Why: user chose O2 in the completion signal evaluation; stage 4/5 docs precede any code.
Evidence: read-only code location in Agent-Native runtime/llm and Backend runtime (SELF).
Impact: docs only; no product code, no paid requests.
Refs: docs/superpowers/specs/2026-10-19-fast-slow-completion-signal-evaluation.md
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: Set up the task card and approved implementation plan for environment-configured super-admin.
Evidence: make precheck and task-start validated.
Impact: Establishes task metadata and implementation baseline.
Refs: #0
Why: include the current integration baseline before verification.
Evidence: fetched origin/main=eef7e5e778cabcb6216f74b74213a3d7511f383b.
Impact: integrate upstream changes without rewriting task history.
Refs: task-sync
Why: Keep the approved plan accessible after task worktrees are recycled and mark all child delivery results.
Evidence: Plan snapshot matches original bytes; U6 #624 merged as 84aa411 with exact-head CI success.
Impact: Task and plan metadata only; final main verification remains pending.
Refs: PR #616
Why: RDM settings completion is split into phases; phase 1a covers the
Picker hardening, R2 member search and the acceptance false PASS fix
that do not conflict with IAM U4.
Evidence: plan and card only; no implementation in this commit.
Impact: none on runtime.
Refs: .task/feature-rdm-settings-phase1a.md
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: closure re-review (head ad4485e) left the per-repo evidence sentence as an unlabelled universal claim; the API check missed Agent-System-UI (15 archived cards, not 14).
Evidence: Gitea contents API on Agent-System-UI main (SELF); PR #604 run 3694 job logs for the flaky backend tests.
Impact: docs/superpowers/plans and .task only.
Refs: PR #604
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: closure re-review (head d2fb19a) blocked the bare claim that every adoption card was archived.
Evidence: Gitea contents API on each repo main (SELF): 14 archived adoption cards, no open ones; Guidelines records adoption in policy/guidelines-adoption.md (PR #9).
Impact: docs/superpowers/plans and .task only.
Refs: PR #604
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: independent review blocked a869453: CLOSED asserted cleanup of other repos without evidence and before this PR's own merge/cleanup; the archived card kept template placeholders.
Evidence: review output /tmp/review-gov-dev-closed.out (VERDICT BLOCK, SELF-held, out of tree).
Impact: docs/superpowers/plans and .task only; no code.
Refs: PR #604
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: Phase 6 adoption PRs merged across the formal repositories; the master record still showed PLANNED rows.
Evidence: merge commits and main CI per repository (GATE, Gitea statuses); make test-governance 421 tests OK on 2b2268f (SELF).
Impact: planning record and task card evidence only.
Refs: docs/superpowers/plans/2026-10-16-development-governance-v2-master.md
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: Guidelines PR #9 review repairs ran through the shared executor; repair-r2 fail-stopped and was redone as r3.
Evidence: docs/superpowers/plans/evidence/guidelines-adoption/03-04 (SELF): governance check --guidelines-self and agent-exec validate on 7cafc7d.
Impact: planning record and evidence only.
Refs: docs/superpowers/plans/2026-10-17-guidelines-governance-adoption.md
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: Development-Guidelines stores no process records (CONTRIBUTING.md), so its Phase 6 adoption card and evidence live with the governance master record in Dev.
Evidence: docs/superpowers/plans/evidence/guidelines-adoption/00-02 (SELF): governance check --guidelines-self, agent-exec validate, adoption cases ALL PASS.
Impact: planning records only.
Refs: docs/superpowers/plans/2026-10-16-development-governance-v2-master.md
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: the Python executor was retired through the shared executor and Phase 5/7 states changed (DM #17/#18 merged, Phase 6 pilot started).
Evidence: make test-governance 421 tests OK (SELF, card evidence); git grep finds no live Python executor reference.
Impact: task card and master record only.
Refs: .task/feature-dev-shared-executor-switch.md; DM PR #17, #18, #19
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: The master record still showed Phases 0-4 as PLANNED after they merged.
Evidence: Dev main aee351a/682a4e8, Guidelines main 2688fd2, DM main 183e764, PR #585/#595/#596/#597.
Impact: Plan document only.
Refs: development-governance-v2
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: Phase 5-7 depend on how repositories obtain the shared executor and how CI reads private submodules.
Evidence: Owner answers on 2026-10-17; DM secret list shows SUBMODULE_TOKEN (SELF).
Impact: Governance master plan only.
Refs: docs/superpowers/plans/2026-10-16-development-governance-v2-master.md
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: the task card claimed all units complete while confirmed blocking defects remain in triage and the Guidelines contract.
Evidence: review of task.sh triage (count-based JOIN, local-only scan) and Guidelines PR #7 diff; CI runs 3417/3419 apply only to superseded objects.
Impact: initiative stops accepting requirements; status uses the PLANNED..CLOSED model; remaining phases tracked in one master record.
Refs: PR #585, Guidelines PR #7
Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
Why: user approved the four design documents and authorized implementation
(/goal); the plan's section-7 tradeoffs gate the I1 public DTO and had to be
frozen before any implementation unit starts. A read-only audit of the RDM
backend (Agent-System-RDM main 5df66106) supplied the source facts.
Evidence: audit findings recorded in rollout section 7 (tree is doc->section
only, no confidence field, no persisted conflict entity, per-project event seq
complete); review fixes folded into the read-model contract (statReasons,
structuralGap, AssertionSummary); precheck receipt READY imported via
task-resume.
Impact: unlocks I1 implementation in the RDM repo; design deliverable ready
for PR/CI/merge; no business code, pins, database or deployment touched.
Refs: .task/feature-document-visualization-plan.md
Why: Turn the approved multi-CLI routing design into independently testable Cursor implementation units without another manual plan gate.
Evidence: The plan self-review found R1-R10 coverage, stable interfaces, five review-focus tests, and no placeholders or whitespace errors.
Impact: Authorizes U1-U5 execution through fresh Cursor Agent runs while the host retains scope, verification, integration, and delivery control.
Refs: docs/superpowers/specs/2026-10-15-project-agent-execution-design.md
weichenandCursor