Written after arming, firing, draining and re-arming a real watcher rather than
reading the code. Command HQ is a home for these, so anything wrong with the
mechanism shows up there first and worst — a commander is meant to run for months.
Six faults, the first structural: "keep going" and "tell the agent" are mutually
exclusive, because a background process reaches the model only when it EXITS. A
looping job can do shell work and nothing else — it cannot read a diff or judge
whether a push matters. So the dialog offers a mode that silently means "the agent
will never see this again", which is the wrong default for the exact case watchers
exist for. Asks for a third option: exit, hand back, re-arm.
Then: drain before re-arming or lose what lands in the gap; a watcher on a branch
the agent also pushes to fires on its own writes, and author filtering cannot help
because both sides are Claude; `timeout` does not exist on macOS so rule 6 cannot be
followed as written; a job stopped on purpose is reported as failed, which would read
as broken on a grid of cards; and the offered working directory is the conversation's
rather than the watched thing's.
Also what worked and should not be traded away — ask-before-arming earned its place
in the first minute — with one caveat: the output rules leave nowhere to report that
the thing asked for cannot work as specified.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Andre: keep these in the platform repo with proper tracking rather than scp-ing
them to a directory on alpha.
A note on a server is invisible to whoever picks the work up next, has no history,
and cannot be reviewed beside the change it argues about. In git it is diffable, it
arrives with a pull, and the commit that answers a note sits next to the note.
First one is the mobile side of Command HQ: what the API got right, and the single
thing a client cannot do — create a commander, because no endpoint returns the
commanders directory and only the web composer flags the spawn. The decision reached
with Andre is recorded there, with the two rejected alternatives and why.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
pastilhasandClaude Opus 5