The project started life as bash scripts and got rewritten to Python
(documented in docs/research/bash-vs-python-vs-go.md). Several docs
still carried the old "bash-first" framing — misleading for anyone
reading them now (8.7k lines of Python vs. ~130 lines of bash, all
in scripts/demo*.sh).
- CLAUDE.md "What this is" + "Conventions": orchestrator is Python,
posture is stdlib-first.
- docs/prds/0010-cred-proxy.md, docs/research/manifest-format-and-
grouping.md: quoted CLAUDE.md's old wording — re-quote.
- docs/research/built-in-supervisor-design.md, landscape-containerized-
claude.md, agent-sandbox-landscape.md, pipelock-assessment.md,
network-egress-guard.md: drop "bash-first" claims about the project,
keep accurate descriptions of external tools' bash usage.
Leaves untouched: bash code-fence syntax in examples, README's
literal `bash scripts/demo.sh` invocation (the demo IS bash),
Claude Code's "Bash tool" references, IVIJL/devbox bash description
(that project actually is bash), and the bash-vs-python-vs-go
research note that records the rewrite decision.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The autonomous "review comment → respawn bottle with comment as
next prompt" loop is the one feature that opens a prompt-injection
vector the bottle wall can't close (a public commenter would get
to issue instructions inside the agent's perimeter on every
launch). The available mitigations — commenter allowlists,
prompt-injection regex screens, private-repo defaults — are all
soft. The durable defense is to keep the human between the
review comment and any next agent prompt.
So `supervise` is now strictly notify-only. The `auto_respawn`
manifest field, the "with auto_respawn: true" behavior paragraph,
and the matching trust-model edge case all go. The reasoning
stays in the "Where to be conservative" bullet so the decision
isn't re-litigated later.
didericis-codex
didericis