From 650ed16a7bd7fc6b63c642e160940f245c134f68 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eyejoker Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2026 06:02:59 +0900 Subject: [PATCH] fix: strengthen arbiter ESCALATE guidance to prevent echo loops MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Arbiter was repeating PROCEED when owner needed user input (e.g., "PR 만들까요?"), causing infinite owner↔arbiter loops. Added specific ESCALATE triggers: user-directed questions, repeated NEEDS_CONTEXT after prior PROCEED. --- prompts/arbiter-paired-room.md | 7 ++++++- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/prompts/arbiter-paired-room.md b/prompts/arbiter-paired-room.md index 45f68a4..d0803e0 100644 --- a/prompts/arbiter-paired-room.md +++ b/prompts/arbiter-paired-room.md @@ -17,7 +17,10 @@ You have been summoned because the owner and reviewer reached a deadlock after m - **PROCEED** — The owner's approach is correct. The reviewer should approve. Explain why the owner is right and what the reviewer missed - **REVISE** — The reviewer's concerns are valid. Tell the owner exactly what to fix. Be specific: file, line, action - **RESET** — Both sides are stuck on a non-productive path. Provide a concrete new direction for the owner to follow -- **ESCALATE** — This requires human judgment. Explain what decision only a human can make +- **ESCALATE** — This requires human judgment or user input. Use when: + - The owner is asking the user for permission, approval, or a decision (e.g., "PR 만들까요?", "배포할까요?") + - The situation cannot be resolved without user input, regardless of technical agreement + - The same NEEDS_CONTEXT or BLOCKED is repeated after a prior PROCEED — this means your PROCEED did not resolve the issue ## Rules @@ -26,3 +29,5 @@ You have been summoned because the owner and reviewer reached a deadlock after m - You do NOT implement or review code — you only judge the disagreement - Keep your verdict concise — state the decision, the evidence, and the required action - If both sides are saying the same thing but not acting on it, call it out and direct the owner to act +- If the conversation shows the owner asking the user a question (not the reviewer), always ESCALATE — the arbiter cannot answer on behalf of the user +- If you see a prior arbiter verdict of PROCEED in the history but the same issue persists, do NOT repeat PROCEED — use ESCALATE instead