Script Execution Flow

This sprint was asked to define the load-time contract before any new executor behavior depended on it. A fresh worker could hold it because the boundary was pure pattern format: accept optional branch keys on verdict producers, reject malformed targets eagerly, and remove the old conditional spelling. Review then caused a replan for the remaining milestone work, which is exactly where a validation contract should force downstream clarity.

This sprint closed the accounting around the branch migration that had already started landing. Its brief framed the work as compatibility and regression coverage: version the behavior-affecting bundled edits, keep script behavior out, and prove patterns no longer depend on trailing verdict conditionals. The run facts show the unit stayed green, so the later script work inherited a tested branch surface rather than an open migration.

This sprint gave later agents a typed script declaration without asking it to execute anything. The brief named the precise command forms, branch grammar, parameter substitution, and grounding rule for fall-through agents. Its gate failure and follow-up investigation show that the risk was in making the new syntax closed and validated enough for the rest of the stack. After replanning, the milestone could continue against a corrected language surface.

This unit consumed the language contract and corrected it to the final command-key spelling before execution spread further. Its scope was interpreter-local: pass a script request through the mockable world boundary, compute the verdict, and steer control flow without involving production processes. The recorded run stayed green here, which left production execution with a small request and result contract instead of open interpreter semantics.

This sprint isolated identity and closure concerns from process execution. It was sized around one invariant: inline script bytes must be frozen and materialized before production can run them, so a resumed run never reads mutable pattern text. The run facts show review led to replanning after this unit, which matches a boundary that changed how later work should consume frozen script material.

This final script-step sprint joined the interpreter contract to the real process world. The brief was broad but contained: launch engine-owned commands, scope the active item environment, classify infrastructure failures, journal process facts, and replay durable results instead of rerunning commands. It landed without recorded repair, which indicates the earlier syntax, interpreter, and freeze cuts gave this agent stable inputs.

This sprint was the rule-side equivalent of the earlier script syntax cut. It stopped before runtime and made load validation decide whether each rule has exactly one probe and a resolvable outcome. That made a fresh worker's task narrow: normalize the accepted shape and reject invalid combinations with useful diagnostics. The run record shows no repair, so script-rule execution could depend on a clear normalized rule contract.

This sprint extended the already-proven script execution behavior into rule evaluation. Because script steps existed, the worker did not need to invent another command model; it only had to evaluate ordered probes, preserve first-match behavior, and halt on infrastructure failure. The clean run here shows the value of sequencing script rules after the step runtime rather than alongside it.

This unit closed the outcome half of rule execution separately from script probes. The brief focused on runtime behavior for reserved terminal words and block names, including structured entry and return. Keeping it separate meant tests could prove bare-name outcomes for both condition and script rules without mixing that concern into process execution. The run record shows a green boundary.

This sprint applied the completed language to Gantry's shipped patterns. The brief made it mechanical and constrained: move verdict flow onto the producing step, use bare outcomes where clearer, retain shared ending blocks where they carry reuse, and update version headers. It stayed green, which fits a propagation unit whose risk was conformance drift rather than new engine behavior.

This closing sprint aligned public documentation with the engine and bundled patterns. Its brief explicitly forbade documenting excluded behavior, so the task was not to broaden the feature but to make the authored contract match the code. The sprint passed, but milestone review still found one goal-check condition name that needed a follow-up, turning documentation drift into the next narrow unit.

This sprint carried only the follow-up documentation mismatch from the previous milestone. A fresh worker could hold it because the brief named the obsolete spelling, the replacement spelling, and the prohibition on behavior changes. Its first gate went red and a fix ran before review passed, which located the remaining risk in exact documentation consistency rather than implementation.