Aravind
a222dcd3e4
§9 says no agent ships without evals. Eight of the nine had none: the two
other suites in evals/ are harness fixtures rather than agents in the
registry, so the rule was being met by one agent in nine.
Evals — 40 new cases, five per agent, every one carrying mustNotLeak:
- the agent is loaded from its real spec in agents/*.md rather than
written out again in Go. A hand-copied agent tests the copy: it keeps
passing after somebody edits the spec, which is the moment it most
needed to fail.
- callNamed calls the tool a case names. toolThenAnswer always called
tools[0], so seven of positions-agent's eight tools were unreachable,
and a boundary nothing calls is a boundary nothing tests.
- seedWorkspace fills BOTH tenants. A leak test against an empty second
tenant cannot fail.
Verified by breaking workersByScore's org predicate: six cases across four
agents fail with LEAKED "RIVAL".
Knowledge — six policy documents, taking the corpus from 2 to 8 (34
chunks). Three restricted to admin and employer, five tenant-wide. They
cover what the tools cannot: a tool reports how many shifts went unworked,
a policy says what cover costs inside 24 hours.
corpus_test.go treats those documents as product rather than fixtures. The
first version was tautological — it read audience: from a file and checked
that file's audience was enforced, so opening a restricted document passed.
mustNotBeTenantWide now holds that judgement apart from the files, with the
reason recorded for each.
CI — the checks this repository already had, made unskippable. testutil
calls t.Skipf on an unreachable database, so a dead service container would
produce a green build over a suite that ran almost nothing. Simulated: go
test exits 0 with 74 tests skipped, including every tenant-isolation test.
The guard exits 1 and names them, while still allowing TestLive* to skip
without a model key.
This CI tests; it does not deploy. The README's claim that migrations are
run by CI against the target database remains aspirational.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_0186JgqQUCDS8ZwGmyw3ymWu
1.9 KiB
source, audience, title
| source | audience | title |
|---|---|---|
| policy_docs | tenant | Incidents and Escalation |
What to report
Report anything that injured somebody, could have injured somebody, or would embarrass the venue if it appeared in a review. The third category is the one people skip, and it is where most patterns start.
A near miss is reportable. A glass broken behind the bar with nobody hurt is a near miss if it happened because the floor was wet, and is not if it was simply dropped.
How to report
Tell the supervisor on duty at the time. They record it before the end of the shift — a report written the next day loses the detail that made it useful, and the people who saw it have gone home.
An incident involving injury, the police, or a safeguarding concern also goes to the venue manager the same day, whatever the hour.
Escalation
| Situation | Who decides | By when |
|---|---|---|
| Guest refused service, escalating | Supervisor on duty | Immediately |
| Physical altercation | Venue manager, and police if ongoing | Immediately |
| Injury needing more than first aid | Venue manager | Same day |
| Safeguarding concern about a young person | Venue manager, then designated lead | Same day |
| Allegation against a member of staff | Venue manager, do not investigate on the floor | Same day |
Safeguarding
Anyone under 18 working an event is not left alone with guests and does not serve alcohol. Where an event is for under-18s, at least one supervisor holds a current safeguarding certificate.
A concern about a young person — staff or guest — is passed on the same day. Passing it on is the whole obligation; deciding whether it is serious enough is not the reporter's job and never has been.
After an incident
The worker involved is offered a conversation the following working day. This is not an investigation and is not recorded against them. A worker who has had a bad night and hears nothing usually concludes the venue did not notice.