From 0266ca3ec847fd1c9cf22970e078fe1587d70e7d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mikael Hugo Date: Sat, 2 May 2026 03:45:37 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] docs(sf): wire parentTrace into advisory-partner dispatch MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Adds a Dispatch Pattern subsection showing the parentTrace shape for advisory review. For advisory, the trace is the planner's reasoning trail (alternatives considered, untested assumptions, explicit out-of-scope) — not tool calls. This lets the advisory reviewer catch the gap between what the planner thought and what the artefact says, which is exactly what advisory review exists to catch. --- .../sf/skills/advisory-partner/SKILL.md | 28 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+) diff --git a/src/resources/extensions/sf/skills/advisory-partner/SKILL.md b/src/resources/extensions/sf/skills/advisory-partner/SKILL.md index 43a0d2d3b..0531151eb 100644 --- a/src/resources/extensions/sf/skills/advisory-partner/SKILL.md +++ b/src/resources/extensions/sf/skills/advisory-partner/SKILL.md @@ -24,6 +24,34 @@ Use `subagent` to dispatch an advisory review (with the `validation` model) when - A significant architectural decision needs challenge — dispatch advisory, then write the ADR - The planning model is uncertain and needs a second opinion +### Dispatch Pattern + +Pass `parentTrace` so the advisory agent reviews the planner's actual +reasoning trail — not just the artefact that landed. For advisory dispatch, +the trace shape is *reasoning*, not *tool calls*: alternatives considered, +assumptions made, what the planner is uncertain about, what was rejected +and why. The advisory agent uses this to find the gap between what the +planner *thought* and what the artefact *says*. + +``` +subagent({ + agent: "reviewer", + model: "", + parentTrace: "Reasoning trail (what the planner considered):\n" + + "- Alternatives weighed: A vs B vs C; chose B because \n" + + "- Untested assumptions: , \n" + + "- Where the planner is uncertain: \n" + + "- What was explicitly out of scope: ", + task: "Apply the advisory-partner protocol to . " + + "Answer Q1-Q5, run the trap scan, end with ADVISORY VERDICT." +}) +``` + +The advisory verdict carries more weight when the reviewer can see *what +the planner thought* and not just *what the planner wrote*. Hidden +assumptions and waved-away objections are exactly what advisory review +exists to catch. + --- ## Advisory Review Protocol