Large Parallel Planning Wave Environment Failure Handoff

Large Parallel Planning Wave Environment-Failure Handoff

Use when:

• running a large (4-10 lane) planning-only wave to move GitHub issues toward status:plan-review
• multiple workers finish with strong planning evidence, but local writes or GitHub mutations fail
• Claude quota exhaustion forces provider failover mid-wave
• you need to exit without losing which issues are substantively ready vs still incomplete

Trigger pattern

Typical signals:

• Claude lanes exit with You've hit your limit · resets 2pm (America/Chicago)
• fallback Codex lanes hit sandbox/runtime failures like bwrap: loopback: Failed RTM_NEWADDR: Operation not permitted
• safe-path writes fail (apply_patch / local file creation)
• GitHub issue comments / labels / branch creation are cancelled
• workers can still gather high-quality evidence and even converge on review verdicts, but nothing durable lands

Core insight

A planning wave can succeed intellectually and still fail operationally. Do not treat these as simple planning failures. Classify each issue by substantive readiness instead of only by whether the plan file exists.

Required classification buckets

For every affected issue, place it in exactly one bucket:

1. Ready in substance, not landed

Use when all or most of the following are true:

• the intended canonical plan path is known
• evidence gathering is complete enough to support a bounded plan
• review verdicts are effectively approval-ready (for example APPROVE/MINOR, or a rewritten plan that resolved prior blockers)
• the only thing missing is persistence: writing the plan/review artifacts and applying GitHub mutations

Next-session interpretation:

• do not restart from scratch
• materialize the plan and review artifacts in a healthy environment
• then apply status:plan-review

2. Rerun required

Use when any of the following are true:

• review state is incomplete or only partially trustworthy
• the issue still needs real cross-provider review to be honestly approval-ready
• major ambiguity remains in scope, decomposition, or file ownership
• the worker only gathered evidence and did not converge the plan content

Next-session interpretation:

• rerun planning in a healthy environment
• do not present the issue as ready for approval yet

Required exit actions

1. Pause any continuation cron that would keep launching more broken lanes.
2. Write a handoff doc under docs/handoffs/ summarizing:
   • wave objective
   • environment failure pattern
   • per-issue bucket assignment
   • intended canonical plan path for each blocked lane
   • whether status:plan-review was applied or not
   • whether a blocker comment landed or not
3. Record which issues already succeeded in earlier waves so they are not mixed into the failed-wave set.
4. If new follow-up issues were discovered during the wave, list them explicitly for the next queue partition.

Recommended handoff structure

• session objective
• what worked (orchestration, evidence gathering, partial review convergence)
• what failed (writes, shell, GitHub mutations, quota)
• issues already in status:plan-review from earlier waves
• ready in substance, not landed bucket
• rerun required bucket
• recommended next move
• exact log/worktree paths for resume

Provider-failover rule

When Claude quota is exhausted in a large planning wave:

• relaunch only the affected lanes with Codex or another provider in the same isolated worktrees
• do not restart the whole wave
• if the failover provider then also fails at the environment layer, stop broad escalation
• mark the lane as environment-blocked and place it into one of the two buckets above

Stop condition

End the wave when either is true:

• enough issues have landed cleanly and remaining failures are clearly environmental, or
• the environment is no longer trustworthy for durable planning artifact creation

At that point, preserve truth in the handoff instead of pretending the queue advanced.

Anti-patterns

• repeatedly relaunching the same broken lane under new providers without changing the environment
• calling an issue “pending review” when the plan content is actually ready but not persisted
• calling an issue “approval-ready” when review/artifact state is too incomplete to support that claim
• leaving a continuation cron active after you already know the environment is not healthy enough for unattended progress

Minimal operator checklist on resume

1. read the handoff doc
2. pause any stale continuation cron still active
3. for ready in substance, not landed issues:
   • recreate canonical plan/review artifacts from logs or re-emit the saved draft content
   • apply GitHub comment + status:plan-review
4. for rerun required issues:
   • rerun planning from scratch in a healthy writable session
5. re-partition the remaining queue only after the above cleanup