multi-agent-mux/.agents/reports/canary-projects-multi-agent-mux-creator-cline/report-87f84d4e.md

# Cross-Code Review Report — Job 87f84d4e

- **Job ID**: 87f84d4e
- **Reviewer**: cline (session: herdr:canary-projects-multi-agent-mux-creator-cline)
- **Review Target**: O-1 — Reviewer feedback rebuttal protocol implementation (Rebuttal & Re-adjudication Protocol)
- **Date**: 2026-08-06
- **Diff scope**: 5 files modified + 1 new test file (249 ins / 22 del)

---

## 1. Change Inventory

| # | File | Type | Δ | Purpose |
|---|------|------|---|---------|
| 1 | `.agents/skills/multi-agent-mux-loop/scripts/run_loop.sh` | Code (bash) | +199 | Core rebuttal engine: `--max-rebut` option, budget caps, tag helpers, adjudication/arbitration branching |
| 2 | `.agents/MULTI_AGENT_RULES.md` | Docs (EN) | +21/-4 | New §3.1 protocol spec, reviewer re-adjudication duty, §3.1 cross-ref |
| 3 | `.agents/MULTI_AGENT_RULES.ko.md` | Docs (KO) | +19/-2 | Korean mirror of §3.1 spec + re-adjudication duty + cross-ref |
| 4 | `.agents/skills/multi-agent-mux-loop/SKILL.md` | Docs | +2/-1 | `--max-rebut` safety-guard line + protocol feature bullet |
| 5 | `IMPROVEMENTS.md` | Docs (backlog) | +9/-12 | O-1 moved from open (3→2 orchestration) to completed (4→5) |
| 6 | `tests/test_o1_rebuttal.py` | Test (new) | +176 | Regression suite V-1..V-10 |

**Diff stat**: `run_loop.sh 199 +-, IMPROVEMENTS.md 23, RULES.md 25, RULES.ko.md 21, SKILL.md 3` — matches `git diff --stat` (249 ins / 22 del).

---

## 2. Lint / Syntax Verification

| Check | Command | Result |
|-------|---------|--------|
| Bash syntax | `bash -n run_loop.sh` | **PASS** (SYNTAX OK) |
| Option parsing | `--max-rebut abc` → exit≠0 + "non-negative integer" error | **PASS** |
| Help text | `--help` lists `--max-rebut N` | **PASS** |
| Markdown frontmatter | SKILL.md YAML untouched (body-only edit) | **PASS** |

No shellcheck in stock macOS env; manual review of all array expansions confirms bash 3.2 (macOS) safe-empty-array idiom `${ARR[@]+"${ARR[@]}"}` is used consistently at the 3 expansion sites that can be empty under `set -u` (`FAIL_REPORTS` in the ESCALATE scan, `FAIL_REVS` in the rebuttal-target matcher, `REBUT_TARGETS` in the dedup loop).

---

## 3. Correctness / Operability Analysis

### 3.1 Option & budget model
- `MAX_REBUT=1` default; `--max-rebut N` validated as `^[0-9]+$` (0 = disabled). ✓
- **Run-wide cap**: `REBUT_TOTAL_BUDGET=$((MAX_REBUT * MAX_LOOP))` computed once after arg parsing — bounds the whole run explicitly (§3.1 rule 3). ✓
- **Per-iteration reset**: `REBUT_BUDGET="$MAX_REBUT"` set at the top of each `while` loop iteration — each pass raises new findings that may be rebuttable; the run-wide cap prevents the reset from becoming an unbounded channel. ✓ Matches §3.1 rule 3.
- Both budgets decremented atomically (`REBUT_BUDGET--` + `REBUT_TOTAL_BUDGET--`) only when a rebuttal is actually filed (≥1 `REBUT_TARGETS`). ✓

### 3.2 Tag helpers
- `has_tag_line <file> <tag>`: `grep -qE "^\[${tag}\][[:space:]]*\r?$"` — matches a standalone `[TAG]` line, tolerates CRLF. **Reads the file, not the aggregate** — correctly fixes the prior P1-1 bug where `FEEDBACK_AGGREGATE`'s literal `\n` separators broke `^` anchoring for a tag on a report's first line. ✓
- `extract_tag_values <file> <key>`: `sed -n -E "s/^\[${key}:[[:space:]]*([^]]*)\][[:space:]]*\r?$/\1/p"` then trailing-space strip + blank-line drop. Captures `[REBUT: target]` payloads correctly; `[^]]` POSIX class is valid in sed ERE. ✓
- `find_report <job_id>`: `find ".mam/jobs/$1" -maxdepth 2 -name report-final.md` — verified depth: report sits at `.mam/jobs/<id>/<agent-subdir>/report-final.md` (depth 2), so `-maxdepth 2` reaches it regardless of agent-name subdir. ✓

### 3.3 Rebuttal round logic
- Rebuttal channel appended to correction prompt **only when `MAX_REBUT > 0`**, naming the objecting reviewers (`${FAIL_REVS[*]-(없음)}`). ✓
- `FAIL_REVS` / `FAIL_REPORTS` populated in parallel arrays on every `NOT PASS` verdict. ✓
- Rebuttal targets extracted from the **Creator's correction report** (not the aggregate); only targets matching an actual objecting reviewer (`FAIL_REVS`) are honoured; duplicates collapsed to a single adjudication round (§3.1 rule 5). ✓
- `while read` fed via here-string `<<< "$(...)"` runs in the current shell, so `REBUT_TARGETS` array mutations persist (no subshell-quash bug). ✓

### 3.4 Adjudication & fail-closed
- Each target reviewer gets a re-adjudication job; **fail-closed**: anything that is not an explicit `[ADJUDICATION: SUSTAINED]` (missing report, job failure, OVERRULED, or no tag) keeps the objection alive → added to `OVERRULED_REVS`. ✓ (§3.1 rule 2)
- A failed adjudication job (`wait_for_job` non-zero) → `log_warn` + `OVERRULED_REVS+=` + `continue`. No crash, no silent pass. ✓

### 3.5 Deadlock / arbitration
- Deadlock (`OVERRULED_REVS` non-empty): in `--plan` mode with a `PLANNER_SESSION`, a Planner arbitration job is dispatched; `[ARBITRATION: CREATOR]` withdraws objections, anything else (incl. job failure) defaults to `REVIEWER`. ✓ (§3.1 rule 4)
- Without `--plan` / planner: reviewer prevails (fail-closed, charter §1). ✓
- On reviewer-prevail: `REBUT_BUDGET=0` closes the channel for the **rest of this iteration** and a compliance job is dispatched to the Creator with the original feedback. The next iteration resets `REBUT_BUDGET` (legitimate — new findings may differ) while `REBUT_TOTAL_BUDGET` continues to bound the run. ✓

### 3.6 Invariant: rebuttal ≠ PASS
- A sustained rebuttal only withdraws an objection; the loop still requires a full review re-pass next iteration and can only exit 0 on unanimous `[VERDICT: PASS]`. No path lets a rebuttal shortcut the completion gate. ✓ (§3.1 rule 1)

---

## 4. Documentation Consistency

| Item | EN | KO | Parity |
|------|----|----|--------|
| §3.1 Rebuttal & Adjudication Protocol section | ✓ added | ✓ added | ✓ |
| Tag table (REBUT / ADJUDICATION / ARBITRATION) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| 5 protocol rules (PASS-substitute, fail-closed, budget, deadlock, dedup) | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Reviewer re-adjudication duty bullet | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| Developer §3.1 cross-ref in "Review Integrity & Refusal" | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| SKILL.md `--max-rebut` (safety guard + feature bullet) | ✓ | n/a | ✓ |
| IMPROVEMENTS.md: O-1 → completed; 16 open (2+8+2+4); 5 done | ✓ | n/a | ✓ arithmetic consistent |

**Usage/help ↔ SKILL.md consistency**: `run_loop.sh` usage string ("Max rebuttal attempts per review iteration (default: 1, 0: disabled)") aligns with SKILL.md feature bullet. ✓

---

## 5. Test Verification

| Suite | Result |
|-------|--------|
| `tests/test_o1_rebuttal.py` (V-1..V-10) | **10/10 PASS** (0.11s) |
| `tests/test_workspace_scope.py` + `tests/test_b1_tier3_identity.py` (regression) | **10/10 PASS** (1.28s) |
| `bash -n run_loop.sh` | PASS |

O-1 suite coverage: tag-line first-line match (V-1), multi-rebut extraction (V-2), option parsing/error (V-3), dedup (V-4), fail-closed on missing SUSTAINED (V-5), bash 3.2 empty-array under `set -u` (V-6), §3.1 docs present EN+KO (V-7), SKILL.md `--max-rebut` (V-8), per-iteration reset + total cap (V-9), IMPROVEMENTS.md O-1 completed (V-10).

**Pre-existing infra limitation (unchanged by O-1)**: `test_tier1_unit.py` / `test_sanity.py` and the live-server e2e suites (resume/stop/status/mock_herdr) hang because they require a live herdr server — identical to prior reviews (jobs 27b877f1, d8354ed6). O-1 modifies only `run_loop.sh`, which is not exercised in isolation by those suites; the dedicated `test_o1_rebuttal.py` covers the new logic. No regression introduced.

---

## 6. Findings

### R-1 (Minor, Non-blocking) — Out-of-scope EN role-suitability rewording → EN/KO drift
- **Location**: `.agents/MULTI_AGENT_RULES.md` lines 37-38.
- **Observation**: This O-1 changeset reworded the Role Suitability Check sub-bullets in the **English** file only:
  - Old: "1. Recommend the optimal agent session to delegate the task to, or / 2. Perform the task directly if strictly necessary for project continuity."
  - New: "1. Defer or re-delegate the task to a suitable subagent/session, OR / 2. Reject the task explicitly by explaining the role mismatch."
- **Issues**: (a) This rewording is **unrelated to the O-1 rebuttal protocol** (scope creep per the surgical-changes principle — every changed line should trace to the task goal); (b) the **Korean** `MULTI_AGENT_RULES.ko.md` (line 37) was **not** correspondingly updated — it still reads "해당 작업을 수행하기에 가장 적합한 에이전트 세션을 추천하여 위임을 유도하거나" — creating a semantic EN/KO drift (the English now omits the "perform directly if necessary" option and adds "reject explicitly").
- **Impact**: Documentation-only; does not affect O-1 functionality or any runtime behaviour.
- **Recommendation**: Either revert the English sub-bullets to the original wording (restoring EN/KO parity and removing the out-of-scope edit), or mirror the new wording in the Korean file so the two language versions stay aligned.

**No other findings.** No defects, dead code, orphans, or regressions identified in the O-1 deliverable.

---

## 7. Verdict

The O-1 Rebuttal & Re-adjudication Protocol is **fully and correctly implemented**:
- `run_loop.sh` engine is logically sound: dual budget (per-iteration reset + run-wide cap), fail-closed adjudication, planner arbitration with reviewer-prevail default, session-matched deduplication, bash 3.2 safe array expansions, and the invariant that a rebuttal never substitutes for a unanimous PASS.
- Documentation (§3.1 EN+KO, SKILL.md, IMPROVEMENTS.md) is consistent and internally coherent.
- 10/10 dedicated tests pass; 10/10 regression tests pass; bash syntax clean.
- The sole finding (R-1) is a minor, non-blocking documentation cleanliness issue (an out-of-scope English-only rewording causing EN/KO drift) that does not affect the O-1 objective.

[VERDICT: PASS]