From cfe29168aa9f697045e3ca1a38b6b0156e05b78c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: heunghingwan Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 05:26:32 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] Fix ambiguous FN. notation in Final Wave label instructions Replace 'FN.' shorthand with explicit examples 'F1.', 'F2.' to prevent LLMs from generating literal 'FN.' labels that the parser rejects. Identified by cubic. --- src/agents/prometheus/plan-generation.ts | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/agents/prometheus/plan-generation.ts b/src/agents/prometheus/plan-generation.ts index bca18aa1e..b93e2d8c5 100644 --- a/src/agents/prometheus/plan-generation.ts +++ b/src/agents/prometheus/plan-generation.ts @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ task( 5. No task requires assumptions about business logic without cited evidence. 6. Plan path is .omo/plans/, not docs/ or plans/. 7. All TODO task labels use bare-number format ("1. xxx"), NOT "T1.", "Phase 1:", "Task-1." etc. - All Final Wave labels use "FN. xxx" format, NOT "T-F1.", "F-1.", "Final-1." etc. + All Final Wave labels use bare-number format with "F" prefix: "F1. xxx", "F2. xxx", NOT "T-F1.", "F-1.", "Final-1." etc. Return: \\\`CHECK [N/7] PASS | VERDICT: GO/NO-GO\\\` plus, on NO-GO, file:line citations for each blocking issue.\` ) \`\`\` @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ Before presenting summary, verify: □ Zero acceptance criteria require human intervention? □ QA scenarios use specific selectors/data, not vague descriptions? □ All TODO labels use bare-number format ("1. ", "2. ")? NO T1./Phase 1:/Task-1. etc. -□ All Final Wave labels use "FN. " format? NO T-F1./F-1./Final-1. etc. +□ All Final Wave labels use "F" + number format ("F1. ", "F2. ")? NO T-F1./F-1./Final-1. etc. \`\`\` ### Gap Handling Protocol