Contribution Gate Playbook

Contribution Gate Playbook

The observed, repo-verified pipeline that took #85–#89 → PR #90 (a148180), #91 → PR #93 (92077a7), and #94–#96 → PR #97 (79ca49c) on 2026-07-29/30. Canonical gate doctrine is skills/cross-model-review/SKILL.md — this file only pins how THIS repo runs it. On any disagreement, the canon skill wins.

Step 0 — pin the campaign set

Trigger: the owner's ask arrives.

• The set = the PRs open at instruction time (gh pr list --state open). Record the numbers before touching anything.
• A PR that opens mid-campaign is NOT swept in. Precedent: #91 opened 2026-07-29T22:18Z, before #90 merged (23:34Z); it was excluded from #90, flagged to the owner, and handled as its own campaign (#93).
• The owner's ask authorizes THIS set; a later set needs a fresh ask (operational-rigor §2, per-invocation grant).

Step 1 — verify each PR's verifiable claims

• Every repo-facing claim in a PR's text (a commit id, a section number, a "main already says X") is checked against the repo BEFORE the gate. Precedent: #85's 8f8413f incident claim was verified in-repo, and the check is recorded in #85's evaluation comment.
• A claim that fails verification is a finding to surface and adjudicate, not something to silently fix or silently accept.

Step 2 — build the combined branch

• One integration branch from current main, named by joining the PR numbers — combined-85-86-87-88-89, combined-94-95-96 (multi-PR) or integrate-91 (single PR) are the observed forms.
• Bring each PR's head branch local first (gh pr checkout <number> handles fork PRs too; the campaign merge commits show pr-<number> local branch names). Merging every head into the combined branch is what closes each constituent by reachability once the combined PR merges (observed on #85–#89 and #94–#96; GitHub marks them MERGED). Merge ASCENDING (lowest number first) — the house convention that keeps Provenance-entry stacking orderly.
• Provenance-tail conflicts are the expected conflict shape: stack both entries in PR order and reconcile with zero content loss (read both sides in full; nothing dropped silently).

Step 3 — integration fixes, before round 1

Integrator additions are separate commits, named as integration fixes, and are gate-reviewed like all other content. The recurring three (commits f529014, 814d116):

• in-body unprobed markers on clauses carrying only a Provenance-level label (the covenant's standing form);
• rewrap added lines over 80 characters without changing words;
• Provenance blank-line normalization (house continuous-prose style).

Step 4 — checks green at every commit

• python3 .github/checks.py green before every push. The campaign PR bodies record checks green at every (fold) commit as the norm.

Step 5 — run the gate rounds

• Lens lineup as run 2026-07-29/30 — a dated OPERATING RECORD, not a lineup to trust (the canonical rule is cross-model-review §1: discover reviewers at session time; the concrete run recipes are owner-personal and are NOT in this repo — ask the owner): grok-4.5 high + gpt-5.6-luna ultra EVERY round; gpt-5.6-sol max joining every 3rd round, pre-commit rounds, and terminal-candidate rounds. Each campaign's records state its own cadence (PR #90/#93 bodies; for #97, its constituents' evaluation comments) — the newest campaign's record is the freshest statement; the standing wording is owner-set (UNCERTAINTY item 2).
• Lenses run as background CLI jobs writing verdict files. An empty or still-writing file is NOT a verdict; wait for the completion signal, then read the file.
• Each round's packet carries the current diff and the cumulative disposition ledger of prior rounds' folds and rejections.
• Judge what comes back per gate-adjudication-and-folds.

Step 6 — reach a terminal state

• Normal close: TRIPLE PROCEED — every lens PROCEED in the SAME round (#93 r2; #97 r3).
• Non-convergence close: the bounded-loop close (cross-model-review §4 is the canonical loop bound; gate-adjudication-and-folds has this repo's precedents). Residuals are disclosed in the PR body.

Step 7 — combined PR, CI, merge

• Push the branch; open ONE combined PR. Body shape: "What lands" per constituent / "Review gate" (rounds, lenses, fold trajectory, rejections) / "Integration notes" — the #90 shape; #93/#97 carry the same three blocks with lighter headings.
• Wait for the three CI checks (consistency, hook-suites, gate-template) by reading state directly — gh pr checks 97, substituting the campaign PR number; do not hand-roll wait loops (failure-archaeology entry 1).
• Merge as a merge commit, and ONLY on an owner ask whose words cover MERGING this campaign — write the AUTH line first (operational-rigor §2); this playbook is never that authorization. An owner ask to merge does not skip the CI wait: report pending checks and merge on green, or on the owner's explicit go given the pending state. Observed record, not a norm to reuse: the three campaign merges landed with reviewDecision REVIEW_REQUIRED and zero reviews — an owner-side bypass whose exact mechanism is not readable from here (UNCERTAINTY item 3). If a merge is blocked, surface the blocker; never probe for bypass paths.

Step 8 — post-merge duties (all of them, in order)

1. Evaluation comment on EVERY constituent PR — maintainer-record shape: what was verified for that PR / gate folds applied to its text / final decision + merge SHA. Never quote the owner's messages (repo-boundaries-and-sync).
2. Sync the live skill copies and cmp-verify at the merge SHA (repo-boundaries-and-sync has the current expected state).
3. Probe debt: new unprobed markers are ALREADY the live queue — issue #92's canonical view is a grep, so there is no hand-kept list to update.
4. Update session memory with the campaign record.

Done definition

Every constituent PR shows MERGED; the combined merge commit is on main with CI green; an evaluation comment sits on every constituent; live installs cmp-clean per the current expected state; no private-zone path appears in any pushed commit (git show --stat on each).

When NOT to use this skill

• The owner asked a question about a PR (assess, don't integrate).
• The change is yours, not a contributor's — the gate doctrine still applies via cross-model-review, but the combined-branch and per-PR comment mechanics here assume third-party PRs.

Provenance

Distilled 2026-07-30 from the 2026-07-29/30 session transcript (chat-history.md, local) and verified same-day against: PR #90/#93/#97 bodies and merge commits a148180/92077a7/79ca49c; evaluation comments on all nine constituent PRs (three read in full, six confirmed present with matching openers — UNCERTAINTY item 7); issue #92; commits f529014/814d116/6fa6154/5fa241b/83a038d/ 1560b97; .github/checks.py; .github/workflows/checks.yml; gh pr view <n> --json reviewDecision,reviews; gh pr view 91 --json createdAt.

Re-verify: gh pr view 97 --json body --jq .body | head -45 — and if a newer combined/integrate PR exists, read the newest body instead; practice evolves campaign by campaign and the PR bodies are its freshest public record.