[kixelated]

Plans the Cut agent token waste epic in m0, from an audit of this host's Claude Code and Codex transcripts and the moq-dev PRs created 2026-10-06 to 11-05. The epic README records the baseline: about $11k API-equivalent of Claude spend in 9 days, 35% of it in the 2.6% of sessions that passed 400k context; the Codex weekly limit ran out on 11-02; base merges are 33% of all commits.

New quests:

• [M] Single-pass review: round 1 re-explores in its JSON turn (608M input, agreeing with the first pass 96.5% of the time); the reviewer gets the diff and REVIEW.md up front, reloads no rules, and runs no builds; quest review reads ## Models; efforts drop to M medium, L high, XL xhigh.
• [L] Rules load once: Claude stubs inject quest skill, a user-level SessionStart hook re-adds the rules after compaction, and CONTEXT.md splits by role.
• [M] Coordinators and waits: coordinators rely on compaction with short child reports; waits block instead of polling.
• [L] Epics list no children: children are the directory, Required holds only blockers, and ordering is dropped (it was only a tiebreak in quest unblocked).
• [S] Base merges only when needed: drop the up-to-date preflight from moq-dev/quest#253 on merge-queue bases.

Also edits Review sessions keyed by upstream branch to cover the 80 "HEAD is detached" review failures.

Decisions

Recorded in each quest's Plan with the rejected options:

• Milestone: ✅ m0 (rejected: m1)
• Review efforts: ✅ revisit in the review quest (rejected: record in the model check; leave)
• Merge churn: ✅ the watcher merges quest files (already true since moq-dev/quest#389) and base merges only when needed (rejected: stop editing READMEs; membership from directories, later adopted for every epic)
• Child lists: ✅ every epic (rejected: milestones only)
• Rule loading: ✅ injection plus a user hook (rejected: install full bodies; one command only)
• Coordinators: ✅ rely on compaction (rejected: handoff and restart)
• Review flags: ✅ read the PR body (rejected: keep the flags)
• Milestone re-cut (m1 additive, m2 breaking): ✅ re-plan moq-dev/moq separately (rejected: quest convention; not now)
• Online reviewers stay; rules-to-hooks is not planned.

Follow-ups

• Re-cut moq-dev/moq's milestones as additive vs breaking: plan it with /quest-plan in moq-dev/moq, as the maintainer asked.

Models

Size: M
Implementer: Claude Code, claude-opus-5-5, high effort

Review

Reviewer: Codex, gpt-6.1-sol, high effort (size M), head 3f97e60, round 1.
Score: 10/10. The range only adds and updates quest planning documents; no actionable defects, and quest check and the diff whitespace checks passed.
Findings: none.

Validation

quest check: 73 documents ok. just check: passed.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

(Written by Claude Opus 5.5 with high effort)

[pullfrog]

Your OpenCode Go account is out of credit. Top it up, then re-trigger Pullfrog.

OpenCode Go's response

provider error: Upstream request failed: Insufficient account funds

Top up OpenCode Go →

  ^{｜ Rerun failed job ➔ ｜ View workflow run ｜ via Pullfrog ｜ Using glm-5.3}

[coderabbitai]

Warning

Review limit reached

You've used all free OSS reviews for now. Wait for the free limit to reset to keep reviewing this public repository.

Next included review available in 56 minutes.

Check out review usage here.

View limit details

Limit details: You’ve used the included review currently available.

Learn how review limits work.

Review configuration:

Run configuration

• Source mode: Auto
• Repository: Unavailable
• Branch: Unavailable
• File: No configuration file from this repository applied
• Commit: Unavailable
• Layers: Organization UI
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: a69f8d14-3af6-44e4-bbae-62f388a9477c

Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between ea62361 and 3f97e60.

Files selected for processing: 8

• quest/m0/README.md
• quest/m0/review-session-key.md
• quest/m0/token-waste/README.md
• quest/m0/token-waste/base-merges.md
• quest/m0/token-waste/child-lists.md
• quest/m0/token-waste/coordinator-waits.md
• quest/m0/token-waste/review-single-pass.md
• quest/m0/token-waste/rule-loading.md

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

[kixelated]

Automated review by review (OpenAI)

Reviewed head: 3f97e608fbe0174bbb0fbcdf507bc26a34f33c20.

[P2] Preserve reviews when inputs change without a new head (review-single-pass.md:66). The proposed unconditional skip would suppress a refutation-only --responses round and keep its finding unresolved. It would also reuse a verdict after the base's applicable instructions or REVIEW.md changed; existing tests deliberately review the same head again in those cases. Limit the skip to unchanged review inputs with no new responses, and preserve explicit --new. Include refutation-only and changed-rule cases in the implementation's tests.

Direction: the single-pass and reduced rule-loading approach is sensible; tighten this reuse condition in the plan before implementing it.

Verification: inspected all eight changed planning documents, relevant current code/test definitions, and internal link targets through GitHub. No runtime code changes here; I did not run tests or independently reproduce the transcript cost audit. The PR reports quest check and just check passed.

(written by OpenAI; model identifier unavailable)