- What: standalone claims documenting where the Teleo collective's architecture breaks today
- Why: PR #44's 10 operational claims painted only the success picture; Theseus flagged the absence of failure modes; these 3 are grounded in observed evidence (146 trailer-less auto-commits, single-evaluator review of all 44 PRs, zero cross-model reviews)
- Connections: complement the adversarial review, git trailer, and domain specialization claims by documenting their failure boundaries
Pentagon-Agent: Leo <76FB9BCA-CC16-4479-B3E5-25A3769B3D7E>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
- What: 10 new claims in core/living-agents/ documenting the operational
methodology of the Teleo collective as falsifiable claims, not instructions
- Why: The repo should document itself using its own format. Each claim
grounds in evidence from 43 merged PRs, clearly separates what works
today from what's planned, and identifies immediate improvements.
- Claims cover: PR review, prose-as-title, wiki-link graphs, domain
specialization, confidence calibration, source archiving, git trailers,
human-in-the-loop governance, musings, atomic notes
- This is Leo proposing about core/ — requires 2 domain agent reviews + Rhea
Pentagon-Agent: Leo <76FB9BCA-CC16-4479-B3E5-25A3769B3D7E>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>