amadan
🤖 spec: §1.10 gains the ref lesson, three-for-three at catching nothing
Two sessions got memoria's main wrong in the same hour, in opposite directions: this branch merged a local main five commits behind the remote, and the suite session read this branch's base commit as main and ruled partly on it. Remote main carried draft 5 throughout. The rule that would have caught both is already written down in suite AGENTS.md — fetch before you read a ref you did not just write — and neither of us ran it. A rule nobody runs catches nothing.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
1 file changed,
+12
−0
docs/superpowers/specs/2026-09-03-memoria-design.md+12 −0
diff --git a/docs/superpowers/specs/2026-09-03-memoria-design.md b/docs/superpowers/specs/2026-09-03-memoria-design.md| index 09587ec..98c1d84 100644 |
| --- a/docs/superpowers/specs/2026-09-03-memoria-design.md |
| +++ b/docs/superpowers/specs/2026-09-03-memoria-design.md |
| @@ -562,6 +562,18 @@ provisioned together — which is the reasoning suite §3 names and rejects, |
| fixtures had been replaced; there were never any fixtures, the gate does |
| not exist, and the entry now says so. |
| +**A postscript, because the same mistake then happened twice more in one |
| +hour and neither instance was caught by a rule that exists to catch it.** |
| +On 2026-09-06 this branch merged a local `main` that was **five commits |
| +behind the remote**, having compared the wrong ref; in the same hour the |
| +suite session read `617eb2a` — this branch's base — as memoria's `main` |
| +and concluded draft 5 was unmerged, then made a doctrine ruling partly on |
| +that belief. Remote `main` was `9b55ab8` and carried draft 5 the whole |
| +time. Two sessions, two directions, one unrun command: **fetch before you |
| +read a ref you did not just write.** It is in suite AGENTS.md already, |
| +which is the point — a rule nobody runs is a rule that catches nothing, |
| +and it is now three-for-three at catching nothing. |
| + |
| **One finding was wrong, and how it was wrong is worth as much.** The |
| review could not resolve `6797bbf` or `4aea8f4` and said §13's blocker was |
| therefore not shown closed. The hashes are correct — they are |