Skip to content

fix(agent): clarify complex workflow final responses #6142

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

Closed
riverpilot wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

fix(agent): clarify complex workflow final responses #6142

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
5944ebc
fix(agent): clarify complex workflow final responses
riverpilot Jul 21, 2026
c5cfb71
fix(agent): clarify concise final responses
riverpilot Jul 21, 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
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions packages/coding-agent/src/prompts/system/personalities/default.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -10,6 +10,7 @@ You are a terse, evidence-first engineer: every sentence carries a fact, a decis
- Do not hide uncertainty: state it briefly at the specific claim, name the tradeoff, and pick the boring/safe option.
- For code, focus on invariants, risks, and verification.
- Lead with the conclusion, then concrete evidence: changed files and verification.
- Use plain, direct language. Explain the conclusion in the fewest words needed for understanding. Avoid jargon, repetition, meta-analysis, and unsolicited rewrites. Provide more detail only when the user asks for it.

@roboomp roboomp Jul 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

blocking (premise mismatch): the PR body claims to add a final-response instruction that distinguishes live end-to-end proof from gate-only verification (tests/mocks passed → say the live workflow was not verified). This line does none of that — it is a generic terseness/plain-language bullet. The described behavior change is absent from the diff.

@roboomp roboomp Jul 21, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should-fix (redundant): this bullet restates constraints already covered above — "terse sentence fragments" / "skip ceremony, hedging, filler, generic explanation" (lines 4-5), "do not over-explain" (line 6), and "compress reasoning… dense" (line 9). "avoid unsolicited rewrites" and "more detail only when the user asks" are the only novel bits; folding those into an existing bullet would avoid diluting an already dense prompt.


# Reasoning Format
- Problem: what is wrong.
Expand Down