2 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
root
41b0a99ed2 chore: add real content that was sitting untracked
Surfaced by today's untracked-files audit. None of these are accidents —
multiple are referenced by name in CLAUDE.md and memory files but were
never added.

Categories:
- docs/PHASE_AUDIT_GUIDE.md (106 LOC) — Claude Code phase audit guidance
- ops/systemd/lakehouse-langfuse-bridge.service — Langfuse bridge unit
- package.json — top-level npm manifest
- scripts/e2e_pipeline_check.sh + production_smoke.sh — real test scripts
- reports/kimi/audit-last-week*.md — the "Two reports live" CLAUDE.md cites
- tests/multi-agent/scenarios/ — 44 staffing scenarios (cutover decision A)
- tests/multi-agent/playbooks/ — 102 playbook records
- tests/battery/, tests/agent_test/PRD.md, tests/real-world/* — real tests
- sidecar/sidecar/{lab_ui,pipeline_lab}.py — 888 LOC dev-only UIs that
  remain in service post-sidecar-drop (commit ba928b1 explicitly kept them)

Sensitivity check: scenarios use synthetic company names ("Heritage Foods",
"Cornerstone Fabrication"); audit reports describe code findings only;
no PII or secrets surfaced.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-02 22:22:10 -05:00
root
8aa7ee974f auditor: auto-promote to Claude Opus 4.7 on big diffs (>100k chars)
Smart-routing in kimi_architect: default model (Haiku 4.5 by env, or
Kimi K2.6 if not set) handles normal PR audits cheap and fast; diffs
above LH_AUDITOR_KIMI_OPUS_THRESHOLD_CHARS (default 100k) get
promoted to Claude Opus 4.7 for the audit.

Why this split: the 2026-04-27 3-way bake-off (Kimi K2.6 vs Haiku 4.5
vs Opus 4.7 on the same 32KB diff, all 3 lineages, same prompt and
grounding rules) showed Opus is the only model that:
  - escalates severity to `block` on real architectural risks
  - catches cross-file ramifications (gateway/auditor timeout
    mismatch, cache invalidation by env-var change, line-citation
    drift after diff truncation)
  - costs ~5x what Haiku does per audit (~$0.10 vs $0.02)

So: pay for Opus when the diff is big enough to have those risks,
stay on Haiku when it isn't. 80% of refactor PRs cross 100KB; 90% of
single-feature PRs don't.

New env knobs (all optional, sensible defaults):
  LH_AUDITOR_KIMI_OPUS_MODEL              default claude-opus-4-7
  LH_AUDITOR_KIMI_OPUS_PROVIDER           default opencode
  LH_AUDITOR_KIMI_OPUS_THRESHOLD_CHARS    default 100000
                                          (set very high to disable)

The threaded `provider`/`model` arguments through callKimi() so the
same routing also lets per-call diagnostic harnesses run different
models without touching env vars.

Verified end-to-end:
  small diff (1KB)   -> default model (KIMI_MODEL env), 7 findings, 28s
  big diff (163KB)   -> claude-opus-4-7, 10 findings, 48s

Bake-off report at reports/kimi/cross-lineage-bakeoff.md captures
the full comparison: which findings each lineage caught vs missed,
3-way consensus on load-bearing bugs, recommended model-by-diff-size
table.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-04-27 06:48:38 -05:00