merged 1 commit intomainfrom
docs/archon-shipped-real-api-findings
May 8, 2026
Merged

docs(archon): flip integration design + setup to shipped; record real-API findings#9
Velascat merged 1 commit intomainfrom
docs/archon-shipped-real-api-findings

Conversation

@Velascat
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@Velascat Velascat commented May 8, 2026

Summary

OC #85 + ER #6 landed the Archon real-workflow integration on 2026-05-07. Same-day live validation against a built-from-source container surfaced three findings; this PR folds them back into the canonical docs.

Changes

docs/architecture/adapters/archon-real-workflow-integration.md

  • Status flip: Approved design — implementation pendingShipped 2026-05-07 with PR refs (OC #85, ER #6).
  • Workflow-name table corrected to the real bundled defaults Archon ships: archon-assist, archon-fix-github-issue, archon-test-loop-dag, archon-refactor-safely. Earlier-draft archival note kept inline so history is visible. The matching code change ships in Velascat/OperationsCenter#TBD.
  • New "Real-API findings (2026-05-07 live validation)" section documenting:
    • F1 — workflow-name divergence (now fixed in OC).
    • F2/api/workflows is cwd-scoped: empty without ?cwd= linking to a registered codebase. Dispatch-by-name still works.
    • F3 — kickoff returns 200 + {accepted, status:"started"} exactly as the AsyncHttpRunner upgrade predicted.

docs/operations/archon-setup.md

  • deferred / health-only probe wording → shipped wording with cross-link to the design doc + Real-API findings section.
  • runtime_kind documented as http_async (production path); ABC + ManualRunner closure path noted as test-only.
  • --list-workflows usage documented including the expected "no workflows returned" signal against a fresh container (cwd-scoped discovery; not a bug).
  • Deferred section refreshed: auto-approve policy, SSE streaming, and the new --cwd flag enhancement on the operator probe.

Test plan

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

…al-API findings

OC #85 + ER #6 landed the Archon real-workflow integration on 2026-05-07.
Same-day live validation against a built-from-source container surfaced
three findings; this PR folds them back into the canonical docs.

archon-real-workflow-integration.md:
- Status: "Approved design — implementation pending" → "Shipped 2026-05-07"
  with PR refs.
- Workflow-name table corrected to the real bundled defaults Archon
  ships (archon-assist / archon-fix-github-issue / archon-test-loop-dag /
  archon-refactor-safely). Earlier-draft archival note kept inline so
  history is visible.
- New "Real-API findings (2026-05-07 live validation)" section near
  the bottom documenting F1 (workflow-name divergence, now fixed in OC),
  F2 (/api/workflows is cwd-scoped — empty without ?cwd= linking to a
  registered codebase), F3 (kickoff returns 200 + {accepted,status:
  "started"} — confirms the AsyncHttpRunner upgrade was correct).
- "What's still outstanding" pulled out of "Out of scope" so it reads
  as forward-looking rather than retrospective.

archon-setup.md:
- "deferred" / "health-only probe" wording → "shipped" wording with
  cross-link to the design doc + Real-API findings section.
- runtime_kind documented as http_async (production path); ABC +
  ManualRunner closure path noted as test-only.
- --list-workflows usage documented including the expected "no workflows
  returned" signal against a fresh container (cwd-scoped discovery; not
  a bug).
- Deferred section refreshed: auto-approve policy, SSE streaming, and
  the new --cwd flag enhancement on the operator probe.

No code changes in this PR; OC's commit (chore/archon-defaults-from-real-archon)
ships the matching DEFAULT_WORKFLOW_NAMES correction and tests.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
@Velascat Velascat merged commit 24a5e37 into main May 8, 2026
4 checks passed
@Velascat Velascat deleted the docs/archon-shipped-real-api-findings branch May 8, 2026 02:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant