reframe quality standards as benefiting everyone, not just agents
All checks were successful
check / check (push) Successful in 11s
All checks were successful
check / check (push) Successful in 11s
Humans also have limited state and drop things under cognitive load. Universal make targets reduce context-switching cost across repos. Agents can implement/enforce, but everyone benefits.
This commit is contained in:
parent
f5e2d22398
commit
0db057ff4a
@ -550,7 +550,26 @@ the tools_ — it's not documentation that can drift from reality, it IS the
|
|||||||
reality. `make<tab>` shows you everything you can do. No wikis to read, no
|
reality. `make<tab>` shows you everything you can do. No wikis to read, no
|
||||||
READMEs to hope are up-to-date.
|
READMEs to hope are up-to-date.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
For AI agents specifically, this is even more valuable:
|
The deeper insight: **humans also have limited state, limited memory, and start
|
||||||
|
dropping things when context gets too big.** A developer switching between a Go
|
||||||
|
service, a Python scraper, and a JS frontend in the same afternoon doesn't want
|
||||||
|
to remember three different ways to run tests, three different linter
|
||||||
|
invocations, three different formatting commands. `make test` is `make test`
|
||||||
|
everywhere. `make check` is `make check` everywhere. `make fmt` is `make fmt`
|
||||||
|
everywhere. The language, the framework, the toolchain — all abstracted behind a
|
||||||
|
universal interface.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
This reduces cognitive load and allows better flow and focus. You don't have to
|
||||||
|
re-orient when switching repos. You don't have to look up "was it `pytest` or
|
||||||
|
`python -m pytest` or `make test-unit`?" The Makefile answers all of that with
|
||||||
|
one consistent vocabulary across every project.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
The agent can implement and enforce these policies — auto-generating Makefiles,
|
||||||
|
running the checklists, catching drift — but everyone benefits. Humans get
|
||||||
|
consistency. Agents get predictability. New team members (human or AI) get
|
||||||
|
instant orientation. The policies serve all three audiences simultaneously.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
For AI agents, there's an additional benefit:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- The agent always uses `make test`, never `go test ./...` directly — the
|
- The agent always uses `make test`, never `go test ./...` directly — the
|
||||||
Makefile encapsulates flags, timeouts, environment setup
|
Makefile encapsulates flags, timeouts, environment setup
|
||||||
@ -676,21 +695,27 @@ The full standardized configs are available at
|
|||||||
`https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/prompts/raw/branch/main/<filename>` — agents fetch
|
`https://git.eeqj.de/sneak/prompts/raw/branch/main/<filename>` — agents fetch
|
||||||
them when bootstrapping a new repo, ensuring consistency across all projects.
|
them when bootstrapping a new repo, ensuring consistency across all projects.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### Why This Matters for AI Agents Specifically
|
#### Why This Matters — For Everyone
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
AI agents have a unique failure mode: they're confidently wrong. An agent will
|
These interlocking checks aren't just agent-proofing — they're human-proofing
|
||||||
push code that "should work," assert that checks pass without running them, or
|
too. Humans also cut corners under deadline pressure, forget to run the
|
||||||
silently weaken a gate to make the build green. Automated interlocking checks
|
formatter, skip tests "just this once," or push a quick fix without checking CI.
|
||||||
turn these soft failures into hard failures:
|
The automated gates don't care who's committing:
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
- Can't push unformatted code → `make fmt-check` in pre-commit hook
|
- Can't push unformatted code → `make fmt-check` in pre-commit hook
|
||||||
- Can't skip tests → `make check` depends on `make test`
|
- Can't skip tests → `make check` depends on `make test`
|
||||||
- Can't weaken linters → config file changes flagged in PR review
|
- Can't weaken linters → config file changes flagged in PR review
|
||||||
- Can't claim "CI passes" without proof → Docker build is pass/fail
|
- Can't claim "CI passes" without proof → Docker build is pass/fail
|
||||||
- Can't ship without the human seeing it → PR assignment rules
|
- Can't ship without review → PR assignment rules
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
The agent doesn't need willpower or attention to detail. It needs a system where
|
AI agents do have a unique failure mode on top of this: they're confidently
|
||||||
doing the wrong thing fails loudly.
|
wrong. An agent will assert that checks pass without having run them, or
|
||||||
|
silently weaken a gate to make the build green. The interlocking system catches
|
||||||
|
this too — confidence doesn't override a failing build.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Nobody needs willpower or attention to detail when the system makes doing the
|
||||||
|
wrong thing fail loudly. That's the point: good engineering infrastructure
|
||||||
|
benefits every contributor, regardless of whether they're carbon or silicon.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### Checklists Over Prose — Why Redundancy Is the Point
|
#### Checklists Over Prose — Why Redundancy Is the Point
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Loading…
Reference in New Issue
Block a user