Remove epic.sc; move its docs pass into implement-enhanced.sc - #30
Merged
Conversation
epic.sc was implement.sc with three agents pinned to concrete accessors (claude.opus plans, claude implements, codex reviews) plus a trailing docs stage. The pinning is entirely expressible in settings — planningAgent = claude:opus / codingAgent = claude / reviewAgent = codex — so the flow demonstrated a capability rather than providing one, at the cost of a fourth near-identical plan-then-implement entry in the picker. The docs stage was the only thing it did that no other flow does; it moves to implement-enhanced.sc, where it runs before the push so the docs land in the PR rather than in a separate commit. README's concrete-accessor example now cites issue-pr-bugfix.sc, which pins claude.sonnet for its reproduction checks.
No shipped flow names a backend any more — issue-pr-bugfix.sc's two reproduction checks were the last, and they now follow the coding role. The guidance stands on its own example instead of pointing at a flow.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
epic.scwasimplement.scwith three agents pinned to concrete accessors and a trailing docs stage:implement.scepic.scplanningAgentclaude.opuscodingAgentclaudereviewAgentcodexstage("Update documentation")The first three differences are pure configuration — this settings file makes
implement.scbehave identically:So the flow demonstrated a capability rather than providing one, at the cost of a fourth near-identical plan-then-implement entry in a picker where the one-line description is all the user sees. Its name didn't help either: every flow here is multi-task, and
epicIdalready means something else inPlan.The docs stage was the only thing it did that no other flow does. It moves to
implement-enhanced.sc(the full-service variant), placed beforeopenPrFromBranchso the docs land in the PR rather than in a separate commit — and as its own stage, keeping the push a later stage than the edits it pushes (ADR 0018 §3.2 R8). Its description line now reads// Plan (self-reviewed), implement per task, update docs, then open a PR.Follow-on reference updates: flow lists in
README.mdandexamples/runnable/README.md; the expected index inBuiltInFlowsTest;flowScriptsinScalaCliSmokeTest; andFlowCompilesTest.epicFlowShaperenamed tocrossBackendReviewShape(the API surface it compile-checks is still worth keeping).README.md's concrete-accessor example now citesissue-pr-bugfix.sc, which pinsclaude.sonnetfor its reproduction checks. ADR references are left alone as historical record.Verified:
scala-cli compile flows/implement-enhanced.sc,sbt scalafmtCheckAll, the shell flow suites, andrunner/Test/compileall pass.