j7/StarrOS
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

prompts: claude-shakedown.md — external audit prompt for Anthropic Claude shakedown #4

Merged
san merged 1 commit from prompts/claude-shakedown into main 2026-07-09 15:49:18 -04:00
Conversation 0 Commits 1 Files changed 1 +182
san commented 2026-07-09 15:49:11 -04:00
Collaborator
Copy link

Summary

Adds prompts/claude-shakedown.md — a turn-key prompt for handing the StarrOS / Megapack stack to an external Claude (Anthropic) session for an independent second-opinion audit. Builds on prompts/fable-global.md (the design lens) by adding the operational + review lens an external auditor needs.

What changed

  • 1 new file: prompts/claude-shakedown.md (14,135 bytes, 182 lines)
  • 0 modifications to existing files

Why

Per J7 directive: bring in Claude (Anthropic) for an external shakedown so we have a rock-solid playbook to build Sprint 0 from. The deliverable target is documents/audits/claude-shakedown-YYYY-MM-DD.md. This file is the prompt Claude reads.

Sections in the new prompt

  • §0 How to use — read fable-global.md first; this file is layered on top.
  • §1 You are an external auditor — no write access; suggestions only.
  • §2 System context — Mononoke (primary NixOS host, tailnet 100.77.7.1, NAS at /nas/hdd/agent-shared/), 2 peer hosts (Outpost 100.77.7.2, Yoseba 100.77.7.3), the 10-wolf pack + San with one-line charters, StarrOS vs Megapack lineage (StarrOS absorbed into Megapack as Subproject 2; "the project is StarrOS" per J7), paused/removed/killed components, top-5 broken items from docs/runtime-state.md §3.
  • §3 Canonical reading list — runtime-state.md deliberately before the spec, so an external auditor doesn't redesign against broken services.
  • §4 Deliverable — verified-vs-inferred, audit-by-section, top issues ranked (≤10), the 9 open PR-2 questions, the 4 deferred Jigo minors, concrete recommendations, what was NOT found (false-negatives disclosure).
  • §5 Self-imposed limits — no second control plane (ADR 0001), no architecture-against-broken-services, no code, no reviving paused components (Mission Control, Honcho, Hermes Workspace), no Megapack-language drift.
  • §6 Output rules — Markdown, 3,000–8,000 words, citations required, no solution code.
  • §7 After-delivery flow — J7 picks recs → kanban cards → Sprint 0.

Audit-pitfalls explicitly surfaced

  1. Don't design against Outpost/Yoseba as if they were Mononoke (separate admin paths).
  2. Don't let Megapack-language drift into StarrOS spec content unless the cross-reference is explicit.
  3. Don't propose reviving paused/killed components (Mission Control, Honcho, Hermes Workspace flake input).
  4. Don't propose adding a 6th external coder worker without an ADR (per docs/external-workers.md §1).

Companion docs

  • prompts/fable-global.md — design lens (foundation)
  • prompts/san-handoff.md — orchestrator handoff
  • prompts/jigo-review.md — review lens
  • docs/playbook.md — top-level playbook
  • decisions/0003-canonical-spec-boundaries.md — terminology glossary

Owner chain

  • Authored by: San (with reference to existing prompt files)
  • Gate: J7
  • Reviewer: Jigo (per prompts/jigo-review.md)

Refs: J7 standing rule (don't assign reviewers until "we get to that point"); J7 directive 2026-07-09 to bring Claude in for a shakedown.

## Summary Adds `prompts/claude-shakedown.md` — a turn-key prompt for handing the StarrOS / Megapack stack to an external Claude (Anthropic) session for an independent second-opinion audit. Builds on `prompts/fable-global.md` (the design lens) by adding the operational + review lens an external auditor needs. ## What changed - 1 new file: `prompts/claude-shakedown.md` (14,135 bytes, 182 lines) - 0 modifications to existing files ## Why Per J7 directive: bring in Claude (Anthropic) for an external shakedown so we have a rock-solid playbook to build Sprint 0 from. The deliverable target is `documents/audits/claude-shakedown-YYYY-MM-DD.md`. This file is the prompt Claude reads. ## Sections in the new prompt - **§0 How to use** — read `fable-global.md` first; this file is layered on top. - **§1 You are an external auditor** — no write access; suggestions only. - **§2 System context** — Mononoke (primary NixOS host, tailnet 100.77.7.1, NAS at `/nas/hdd/agent-shared/`), 2 peer hosts (Outpost 100.77.7.2, Yoseba 100.77.7.3), the 10-wolf pack + San with one-line charters, **StarrOS vs Megapack lineage** (StarrOS absorbed into Megapack as Subproject 2; "the project is StarrOS" per J7), paused/removed/killed components, top-5 broken items from `docs/runtime-state.md` §3. - **§3 Canonical reading list** — `runtime-state.md` deliberately **before** the spec, so an external auditor doesn't redesign against broken services. - **§4 Deliverable** — verified-vs-inferred, audit-by-section, top issues ranked (≤10), the 9 open PR-2 questions, the 4 deferred Jigo minors, concrete recommendations, what was NOT found (false-negatives disclosure). - **§5 Self-imposed limits** — no second control plane (ADR 0001), no architecture-against-broken-services, no code, no reviving paused components (Mission Control, Honcho, Hermes Workspace), no Megapack-language drift. - **§6 Output rules** — Markdown, 3,000–8,000 words, citations required, no solution code. - **§7 After-delivery flow** — J7 picks recs → kanban cards → Sprint 0. ## Audit-pitfalls explicitly surfaced 1. Don't design against Outpost/Yoseba as if they were Mononoke (separate admin paths). 2. Don't let Megapack-language drift into StarrOS spec content unless the cross-reference is explicit. 3. Don't propose reviving paused/killed components (Mission Control, Honcho, Hermes Workspace flake input). 4. Don't propose adding a 6th external coder worker without an ADR (per `docs/external-workers.md` §1). ## Companion docs - `prompts/fable-global.md` — design lens (foundation) - `prompts/san-handoff.md` — orchestrator handoff - `prompts/jigo-review.md` — review lens - `docs/playbook.md` — top-level playbook - `decisions/0003-canonical-spec-boundaries.md` — terminology glossary ## Owner chain - Authored by: San (with reference to existing prompt files) - Gate: J7 - Reviewer: Jigo (per `prompts/jigo-review.md`) Refs: J7 standing rule (don't assign reviewers until "we get to that point"); J7 directive 2026-07-09 to bring Claude in for a shakedown.
Turn-key prompt for handing the StarrOS / Megapack stack to an external Claude
session for an independent second-opinion audit. Builds on fable-global.md
(design lens) by adding the operational + review lens an external auditor needs.

Sections:
- §0 How to use (read fable-global first)
- §1 You are an external auditor (no write access; suggestions only)
- §2 System context (Mononoke + 2 peers, 10-wolf pack + San, StarrOS vs
  Megapack, paused/removed/killed components, top-5 broken items)
- §3 Canonical reading list — runtime-state.md BEFORE spec by design
- §4 Deliverable spec (verified vs inferred, audit-by-section, top issues
  ranked, the 9 open PR-2 questions, the 4 deferred Jigo minors, concrete
  recs, what you did NOT find)
- §5 Self-imposed limits (no second control plane, no architecture-against-
  broken-services, no code, no reviving paused components, no Megapack drift)
- §6 Output rules (Markdown, 3-8k words, citations required)
- §7 After-delivery flow (J7 picks recs → kanban cards → Sprint 0)

Output target: documents/audits/claude-shakedown-YYYY-MM-DD.md
Owner: San (authoring); J7 (gate); Jigo (reviewer).
san merged commit 524fbfe8a7 into main 2026-07-09 15:49:18 -04:00
san deleted branch prompts/claude-shakedown 2026-07-09 15:49:19 -04:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
Labels
Clear labels
No items
No labels
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
j7/StarrOS!4
No description provided.