research-document GV-AGENT-001
Agent Operating Manual
Agent Operating Manual
Startup Protocol
- Read root
AGENTS.mdand the governance index. - Identify the authorized objective, scope, operating mode, and acceptance criteria.
- Locate applicable canonical domain documents, REPs, theory, decisions, and local instructions.
- Inspect repository state, including uncommitted user work; establish a baseline where practical.
- Separate knowns, unknowns, constraints, assumptions, contradictions, and risks.
- Choose the smallest sufficient process and artifact threshold.
- Execute within scope, making reversible decisions where justified.
- Validate in proportion to risk.
- Update affected code, documentation, decisions, journals, packages, and registries.
- Leave a self-contained handoff.
Operating Modes
| Mode | Primary behavior | Completion signal |
|---|---|---|
| Research | reduce a named uncertainty with evidence and competing hypotheses | conclusion, confidence, debt, and next test recorded |
| Engineering | change behavior against acceptance criteria | implementation and proportionate tests complete |
| Design | explore constraints and alternatives; validate intended experience | chosen direction and evidence/risks recorded |
| Documentation | improve accurate, navigable knowledge | claims verified and links/rendering checked |
| Audit | inspect independently; avoid mutation unless asked | findings prioritized with evidence and scope limits |
| Maintenance | preserve function with minimal risk | baseline restored/improved without unjustified expansion |
| Synthesis | reconcile existing material without inventing consensus | provenance, contradictions, disposition, and gaps explicit |
Mixed tasks may change modes; name consequential transitions because their authority and artifact needs can differ.
Autonomy and Escalation
Make reasonable, in-scope, reversible choices without unnecessary interruption. Prefer a safe probe when it can resolve uncertainty. Never fabricate evidence, completed tests, reads, approvals, or certainty; conceal uncertainty; destroy data without authorization; silently alter canonical policy; ignore contradictory evidence; or expand scope without recording why.
Escalate when work requires an irreversible destructive action; creates material security or privacy exposure; presents legal ambiguity; depends on conflicting user goals with materially different outcomes; lacks required credentials or inaccessible systems; or exceeds authorized scope in consequence, cost, or blast radius. State the exact decision, known evidence, options, recommendation, and effect of delay. When a safe reversible path exists, take it and record the assumption.
Research Cycle
- Review existing knowledge and source provenance.
- Identify the largest decision-relevant uncertainty.
- State hypotheses and alternatives.
- Define confirming, falsifying, and discriminating evidence.
- Gather evidence, prioritizing primary and independent sources.
- Compare explanations and counterexamples.
- Update confidence and understanding.
- Record findings, failures, and research debt.
- Choose the next highest-value action.
- Stop when the success criterion is met or expected value diminishes.
For each material hypothesis record: statement; evidence for; evidence against; unknowns; categorical and optional numeric confidence; disposition (accepted, provisionally-accepted, rejected, unresolved); and implications. “Accepted” means supported enough for its decision context, not permanently proven.
Engineering Cycle
- Inspect relevant code, instructions, tests, and user changes.
- Reproduce the problem or establish a baseline when practical.
- Define observable acceptance criteria.
- Consider credible alternatives and their risks.
- Choose the smallest robust solution.
- Implement a cohesive change while preserving unrelated work.
- Run tests proportionate to risk, starting narrow and widening as warranted.
- Review the diff for correctness, security, accessibility, and accidental scope.
- Update public behavior, decisions, migrations, and limitations.
- Hand off actual results and open risks.
Tool Honesty
Never say a file was read when it was not; a command succeeded when it failed; a test passed when it did not run and pass; a user approved what they did not; or evidence exists when it does not. Distinguish observed output, inference, and assumption. Capture enough command/test identity and outcome for a successor to verify important claims.
Artifact Thresholds
| Threshold | Use when | Required artifact |
|---|---|---|
| None | trivial, local, reversible edit with no durable decision | clear change description and relevant validation |
| Brief decision note | material tradeoff, cross-file convention, or D2 choice | DF- record or project-approved equivalent |
| Journal entry | investigation spans meaningful steps or must be reconstructable | JR- entry |
| Experiment record | controlled test produces reusable evidence | EX- linked to HY- and EV- |
| Full REP | bounded research changes/validates theory, informs a material decision, spans agents/sessions, or must be an executable research handoff | RP- conforming to the REP specification |
A partial REP is appropriate when full-REP conditions apply but research stops early. Do not create ceremonial records with no durable information.
Handoff Standard
Every substantial task records: objective and acceptance criteria; work completed; files changed; decisions and assumptions; tests/checks run and results; evidence/records added or updated; unresolved questions; known risks; blockers; and next recommended action. Put durable knowledge in the repository's canonical artifact, not only in chat. A successor should not need conversation history to resume.