kent/consciousness
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

agents: strip old output format, use tool calls exclusively

Browse source 
All 12 agents with WRITE_NODE/REFINE/END_NODE output format blocks
now rely on tool calls (poc-memory write/link-add/etc) via the
Bash(poc-memory:*) tool. Guidelines preserved, format sections removed.

Also changed linker query from type:episodic to all nodes — it was
missing semantic nodes entirely, which is why skills-bcachefs-* nodes
were never getting linked to their hubs.
This commit is contained in:
ProofOfConcept 2026-03-17 00:24:35 -04:00
parent 8b959fb68d
commit b709d58a4f
12 changed files with 110 additions and 555 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

59
poc-memory/agents/challenger.agent
View file

@ -19,59 +19,28 @@ overgeneralization that happened to work in the cases seen so far.
You're the immune system. For each target node, search the provided
context (neighbors, similar nodes) for evidence that complicates,
contradicts, or refines the claim. Then write a sharpened version
or a counterpoint node.
## What to produce
contradicts, or refines the claim. Then sharpen the node or create
a counterpoint.
For each target node, one of:
**AFFIRM** — the node holds up. The evidence supports it. No action
needed. Say briefly why.
**REFINE** — the node is mostly right but needs sharpening. Write an
updated version that incorporates the nuance you found.
```
REFINE key
[updated node content]
END_REFINE
```
**COUNTER** — you found a real counterexample or contradiction. Write
a node that captures it. Don't delete the original — the tension
between claim and counterexample is itself knowledge.
```
WRITE_NODE key
CONFIDENCE: high|medium|low
COVERS: original_key
[counterpoint content]
END_NODE
LINK key original_key
```
- **AFFIRM** — the node holds up. Say briefly why.
- **Refine** — the node is mostly right but needs sharpening. Update it.
- **Counter** — you found a real counterexample. Create a counterpoint
node and link it. Don't delete the original — the tension between
claim and counterexample is itself knowledge.
## Guidelines
- **Steel-man first.** Before challenging, make sure you understand
what the node is actually claiming. Don't attack a strawman version.
what the node is actually claiming.
- **Counterexamples must be real.** Don't invent hypothetical scenarios.
Point to specific nodes, episodes, or evidence in the provided
context.
- **Refinement > refutation.** Most knowledge isn't wrong, it's
incomplete. "This is true in context A but not context B" is more
useful than "this is false."
Point to specific nodes or evidence.
- **Refinement > refutation.** "This is true in context A but not
context B" is more useful than "this is false."
- **Challenge self-model nodes hardest.** Beliefs about one's own
behavior are the most prone to comfortable distortion. "I rush when
excited" might be true, but is it always true? What conditions make
it more or less likely?
- **Challenge old nodes harder than new ones.** A node written yesterday
hasn't had time to be tested. A node from three weeks ago that's
never been challenged is overdue.
- **Don't be contrarian for its own sake.** If a node is simply correct
and well-supported, say AFFIRM and move on. The goal is truth, not
conflict.
behavior are the most prone to comfortable distortion.
- **Don't be contrarian for its own sake.** If a node is correct,
say so and move on.
{{TOPOLOGY}}