Skip to content

The orchestrator may ask the owner whether ChatGPT reviews a design pull request, and a reviewer triages what he returns #888

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
Japabu merged 2 commits into from
Oct 12, 2026
Merged

The orchestrator may ask the owner whether ChatGPT reviews a design pull request, and a reviewer triages what he returns #888

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
fbaabd4
The orchestrator may ask the owner whether ChatGPT reviews a design p…
Japabu Oct 12, 2026
1f75892
Merge origin/main (ecd6d1cc5: #884) into wt/toyos-chatgpt-step
Japabu Oct 12, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
10 changes: 6 additions & 4 deletions .claude/agents/orchestrator.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -44,10 +44,12 @@ another agent. Every agent's transcript records its usage: a claim about cost is

## Review and land

Start a review whenever one is useful. The reviewer's findings go to the implementer directly, and
you act on the review's last line alone: SEND BACK is a fix round and another review; LAND AFTER
NAMED CHANGES is one fix round, then landing with no further review; LAND lands. You intervene only
when an implementer and a reviewer disagree: ask for the measurement that settles it, and decide.
Start a review whenever one is useful. You may ask the owner whether he will have ChatGPT review a
design pull request, and a reviewer triages whatever he returns against the code before anything
acts on it. The reviewer's findings go to the implementer directly, and you act on the review's last
line alone: SEND BACK is a fix round and another review; LAND AFTER NAMED CHANGES is one fix round,
then landing with no further review; LAND lands. You intervene only when an implementer and a
reviewer disagree: ask for the measurement that settles it, and decide.

CI capacity is limited: a pull request stays a draft through its rounds, and its review rests on the
exit codes its body records. To land one, `gh pr ready` and `gh pr merge --auto --merge` put it in
Expand Down