Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@enzokro
Last active December 31, 2025 22:51
Show Gist options
  • Select an option

  • Save enzokro/10b5b06062933cfc18ad6f9af321c18a to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.

Select an option

Save enzokro/10b5b06062933cfc18ad6f9af321c18a to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
tether Agent Orchestrator Evaluation Plan

Tether Plugin Evaluation Plan

Objective

Rigorously evaluate the tether plugin through diverse tasks, tracking workflow fidelity, workspace quality, and friction points to inform its evolution. Design Goals:

  • Executable by any Claude Code session (portable)
  • Can run full suite or subset in parallel
  • Self-documenting: captures results for later evolution
  • Results persist in workspace/ for analysis

Quick Start (for any Claude Code session)

# 1. Navigate to the test harness directory for your task
cd /Users/cck/CC/plugins/marketplaces/crinzo-plugins/scratch/[TASK-ID]
# 2. Ensure workspace directory exists (tether creates files here)
mkdir -p workspace
# 3. Check workspace state
/tether:workspace
# 4. Run the test task
/tether:skills [task prompt from table]
# 5. After completion, score the task using the rubric
# 6. Document friction in the results table

Test Isolation Structure

Each task runs in its own isolated folder:

crinzo-plugins/
├── tether/              # The plugin being tested
├── scratch/             # Test harness root
│   ├── A1/
│   │   └── workspace/   # A1's isolated workspace
│   ├── A2/
│   │   └── workspace/   # A2's isolated workspace
│   ├── A3/
│   │   └── workspace/
│   ├── B1/
│   │   └── workspace/
│   ... (one folder per task)
│   ├── E2/
│   │   └── workspace/
│   └── EVAL_REPORT.md   # Aggregate results

Why isolation matters:

  • Each task gets clean workspace state
  • Parallel sessions don't conflict
  • Lineage tests (C1→C2) can still reference parent by copying workspace file
  • Easy to compare results across tasks

Phase 1: Evaluation Setup

1.1 Create Test Harness Structure

# Create all task folders upfront
cd /Users/cck/CC/plugins/marketplaces/crinzo-plugins/scratch
mkdir -p A1/workspace A2/workspace A3/workspace
mkdir -p B1/workspace B2/workspace B3/workspace
mkdir -p C1/workspace C2/workspace
mkdir -p D1/workspace D2/workspace
mkdir -p E1/workspace E2/workspace

1.2 Verify Plugin Access

# From any scratch/[TASK]/ folder, verify tether is accessible
/tether:workspace   # Should show empty workspace

1.3 Evaluation Harness Protocol

For each test task, track:

  • Pre-task: Workspace file count, active tasks
  • Routing Decision: What Assess returned (full/direct/clarify)
  • Workspace File Created: Yes/No, filename
  • Path Quality: Clear data transformation? (1-5)
  • Delta Quality: Truly minimal? (1-5)
  • Thinking Traces Quality: Substantive findings? (1-5)
  • Build Fidelity: Stayed on Path? Within Delta?
  • Completion: File renamed correctly? Delivered filled?
  • Friction Points: Where did workflow stall or add overhead?

Phase 2: Test Task Suite (12 Tasks)

Master Task Table

ID Category Prompt Expected Route Tests
A1 Routing "Add a debug log to the assess agent's routing logic" direct Trivial task skips workspace
A2 Routing "Add a new command that shows workspace file statistics" full Full workflow triggers
A3 Routing "Improve the plugin" clarify Ambiguous prompts halt
B1 Quality "Add validation to ensure Path and Delta exist before Build proceeds" full Exploration depth
B2 Quality "Add line numbers to Thinking Traces output" full Delta minimality
B3 Quality "Create a workspace file template generator" full Path clarity
C1 Lineage "Create a function that parses workspace filenames into components" full Parent task
C2 Lineage "Use the filename parser to show lineage tree" full Child inherits _from-NNN
D1 Creep "Add a configuration system for tether settings" full Creep-prone scope
D2 Creep "Add descriptive error messages to assess routing" full Subtle over-engineering
E1 Edge "Integrate workspace with a GraphQL API" clarify/blocked Impossible task handling
E2 Edge "Fix the typo 'returing' in assess.md" direct Minimal overhead test

Task Details

A1: Direct Route Validation

/tether:skills Add a debug log to the assess agent's routing logic

Expected: Direct route (no workspace file) Validates: Assess correctly identifies trivial, ephemeral tasks Friction Check: If full route triggered, overhead is excessive

A2: Full Workflow Validation

/tether:skills Add a new command that shows workspace file statistics

Expected: Full route → Anchor → Build Validates: Three-phase orchestration works end-to-end Friction Check: All phases execute in sequence, gate enforced

A3: Clarify Route Validation

/tether:skills Improve the plugin

Expected: Clarify route (returns question) Validates: Ambiguous requests don't blindly execute Friction Check: Quality of clarifying question

B1: Exploration Depth

/tether:skills Add validation to ensure Path and Delta exist before Build proceeds

Expected: Full route with substantive exploration Validates: Anchor explores code, finds patterns Scoring Focus: Thinking Traces quality (1-5)

B2: Delta Minimality

/tether:skills Add line numbers to Thinking Traces output

Expected: Full route, tight Delta Validates: Delta stays minimal (not "refactor traces system") Scoring Focus: Delta quality (1-5)

B3: Path Clarity

/tether:skills Create a workspace file template generator

Expected: Full route, clear Path Validates: Path describes actual data transformation Scoring Focus: Path quality (1-5)

C1: Parent Task (run first)

/tether:skills Create a function that parses workspace filenames into components

Expected: Full route, creates NNN_*_active.md Validates: Workspace file created correctly Note: Record NNN for C2

C2: Child Task (run after C1)

/tether:skills Use the filename parser to show lineage tree

Expected: Full route with _from-{C1-NNN} suffix Validates: Lineage inheritance works Scoring Focus: Did child read parent's Thinking Traces?

D1: Creep-Prone Task

/tether:skills Add a configuration system for tether settings

Expected: Full route, likely to creep During Build: Invoke /tether:creep Validates: Creep detection catches over-engineering Watch For: "flexible", "extensible", multiple files touched

D2: Subtle Creep

/tether:skills Add descriptive error messages to assess routing

Expected: Full route Validates: Subtle creep (abstractions, "future-proof" code) Scoring Focus: Did implementation exceed stated Delta?

E1: Impossible Task

/tether:skills Integrate workspace with a GraphQL API

Expected: Clarify (asks about API details) OR Blocked Validates: Graceful handling of impossible/underspecified tasks Friction Check: How does workflow handle inability to proceed?

E2: Minimal Task

/tether:skills Fix the typo 'returing' in assess.md

Expected: Direct route (single-line fix) Validates: Trivial tasks don't incur workflow overhead Friction Check: If full route, note excessive ceremony

Phase 3: Execution Protocol

Per-Task Protocol

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ TASK: [ID]                                                  │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 1. PRE-STATE                                                │
│    /tether:workspace                                        │
│    Record: Active tasks, workspace file count               │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 2. INVOKE                                                   │
│    /tether:skills [prompt from task table]                  │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 3. OBSERVE ROUTING                                          │
│    - Route returned: [full/direct/clarify]                  │
│    - Matched expectation: [Y/N]                             │
│    - Reasoning quality: [1-5]                               │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 4. OBSERVE ANCHOR (if full route)                           │
│    - Workspace file: [filename or "none"]                   │
│    - Path clarity: [1-5]                                    │
│    - Delta minimality: [1-5]                                │
│    - Traces substance: [1-5]                                │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 5. OBSERVE BUILD                                            │
│    - Stayed on Path: [Y/N]                                  │
│    - Within Delta: [Y/N]                                    │
│    - Traces expanded: [Y/N]                                 │
│    - Files touched: [list]                                  │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 6. VERIFY COMPLETION                                        │
│    - Delivered filled: [Y/N]                                │
│    - File renamed: [Y/N] to [_complete/_blocked]            │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 7. CREEP CHECK (D tasks)                                    │
│    /tether:creep                                            │
│    - Creep detected: [Y/N]                                  │
│    - Off Path items: [list or "none"]                       │
│    - Exceeds Delta: [list or "none"]                        │
├─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ 8. FRICTION LOG                                             │
│    - Unnecessary overhead: [describe]                       │
│    - Missing steps: [describe]                              │
│    - Awkward UX: [describe]                                 │
│    - Evolution idea: [describe]                             │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Parallel Execution Guide (Multiple Claude Codes)

Tasks can be run in parallel by different sessions since each has its own isolated folder: Independent Tasks (can run simultaneously):

  • A1, A3, B2, B3, D2, E1, E2 Sequential Dependencies:
  • C1 must complete before C2 (lineage test)
  • After C1 completes, copy its workspace file to C2's workspace folder Suggested Parallel Split:
Session 1: cd scratch/A1 && run, cd scratch/A2 && run, cd scratch/A3 && run, cd scratch/E2 && run
Session 2: cd scratch/B1 && run, cd scratch/B2 && run, cd scratch/B3 && run
Session 3: cd scratch/C1 && run, then copy workspace to C2, cd scratch/C2 && run
Session 4: cd scratch/D1 && run, cd scratch/D2 && run, cd scratch/E1 && run

Workspace Coordination (With Isolation):

  • Each task has its own clean workspace folder
  • No cross-contamination between tests
  • For C2 lineage test: cp scratch/C1/workspace/*.md scratch/C2/workspace/ before running C2
  • Results collection: aggregate from all scratch/*/workspace/ folders

Phase 4: Scoring Rubric

Quality Scores (1-5 Scale)

Score Path Clarity Delta Minimality Traces Substance Reasoning Quality
5 Crystal clear data transformation, obvious flow Smallest possible change, nothing extraneous Rich insights, file:line refs, decision rationale Precisely matches task complexity
4 Clear transformation, minor ambiguity Tight scope, 1-2 extra touches Good findings, some references Good match, minor quibble
3 Understandable but vague Reasonable scope, some bloat Basic exploration summary Acceptable but imperfect
2 Unclear, requires interpretation Noticeable scope creep Formulaic, little value Mismatched complexity
1 Missing or incomprehensible Major scope explosion Empty or useless Wrong route entirely

Results Capture Table

After running all tasks, fill in:

ID Route Match? Path Delta Traces Build Fidelity Complete? Friction Notes
A1 - - -
A2
A3 - - -
B1
B2
B3
C1
C2
D1
D2
E1
E2 - - -
Legend: Route = full/direct/clarify, Match = Y/N, Scores = 1-5, Build Fidelity = Y/N, Complete = Y/N

Aggregate Metrics (post-evaluation)

Metric Target Actual
Routing Accuracy >80% _/12
Path Quality Avg >3.5 _/5
Delta Quality Avg >3.5 _/5
Traces Quality Avg >3.5 _/5
Build Fidelity >90% _/N
Completion Rate >80% _/N

Friction Catalog Template

For each friction point discovered:

FRICTION: [short name]
Task: [ID where discovered]
What happened: [concrete description]
Expected: [what should have happened]
Impact: [minor/moderate/severe]
Evolution: [proposed fix]
Files to modify: [agent/command files]

Phase 5: Output Artifacts

After evaluation, produce:

  1. Evaluation Report (create at scratch/EVAL_REPORT.md)
    • Filled results capture table
    • Aggregate metrics comparison
    • Friction point catalog
  2. Evolution Backlog (append to report)
    • Prioritized list of improvements
    • Specific file changes with line references
    • Estimated impact: high/medium/low
  3. Workspace Archive
    • All workspace files in scratch/*/workspace/ folders
    • Keep as test artifacts for regression testing
    • Query all: ls scratch/*/workspace/*.md

Critical Files Reference

File Purpose When to Review
tether/agents/assess.md Routing logic After A1-A3 tasks
tether/agents/anchor.md Workspace creation After B1-B3 tasks
tether/agents/code-builder.md Implementation After all Build phases
tether/agents/tether-orchestrator.md Phase coordination If phases don't sequence properly
tether/commands/creep.md Creep detection After D1-D2 tasks
tether/commands/workspace.md State queries If workspace queries fail
tether/skills/SKILL.md Entry point If invocation pattern is off

Execution Order (Recommended)

Phase 1: Routing Validation
├── A1: Direct route test
├── A2: Full workflow test
└── A3: Clarify route test
Phase 2: Quality Assessment
├── B1: Exploration depth
├── B2: Delta minimality
└── B3: Path clarity
Phase 3: Lineage Testing (SEQUENTIAL)
├── C1: Create parent task
└── C2: Create child task (uses C1's NNN)
Phase 4: Creep Detection
├── D1: Obvious creep-prone
└── D2: Subtle creep
Phase 5: Edge Cases
├── E1: Impossible/blocked
└── E2: Minimal overhead
Phase 6: Analysis
├── Fill results table
├── Calculate aggregate metrics
├── Catalog all friction points
└── Write evaluation report
Phase 7: Evolution Planning
├── Prioritize friction by impact
├── Identify top 3-5 changes
└── Document specific file edits

Success Criteria

The plugin demonstrates value if:

  • Routing accuracy >80% (10+ correct routes)
  • Path quality average >3.5
  • Delta quality average >3.5
  • Traces quality average >3.5
  • Build fidelity >90%
  • Lineage inheritance works (C2 references C1)
  • Creep detection catches D1 over-engineering
  • Trivial tasks (A1, E2) don't create workspace files

The plugin needs evolution if:

  • Trivial tasks trigger full workflow (excessive overhead)
  • Workspace files are formulaic (low Traces scores)
  • Creep slips through undetected
  • Phases bleed into each other (agent lane violations)
  • Gate not enforced (Build without Path/Delta)
  • Manual intervention required to complete tasks
  • Clarify route triggers on clear requests

Immediate Next Steps (Post Plan Approval)

  1. Create test harness structure:
    cd /Users/cck/CC/plugins/marketplaces/crinzo-plugins/scratch
    mkdir -p A1/workspace A2/workspace A3/workspace
    mkdir -p B1/workspace B2/workspace B3/workspace
    mkdir -p C1/workspace C2/workspace
    mkdir -p D1/workspace D2/workspace
    mkdir -p E1/workspace E2/workspace
  2. Navigate to first test folder and verify plugin:
    cd /Users/cck/CC/plugins/marketplaces/crinzo-plugins/scratch/A1
    /tether:workspace   # Should show empty workspace
  3. Begin with A1 (direct route test):
    /tether:skills Add a debug log to the assess agent's routing logic
    
  4. Document results using per-task protocol template
  5. Move to next task folder and repeat:
    cd ../A2
    /tether:skills Add a new command that shows workspace file statistics
  6. After all tasks complete, aggregate results:
    # Collect all workspace files for review
    ls scratch/*/workspace/*.md

Tether Advanced Evaluation Plan: Gestalt Agent Orchestration

Vision Under Test

Tether aspires to be more than workflow management. It aims to be externalized cognition - a system where:

  • Understanding compounds across sessions
  • Complex work is decomposed without losing coherence
  • The workspace becomes a queryable knowledge graph
  • Agents maintain focus under cognitive load
  • Emergent patterns reveal themselves through lineage The first eval tested mechanics. This eval tests whether tether enables a fundamentally different way of building.

Advanced Test Categories

Category F: Deep Lineage Chains

Test whether understanding genuinely compounds across 4+ generations of tasks.

Category G: Cognitive Load Stress

Test tasks that would be impossible without externalized thinking.

Category H: Emergent Workspace Patterns

Test whether the workspace reveals insights through structure.

Category I: Recovery & Resumption

Test blocked tasks, context switches, and picking up prior work.

Category J: Meta-Evolution

Use tether to evolve tether itself - recursive self-improvement.

Category K: Parallel Active Work

Test multiple concurrent tasks with shared context.

Test Suite (18 Tasks)

Category F: Deep Lineage Chains (4 tasks, sequential)

Goal: Build a 4-generation lineage chain where each task meaningfully inherits from its parent.

ID Prompt Builds On Tests
F1 "Design a plugin health check system - just the spec, no implementation" none Root task, spec-only
F2 "Implement the core health check function from F1's spec" F1 Inherits spec, implements core
F3 "Add health check reporting that uses F2's function" F2 Inherits impl, adds layer
F4 "Create health check CLI command using F3's reporting" F3 4th generation, full stack
Evaluation Focus:
  • Does F4's Thinking Traces reference all ancestors?
  • Does understanding genuinely compound or reset each generation?
  • Can ls workspace/ reconstruct the design evolution?

Category G: Cognitive Load Stress (3 tasks)

Goal: Tasks that require holding multiple concerns simultaneously - tests whether externalized thinking provides real leverage.

ID Prompt Tests
G1 "Refactor the assess, anchor, and code-builder agents to share a common constraint validation pattern without breaking their individual behaviors" Multi-file coherence under constraint
G2 "Analyze the entire tether plugin and produce a dependency graph showing which components reference which others" Codebase-wide analysis, structured output
G3 "Implement a workspace migration tool that converts old-format workspace files to current format while preserving lineage" Complex transformation with edge cases
Evaluation Focus:
  • Are Thinking Traces used as "working memory"?
  • Does Path/Delta keep scope contained despite complexity?
  • Is the work completable at all without externalized cognition?

Category H: Emergent Workspace Patterns (3 tasks)

Goal: Generate enough workspace artifacts that patterns emerge from the structure itself.

ID Prompt Tests
H1 "Query the workspace: which tasks touched assess.md and what did they change?" Workspace as knowledge base
H2 "Identify tasks that exceeded their stated Delta by comparing workspace files to git diff" Workspace as audit trail
H3 "Generate a 'lessons learned' document by analyzing Thinking Traces across all completed tasks" Workspace as accumulated wisdom
Evaluation Focus:
  • Can the workspace answer questions about past work?
  • Do patterns emerge that weren't explicitly encoded?
  • Is the naming convention queryable as designed?

Category I: Recovery & Resumption (3 tasks)

Goal: Test resilience - blocked tasks, context switches, resuming abandoned work.

ID Prompt Tests
I1 "Start implementing a complex feature, then mark it blocked with clear blockers documented" Intentional block, graceful stop
I2 "Resume I1 - address the blockers and complete the task" Resume from blocked state
I3 "Pick up an old workspace file from eval 1 and extend it with new functionality" Cross-session continuity
Evaluation Focus:
  • Does _blocked status preserve enough context to resume?
  • Can a new session continue prior work via workspace?
  • Is lineage correctly maintained across sessions?

Category J: Meta-Evolution (3 tasks)

Goal: Use tether to improve tether - recursive self-improvement through its own methodology.

ID Prompt Tests
J1 "Use tether to analyze tether's friction points and propose architectural improvements" Self-reflection
J2 "Implement J1's top recommendation using tether's own workflow" Self-modification
J3 "Evaluate whether J2's change improved tether by re-running a subset of eval 1 tests" Self-validation
Evaluation Focus:
  • Can tether meaningfully improve itself?
  • Does the methodology survive self-application?
  • Is there recursive coherence?

Category K: Parallel Active Work (2 tasks)

Goal: Test multiple active tasks with potential interaction.

ID Prompt Tests
K1 "Start two related tasks: one adding a feature to assess, one to anchor - keep both active" Concurrent anchoring
K2 "Complete both K1 tasks ensuring they integrate correctly" Parallel resolution
Evaluation Focus:
  • Can multiple _active files coexist meaningfully?
  • Does the workspace support concurrent work?
  • Are dependencies between parallel tasks handleable?

Advanced Execution Protocol

For Deep Lineage (F1-F4)

1. Run F1, document workspace file NNN
2. Before F2, verify F1's workspace is complete
3. Run F2, confirm _from-{F1-NNN} suffix
4. Verify F2's Thinking Traces reference F1's findings
5. Repeat for F3, F4
6. Final: Can F4's workspace reconstruct the full design journey?

For Cognitive Load (G1-G3)

1. Pre-task: Note complexity level (files involved, constraints)
2. During: Track Thinking Traces growth
3. Post-task: Could this have been done without externalized thinking?
4. Score: Cognitive leverage provided (1-5)

For Emergent Patterns (H1-H3)

1. These tasks QUERY existing workspace, don't just create new files
2. Pre-task: What workspace artifacts exist?
3. During: What queries are needed to answer the question?
4. Post-task: Did the workspace naming convention enable the query?

For Recovery (I1-I3)

1. I1 must genuinely block (not artificial)
2. I2 must resume from workspace file only (simulate new session)
3. I3 must pick up eval 1 artifact (tests cross-session memory)

For Meta-Evolution (J1-J3)

1. J1: Produce concrete, actionable improvements
2. J2: Implement via tether workflow (full orchestration)
3. J3: Re-run A1, A2, B1 to validate improvement

Advanced Scoring Rubric

Lineage Depth Score (F tasks)

Score Description
5 F4 explicitly references F1, F2, F3 findings; understanding visibly compounds
4 F4 references parent (F3) well, ancestors mentioned
3 Lineage suffix correct, but inheritance is shallow
2 Lineage suffix present, but Thinking Traces don't inherit
1 No meaningful inheritance despite lineage

Cognitive Leverage Score (G tasks)

Score Description
5 Task would be impossible without externalized thinking
4 Task significantly easier with workspace support
3 Workspace helpful but not essential
2 Workspace adds overhead without clear benefit
1 Workspace actively hindered the work

Emergent Pattern Score (H tasks)

Score Description
5 Query answered precisely from workspace structure alone
4 Query answered with workspace + minimal additional exploration
3 Workspace partially helpful, needed significant extra work
2 Workspace structure didn't support the query well
1 Had to ignore workspace and do fresh exploration

Recovery Score (I tasks)

Score Description
5 Resumed seamlessly from workspace file, no context loss
4 Resumed with minor context reconstruction
3 Workspace provided starting point but needed exploration
2 Workspace partially helpful, significant rework needed
1 Easier to start fresh than resume

Meta-Coherence Score (J tasks)

Score Description
5 Tether successfully improved itself through its own methodology
4 Improvement implemented, methodology mostly followed
3 Partial improvement, some methodology deviation
2 Attempted improvement, methodology broke down
1 Could not self-improve through own methodology

Success Criteria for Vision Validation

Tether achieves gestalt vision if:

  • F4 workspace explicitly references all 3 ancestors
  • At least 2/3 G tasks score 4+ on cognitive leverage
  • H tasks can query workspace without full re-exploration
  • I2 resumes from workspace alone (no external context)
  • J2 successfully improves tether via tether
  • K tasks demonstrate viable parallel work pattern

Tether needs fundamental evolution if:

  • Lineage is syntactic only (suffix present but no inheritance)
  • Cognitive leverage score averages below 3
  • Workspace is write-only (can't be queried)
  • Recovery requires full re-exploration
  • Meta-evolution breaks the methodology
  • Parallel work causes workspace conflicts

Execution Sequence

Phase 1: Deep Lineage (F1 → F2 → F3 → F4)
├── Build 4-generation chain
└── Evaluate inheritance quality
Phase 2: Cognitive Load (G1, G2, G3)
├── Run complex multi-concern tasks
└── Evaluate cognitive leverage
Phase 3: Emergent Patterns (H1, H2, H3)
├── Query accumulated workspace
└── Evaluate queryability
Phase 4: Recovery (I1 → I2, then I3)
├── Test block/resume cycle
├── Test cross-session continuity
└── Evaluate recovery quality
Phase 5: Meta-Evolution (J1 → J2 → J3)
├── Self-analyze
├── Self-improve
└── Self-validate
Phase 6: Parallel Work (K1 → K2)
├── Concurrent active tasks
└── Evaluate parallel viability
Phase 7: Synthesis
├── Aggregate scores
├── Vision validation checklist
└── Evolution recommendations

Key Questions This Eval Answers

  1. Does understanding compound? (F tasks)
    • Or does each task start fresh despite lineage?
  2. Does externalized thinking provide leverage? (G tasks)
    • Or is the workspace just documentation overhead?
  3. Is the workspace queryable? (H tasks)
    • Or is it write-only artifact storage?
  4. Can work survive interruption? (I tasks)
    • Or is context lost between sessions?
  5. Can tether improve itself? (J tasks)
    • Or does meta-application break down?
  6. Can parallel work coexist? (K tasks)
    • Or is sequential the only viable mode?

Output Artifacts

After this evaluation:

  1. Vision Validation Report
    • Answers to key questions with evidence
    • Score aggregates by category
    • Checklist status
  2. Gestalt Evolution Backlog
    • Changes needed to achieve vision
    • Prioritized by impact on gestalt capability
  3. Workspace Corpus
    • All 18+ workspace files as test artifacts
    • Demonstrating (or failing to demonstrate) the vision

Setup Instructions

Create Test Folders

cd /Users/cck/CC/plugins/marketplaces/crinzo-plugins/scratch
mkdir -p F1/workspace F2/workspace F3/workspace F4/workspace
mkdir -p G1/workspace G2/workspace G3/workspace
mkdir -p H1/workspace H2/workspace H3/workspace
mkdir -p I1/workspace I2/workspace I3/workspace
mkdir -p J1/workspace J2/workspace J3/workspace
mkdir -p K1/workspace K2/workspace

For H Tasks (Emergent Patterns): Use Eval 1 Artifacts

# Copy eval 1 workspace files to H task folders
cp scratch/A2/workspace/*.md scratch/H1/workspace/
cp scratch/B1/workspace/*.md scratch/H1/workspace/
cp scratch/B2/workspace/*.md scratch/H1/workspace/
cp scratch/C1/workspace/*.md scratch/H1/workspace/
cp scratch/C2/workspace/*.md scratch/H1/workspace/
cp scratch/D1/workspace/*.md scratch/H1/workspace/
cp scratch/D2/workspace/*.md scratch/H1/workspace/
# Same for H2, H3
cp scratch/H1/workspace/*.md scratch/H2/workspace/
cp scratch/H1/workspace/*.md scratch/H3/workspace/

For I3 (Cross-Session Continuity)

# Use C1's workspace file as the "old artifact" to extend
cp scratch/C1/workspace/001_parse-workspace-filename_complete.md scratch/I3/workspace/

Ready for Execution

This evaluation will determine whether tether is:

  • Mechanical tool (workflow automation)
  • Cognitive amplifier (externalized thinking)
  • Gestalt evolution (fundamentally new way of building) The first eval validated mechanics work. This eval validates the vision.

Quick Reference: Task Prompts

F1: Design a plugin health check system - just the spec, no implementation
F2: Implement the core health check function from F1's spec
F3: Add health check reporting that uses F2's function
F4: Create health check CLI command using F3's reporting
G1: Refactor assess, anchor, code-builder to share common constraint validation pattern
G2: Analyze tether plugin and produce dependency graph
G3: Implement workspace migration tool for old-format to current-format
H1: Query workspace: which tasks touched assess.md and what did they change?
H2: Identify tasks that exceeded Delta by comparing workspace to git diff
H3: Generate lessons learned document from Thinking Traces across all tasks
I1: Start complex feature, then mark blocked with clear blockers
I2: Resume I1 - address blockers and complete
I3: Extend old C1 workspace file with new functionality
J1: Use tether to analyze tether friction and propose improvements
J2: Implement J1's top recommendation via tether workflow
J3: Re-run A1, A2, B1 to validate improvement
K1: Start two related tasks (assess feature + anchor feature) - keep both active
K2: Complete both K1 tasks ensuring integration

Tether Phase 3 Evaluation: The Bootstrapping Spiral

The Ascent Beyond Testing

Phase 1 tested mechanics. Phase 2 tested vision. Both passed. Phase 3 is different. We don't test tether—we use tether to evolve tether while building something real. The J1-J3 chain proved recursive self-improvement works. Phase 3 makes this the continuous mode of operation: every creative task encounters friction, every friction triggers a scoped improvement, and every improvement enables the next creative task to reach higher. By the end, we will have:

  1. Built genuinely useful capabilities
  2. Evolved tether significantly through accumulated improvements
  3. Demonstrated that improvement can be organic, woven into creative work
  4. Answered: What emerges when gestalt cognition operates at scale?

The Spiral Structure

                    ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
                    │        TIER 5: METHODOLOGY              │
                    │   Evolve how tether thinks itself       │
                    │   "Design the context-sharing protocol" │
                    └───────────────────┬─────────────────────┘
                                        │
                    ┌───────────────────┴─────────────────────┐
                    │        TIER 4: COGNITIVE OVERFLOW       │
                    │   Tasks that would fail without tether  │
                    │   "Synthesize tether 2.0 from ALL work" │
                    └───────────────────┬─────────────────────┘
                                        │
                    ┌───────────────────┴─────────────────────┐
                    │        TIER 3: EMERGENT PATTERNS        │
                    │   See the shape of accumulated work     │
                    │   "Build workspace query language"      │
                    └───────────────────┬─────────────────────┘
                                        │
                    ┌───────────────────┴─────────────────────┐
                    │        TIER 2: CROSS-DOMAIN SYNTHESIS   │
                    │   Combine insights from multiple tasks  │
                    │   "Create tether dialect for research"  │
                    └───────────────────┬─────────────────────┘
                                        │
                    ┌───────────────────┴─────────────────────┐
                    │        TIER 1: FOUNDATION               │
                    │   Bounded creative work + first fix     │
                    │   "Design workspace visualization"      │
                    └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

Each tier is a spiral turn:

  1. CREATE - Build something genuinely useful
  2. ENCOUNTER - What friction emerged?
  3. IMPROVE - Implement scoped fix (via tether methodology)
  4. VALIDATE - Next task benefits from improvement

The Fundamental Question

Phase 2 asked: Can tether do X? Phase 3 asks: What emerges when gestalt cognition operates continuously?

  • Does improvement become natural, not episodic?
  • Does accumulated workspace become institutional memory?
  • Does methodology evolve through use?
  • Can a system bootstrap its own evolution?

The Spiral Tasks (12 Tasks, 5 Tiers)

Tier 1: Foundation (2 tasks)

Goal: Establish the spiral pattern. Bounded creative work + first organic improvement.

ID Type Prompt Purpose
L1 CREATE "Design a workspace visualization tool that renders the lineage graph as an interactive diagram" Bounded creative work using all accumulated workspace
L2 IMPROVE [Organic - address friction discovered in L1] First spiral improvement
What to observe:
  • Does L1 naturally encounter friction?
  • Is the friction addressable via tether methodology?
  • Does L2's fix feel organic, not forced?

Tier 2: Cross-Domain Synthesis (2 tasks)

Goal: Tasks requiring understanding from MULTIPLE unrelated prior workspace files.

ID Type Prompt Purpose
M1 CREATE "Create a tether 'dialect' for research tasks - adapt the methodology for exploring ideas rather than building code" Requires synthesizing: health-check (F1-F4), workspace conventions (C1-C2), constraint patterns (G1)
M2 IMPROVE [Organic - address friction discovered in M1] Cross-domain synthesis improvement
What to observe:
  • Can the workspace enable genuine synthesis across domains?
  • Does M1 reference findings from F, G, C, I, J tasks?
  • Does synthesis feel natural or forced?

Tier 3: Emergent Architecture (2 tasks)

Goal: See the SHAPE of accumulated work. Build something that requires understanding patterns, not just content.

ID Type Prompt Purpose
N1 CREATE "Design a workspace query language (WQL) that can answer questions like: 'which improvements enabled which creative tasks?', 'what friction patterns repeat?', 'show me all lineage chains longer than 3'" Requires understanding the emergent structure
N2 IMPROVE [Organic - address friction discovered in N1] Pattern-recognition improvement
What to observe:
  • Does accumulated workspace have queryable structure?
  • Can patterns be identified that weren't explicitly encoded?
  • Does N1 reveal emergent architecture?

Tier 4: Cognitive Overflow (2 tasks)

Goal: The impossible task. Proves (or disproves) cognitive leverage at the limit.

ID Type Prompt Purpose
O1 CREATE "Synthesize ALL accumulated workspace (30+ eval tasks, 20+ improvements) into a 'Tether 2.0 Architecture Spec' that captures what we've learned about gestalt agent orchestration" Would fail without externalized cognition
O2 IMPROVE [Organic - address friction discovered in O1] Extreme-scale improvement
What to observe:
  • Does the workspace enable this synthesis at all?
  • What cognitive leverage score (1-5)?
  • Is this literally impossible without externalized thinking?

Tier 5: Methodology Evolution (4 tasks)

Goal: Not improving tether's FILES, but evolving how tether THINKS. New patterns, constraints, phases.

ID Type Prompt Purpose
P1 CREATE "Based on all spiral learnings, design a new tether phase: 'Reflect' - to be invoked after Build completes, extracting reusable patterns for future work" Methodology extension
P2 IMPROVE [Organic - implement the Reflect phase] Phase addition
P3 CREATE "Design the context-sharing protocol: how should multiple tether instances share workspace understanding?" Open problem in agent orchestration
P4 SYNTHESIZE "Create the Phase 3 Evaluation Report synthesizing all spiral learnings, improvements made, and emergent patterns discovered" Culminating synthesis
What to observe:
  • Can tether evolve its own methodology?
  • Do the spiral improvements compound into architectural insight?
  • What emerges that wasn't anticipated?

Spiral Execution Protocol

The CREATE-ENCOUNTER-IMPROVE-VALIDATE Cycle

For each tier, execute this cycle:

1. CREATE
   - Invoke tether:tether-orchestrator with the creative prompt
   - Full workflow: assess → anchor → build
   - Let the task complete naturally
2. ENCOUNTER
   - After CREATE completes, explicitly ask: "What friction did you encounter?"
   - Document friction in workspace (workspace/friction-log.md)
   - Friction types: methodology gaps, workspace limitations, pattern ambiguity
3. IMPROVE
   - Select ONE friction point (most impactful, smallest delta)
   - Invoke tether:tether-orchestrator to implement the fix
   - The fix becomes a workspace file with lineage to the CREATE task
4. VALIDATE
   - The next tier's CREATE task implicitly validates
   - Does it benefit from the improvement?
   - Document validation in the spiral report

Friction Discovery Questions

After each CREATE task, probe for:

  • "What would have made this easier?"
  • "What pattern were you looking for that didn't exist?"
  • "What did you have to invent that should have been provided?"
  • "What prior workspace was hard to synthesize?"

Spiral Scoring Rubric

Organic Improvement Score

Score Description
5 Friction emerged naturally; improvement felt inevitable
4 Friction was real; improvement was appropriately scoped
3 Friction was identified; improvement scope debatable
2 Friction felt forced; improvement disconnected from task
1 No meaningful friction discovered

Synthesis Depth Score (for M, N, O tasks)

Score Description
5 Required understanding from 5+ prior tasks; synthesis was genuine
4 Required 3-4 prior tasks; synthesis added value
3 Required 1-2 prior tasks; synthesis was shallow
2 Could have been done without prior workspace
1 Prior workspace was ignored

Methodology Evolution Score (for P tasks)

Score Description
5 Discovered new pattern that changes how tether works fundamentally
4 Created useful extension that compounds with existing methodology
3 Added capability but didn't change core thinking
2 Extension was cosmetic
1 Evolution attempt failed

Success Criteria for Spiral Validation

The spiral succeeds if:

  • Each tier's IMPROVE task feels organic, not forced
  • Accumulated improvements enable progressively harder creative work
  • By Tier 4 (O1), the task literally requires workspace to complete
  • By Tier 5 (P1-P4), methodology has meaningfully evolved
  • P4 can synthesize ALL spiral learning coherently

The spiral reveals limits if:

  • Improvements become disconnected from creative tasks
  • Synthesis stops referencing prior workspace
  • Cognitive overflow task (O1) fails despite workspace
  • Methodology evolution produces nothing actionable
  • Final synthesis (P4) can't capture emergent patterns

Execution Sequence

TIER 1: FOUNDATION
├── L1: Create workspace visualization (bounded creative)
├── [Encounter friction]
├── L2: Implement improvement (first spiral fix)
└── [Validate: does M1 benefit?]
TIER 2: CROSS-DOMAIN SYNTHESIS
├── M1: Create research dialect (requires multi-task synthesis)
├── [Encounter friction]
├── M2: Implement improvement
└── [Validate: does N1 benefit?]
TIER 3: EMERGENT ARCHITECTURE
├── N1: Design workspace query language (pattern recognition)
├── [Encounter friction]
├── N2: Implement improvement
└── [Validate: does O1 benefit?]
TIER 4: COGNITIVE OVERFLOW
├── O1: Synthesize Tether 2.0 spec (impossible without workspace)
├── [Encounter friction]
├── O2: Implement improvement
└── [Validate: does P1 benefit?]
TIER 5: METHODOLOGY EVOLUTION
├── P1: Design Reflect phase (new methodology element)
├── P2: Implement Reflect phase
├── P3: Design context-sharing protocol (open problem)
└── P4: Spiral synthesis report

What This Eval Answers

  1. Can improvement be organic?
    • Or does self-improvement require explicit "meta" mode?
  2. Does accumulated work enable harder work?
    • Or do improvements not compound?
  3. What is the cognitive leverage ceiling?
    • At what complexity does workspace leverage max out?
  4. Can methodology evolve through use?
    • Or is tether's structure fixed?
  5. What emerges that wasn't designed?
    • Patterns, structures, insights we didn't anticipate

Output Artifacts

After this evaluation:

  1. Spiral Evolution Report
    • Each tier's CREATE output
    • Each tier's friction discovery
    • Each tier's IMPROVE implementation
    • Validation chain showing improvement cascade
  2. Tether 2.0 Architecture Spec (from O1)
    • Synthesis of all accumulated learning
    • New patterns discovered through spiral
    • Recommendations for fundamental evolution
  3. Methodology Extensions (from P1-P3)
    • Reflect phase specification
    • Context-sharing protocol design
    • Patterns that emerged vs. patterns that were designed
  4. Accumulated Workspace Corpus
    • All Phase 1+2+3 workspace files (~45 files)
    • Demonstrating institutional memory
    • Queryable via WQL (if N1 succeeds)

Setup Instructions

Create Spiral Folders

cd /Users/cck/CC/plugins/marketplaces/crinzo-plugins/scratch
mkdir -p L1/workspace L2/workspace   # Tier 1: Foundation
mkdir -p M1/workspace M2/workspace   # Tier 2: Cross-Domain
mkdir -p N1/workspace N2/workspace   # Tier 3: Emergent
mkdir -p O1/workspace O2/workspace   # Tier 4: Overflow
mkdir -p P1/workspace P2/workspace P3/workspace P4/workspace  # Tier 5: Evolution

Prepare Accumulated Workspace

# Create master workspace with ALL prior eval files
mkdir -p scratch/MASTER/workspace
# Copy all Phase 1 workspace files
for dir in A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 C1 C2 D1 D2 E1 E2; do
  cp scratch/$dir/workspace/*.md scratch/MASTER/workspace/ 2>/dev/null
done
# Copy all Phase 2 workspace files
for dir in F1 F2 F3 F4 G1 G2 G3 I1 I2 I3 J1 J2 J3 K1 K2; do
  cp scratch/$dir/workspace/*.md scratch/MASTER/workspace/ 2>/dev/null
done
# This becomes the inherited workspace for all Phase 3 tasks

Symlink Master Workspace to Each Tier

# Each tier starts with inherited workspace
for task in L1 L2 M1 M2 N1 N2 O1 O2 P1 P2 P3 P4; do
  cp scratch/MASTER/workspace/*.md scratch/$task/workspace/ 2>/dev/null
done

Philosophy: Following Tether's Own Principles

This evaluation itself follows tether philosophy:

Principle How Phase 3 Follows It
Present over future Each improvement addresses current friction, not anticipated needs
Concrete over abstract Improvements are specific file edits, not architectural blueprints
Explicit over clever Spiral structure is clear; emergence happens within clarity
Edit over create Improvements modify existing tether, don't create parallel systems
The spiral IS the methodology applied to the methodology.

Ready for Execution

Phase 1 validated mechanics (30 tasks, 98% pass). Phase 2 validated vision (18 tasks, 100% pass). Phase 3 asks: What emerges when we stop testing and start building? The spiral will reveal:

  • Whether improvement can be organic
  • What the cognitive leverage ceiling is
  • How methodology can evolve through use
  • What patterns emerge that weren't designed

Quick Reference: Spiral Task Prompts

TIER 1: FOUNDATION
L1: Design a workspace visualization tool that renders the lineage graph as an interactive diagram
L2: [Organic improvement from L1 friction]
TIER 2: CROSS-DOMAIN SYNTHESIS
M1: Create a tether 'dialect' for research tasks - adapt the methodology for exploring ideas rather than building code
M2: [Organic improvement from M1 friction]
TIER 3: EMERGENT ARCHITECTURE
N1: Design a workspace query language (WQL) that can answer questions like: 'which improvements enabled which creative tasks?', 'what friction patterns repeat?', 'show me all lineage chains longer than 3'
N2: [Organic improvement from N1 friction]
TIER 4: COGNITIVE OVERFLOW
O1: Synthesize ALL accumulated workspace (30+ eval tasks, 20+ improvements) into a 'Tether 2.0 Architecture Spec' that captures what we've learned about gestalt agent orchestration
O2: [Organic improvement from O1 friction]
TIER 5: METHODOLOGY EVOLUTION
P1: Based on all spiral learnings, design a new tether phase: 'Reflect' - to be invoked after Build completes, extracting reusable patterns for future work
P2: Implement the Reflect phase
P3: Design the context-sharing protocol: how should multiple tether instances share workspace understanding?
P4: Create the Phase 3 Evaluation Report synthesizing all spiral learnings, improvements made, and emergent patterns discovered

The Culminating Question

By the end of Phase 3, we answer: Is tether a tool, or is it a way of thinking? If it's a tool, improvements will feel bolted on. If it's a way of thinking, improvements will feel like discoveries. The spiral will reveal which.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment