Overview Shipped
Once a review is trustworthy enough to be a gate, it can close a loop: fix what it found, or build until it stops finding anything.
Everything above produces a report for a human. These two use the same pipeline as a measuring instrument instead — one drives fixes for findings that already exist, the other drives construction against a contract pinned before the work started. Both are the same bet: that an independent judge which cannot be edited mid-run is what makes an autonomous loop terminate honestly.
The shared shape
- A targetSelected findings, or a pinned acceptance contract.
- A grounded coderEdits only. No shell, no fan-out, every citation checked.
- A commitThe session commits, never the coder. Each pass is revertible.
- An independent judgeA re-review, or a conformance oracle. Not the brief.
- A deterministic decisionKeep, revert, escalate once, or halt with a reason.
The fourth step is the one that makes the difference: in both loops the thing that decides whether you moved forward is not the thing that told the coder what to do.