context weight: free-tier prose cuts across six surfaces (~11,600 B) #101
Labels
No labels
already-shipped
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
external-review
good first issue
help wanted
in progress
invalid
needs-decision
proposal
question
security
wontfix
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference: crenshawdev/cadence-archived#101
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
~11,600 B off the eager path with no new files, no register rows, and no dependency on #1. Land these per-command, one commit per surface plus its budget re-pin — except the
--tokensitem, which is inherently cross-file.Cuts
plan.md:182-189,context.md:122-144,execute.md:233-237,verify-deep.md:37-41,review-triggers.md:106-107--tokensprovenance paragraph, duplicated five times.context.md:122claims to state it "once, for every bracket in this plugin" — already false four ways. Move tolib/trace.mjs's header (zero token cost); each site keeps one imperative sentence. Keep everywhere: omit the flag when no figure exists, never--tokens 0, and a return carrying no figure is ROUTINE rather than a defect.skills/cad-land/SKILL.md:175-190,:44-49,:93-97,:115-118git.auto_closemechanic given 50 lines above at:119-132; three deferral tails are maintainer cost-model prose. Keep: "No preselected publish default, ever. No auto-push. No auto-commit." and the "this read is NOT scoped to the GitHub arm" clause — that one stops the model skipping the read on GitLab. The compressed deferral form has in-repo precedent atskills/cad-plan-review/SKILL.md:38-39.execute.md:96-104,:245-253,:1-11<purpose>duplicatingSKILL.md's<objective>in the same context, with lines 8-10 describing a design already removed. Keep: "a worktree executor emits no trace events of its own" — that is a rule.context.md:128-144,:366-370,:9-11,:13-15:122-127.verify.md:2-11,:84-89SKILL.md's objective clause-for-clause; thefields_versionlegacy paragraph, which is /cad-audit's and already lives ataudit.md:71-75andacceptance-criteria.md:181-191. Removing it also kills a live drift hazard — that five-term rule currently has four copies across two commands.cad-planner-contract:167-175,cad-reviewer-contract:76-80,cad-plan-checker-contract:111-116<success_criteria>checklists restating their own contracts item-for-item.conventions.md:141scopes the section to workflows, and the executor, verifier and assumptions-analyzer contracts already ship without one. Cut reviewer's first — highest multiplier, shortest contract, easiest to reverse if compliance drops.cad-health:107-113,:103-105lib/branch-decision.mjs) and av2.4.0regression anecdote. The runtime rule is already unambiguous at:92-94and:96-102.plan.md:8-10,:329-333trace.test.mjsbesideBRACKETING.cad-executor-contract:44-46:100-103). Cut the step-3 copy to a pointer at<deviation_rules>.Constraints
weight-budgets.jsonpins exact bytes and undershoot fails CI as hard as overrun — every cut needs a same-commit re-pin..mjsheader or a design-note, both zero token cost. Rationale bound to a rule the model applies at runtime stays.plan.md:56-57,plan.md:104-107,context.md:77-78— those sentences survive verbatim.Risk
This is where the milestone can actually regress behaviour: roughly 9,000 B of what comes out is rationale, and this repo keeps rationale because removing it caused regressions before. Run
/cad-verifyon each affected command rather than bulk-editing — self-verify structurally cannot catch this.Re-measured against the current tree (post-2.7.0 + the retune branch). Six of the nine rows are already shipped:
Still outstanding, ~1,700 B of the original ~11,600:
Scope is now small enough to ride any branch that touches those three files.
Correction to the re-measure above: the plan-checker contract's success_criteria checklist is NOT outstanding - CTW-03's own row keeps it deliberately, asserted by prose-agreement.test.mjs:69-95 as the DFC-03 fix. The live remnant is the cad-land guardrails re-derivation and the executor contract's doubled static-analysis carve-out, now tracked as CTW-06 in the v3.1.0 requirements.