OSMO / oetf
CLAUDE.md278 starsChanged 46 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
User-facing docs live in README.md. This file captures only what isn't obvious from it. If you touched BUILD or bzl/oetf.bzl: bazel query //test/... must succeed. If you touched cli_args.py: --help on all three binaries.
In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- src/ui/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- osmo-adminSkill
- osmo-deploySkill
- osmo-userSkill
The file
We split this CLAUDE.md into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 34
If you touched BUILD or bzl/oetf.bzl: bazel query //test/...
- Very specific: line 35
If you touched cli_args.py: --help on all three binaries.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 26,980 CLAUDE.md files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
OETF — Agent Notes
User-facing docs live in README.md. This file captures only what isn't obvious from it.
Where things go
- New smoke test →
staging/smoke/<file>.py+ entry instaging/smoke/BUILD - New scenario referencing an existing yaml →
staging/scenarios/<file>.py(split into per-method targets viatest_filter=if combined runtime > ~120s; slug =test_foo_bar→foo-bar) - New scenario with in-container code →
staging/scenarios/<dir>/{spec.yaml, task.py, test_runner.py}+ BUILD entry withtest_dir= - New CLI flag on any of
oetf:{run,deploy,deploy_and_run}→ add it incli_args.py(NOT in the per-binarymain.py); add to_RUN_ARG_TABLE/_ENV_ARG_TABLEif it must forward fromdeploy_and_runto itsoetf:runsubprocess - New env preset field →
models.EnvironmentConfig+environments.pyloader +data/oetf.default.yaml
Invariants (don't break)
task.pyandtask_fixture.pyare stdlib-only — they run inside workflow containers that may have no pip deps. Norequests/yaml/etc. Violations only fail at workflow runtime.- OETF targets are
manual-tagged —bazel test //test/oetf/...matches nothing. Useoetf:runorbazel query 'attr(tags, "oetf-smoke", tests(...))'. - Use server-side log filters (
task_name=,regexes=[...]in_fetch_logs) for polling, not client-side grep — bandwidth scales with matches, not log volume.
Defaults agents commonly get wrong
- Default to the cheapest shape. Smoke first; plain scenario only when smoke can't observe the bug; 3-file only when you must assert on in-container state or drive a live task with a checkpoint gate. Cancel +
expect_outcomeworks on plain scenarios — notask.pyrequired. expect_outcome("failed")and.expect_failed()are UNIONS ofFAILED + FAILED_CANCELED. For tests that specifically validate cancellation, assertWorkflowServerStatus.FAILED_CANCELEDdirectly. Same forexpect_failed_submission()— it accepts anyOSMOError; if you need 4xx-vs-5xx discrimination, drop toOSMOError.status_code.- Convince yourself the test can fail. Before declaring done, name the vacuous-pass mode (empty result set satisfies
count <= N, generic try/except eats the bug, precondition the env doesn't satisfy) and guard against it. If you can't make the test fail by reverting the fix or mutating the assertion, the assertion isn't load-bearing. - Assert every facet the user named. "4xx with a clear error" → both status class and body content. Single-facet asserts let the other half regress silently.
Verifying a change
bazel test //test/oetf/tests/... # framework unit tests
bazel run //test/oetf:run -- --env staging --name test_foo # one method against staging
bazel run //test/oetf:deploy_and_run -- --env kind --tags kind # end-to-end on local KINDIf you touched BUILD or bzl/oetf.bzl: bazel query //test/... must succeed.
If you touched cli_args.py: --help on all three binaries.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

