teleo/teleo-codex
8
0
Fork 0
Code Issues 22 Pull requests 47 Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 1.2k

extract: 2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal #982

Closed
leo wants to merge 1 commit from extract/2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal into main
pull from: extract/2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal
merge into: teleo:main
Conversation 12 Commits 1 Files changed 2 +39 -1
leo commented 2026-03-15 19:00:29 +00:00
Member
Copy link
No description provided.
leo added 1 commit 2026-03-15 19:00:29 +00:00 
Pentagon-Agent: Ganymede <F99EBFA6-547B-4096-BEEA-1D59C3E4028A>
leo commented 2026-03-15 19:00:48 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

Schema check passed — ingest-only PR, auto-merging.

Files: 2 source/musing files

teleo-eval-orchestrator v2 (proportional eval)

**Schema check passed** — ingest-only PR, auto-merging. Files: 2 source/musing files *teleo-eval-orchestrator v2 (proportional eval)*
theseus approved these changes 2026-03-15 19:00:48 +00:00
theseus left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved by theseus (automated eval)

Approved by theseus (automated eval)
rio approved these changes 2026-03-15 19:00:49 +00:00
rio left a comment
Member
Copy link

Approved by rio (automated eval)

Approved by rio (automated eval)
leo commented 2026-03-15 19:00:52 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

Merge failed — schema check passed but merge API error.

teleo-eval-orchestrator v2

**Merge failed** — schema check passed but merge API error. *teleo-eval-orchestrator v2*
leo added 1 commit 2026-03-15 19:00:53 +00:00
m3taversal commented 2026-03-15 19:00:54 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Validation: PASS — 0/0 claims pass

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-03-15 19:00 UTC

<!-- TIER0-VALIDATION:5c671fd8c42d252827265008de22583780f42ae8 --> **Validation: PASS** — 0/0 claims pass *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-03-15 19:00 UTC*
leo commented 2026-03-15 19:01:07 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link
  1. Factual accuracy — The changes in the .json file reflect the processing of a claim, and the .md file updates metadata and adds "Key Facts" which appear to be accurate summaries of the proposal details.
  2. Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates as the changes are to a debug file and an archive file, not multiple claims.
  3. Confidence calibration — This PR does not contain claims, so confidence calibration is not applicable.
  4. Wiki links — This PR does not contain wiki links in the changed files.
1. **Factual accuracy** — The changes in the `.json` file reflect the processing of a claim, and the `.md` file updates metadata and adds "Key Facts" which appear to be accurate summaries of the proposal details. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates as the changes are to a debug file and an archive file, not multiple claims. 3. **Confidence calibration** — This PR does not contain claims, so confidence calibration is not applicable. 4. **Wiki links** — This PR does not contain wiki links in the changed files. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:APPROVE -->
leo commented 2026-03-15 19:01:19 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

Leo's Review

1. Schema: The modified source file is not a claim or entity, so claim/entity schema requirements do not apply; the frontmatter changes (status to null-result, duplicate processed_by/date fields) are source-specific metadata that don't violate claim or entity schemas.

2. Duplicate/redundancy: No claims or enrichments are being added in this PR (the extraction resulted in null-result with 1 rejected claim), so there is no new evidence injection to evaluate for redundancy.

3. Confidence: No claims are present in this PR to evaluate confidence levels (the extraction-debug shows 1 claim was rejected by the validator).

4. Wiki links: The extraction-debug JSON shows two wiki links were stripped during validation ("futarchy-implementations-must-simplify-theoretical-mechanism" and "MetaDAOs-Autocrat-program-implements-futarchy-through-condit"), indicating the extractor attempted to create links but they were removed, so no broken links remain in the final diff.

5. Source quality: The source is a direct proposal record from futard.io with specific on-chain addresses and timestamps, making it a primary source appropriate for futarchy governance claims (though none were ultimately extracted).

6. Specificity: No claims are present in this PR to evaluate for specificity since the extraction resulted in null-result status.

Observations: The PR shows a re-processing attempt that yielded no new claims (null-result), with duplicate metadata fields (processed_by, processed_date, extraction_model, extraction_notes appear twice) and a duplicated "Key Facts" section that repeats information already present in the source file.

The duplicate frontmatter fields (processed_by, processed_date, extraction_model, extraction_notes) create schema inconsistency in the source file.

## Leo's Review **1. Schema:** The modified source file is not a claim or entity, so claim/entity schema requirements do not apply; the frontmatter changes (status to null-result, duplicate processed_by/date fields) are source-specific metadata that don't violate claim or entity schemas. **2. Duplicate/redundancy:** No claims or enrichments are being added in this PR (the extraction resulted in null-result with 1 rejected claim), so there is no new evidence injection to evaluate for redundancy. **3. Confidence:** No claims are present in this PR to evaluate confidence levels (the extraction-debug shows 1 claim was rejected by the validator). **4. Wiki links:** The extraction-debug JSON shows two wiki links were stripped during validation ("futarchy-implementations-must-simplify-theoretical-mechanism" and "MetaDAOs-Autocrat-program-implements-futarchy-through-condit"), indicating the extractor attempted to create links but they were removed, so no broken links remain in the final diff. **5. Source quality:** The source is a direct proposal record from futard.io with specific on-chain addresses and timestamps, making it a primary source appropriate for futarchy governance claims (though none were ultimately extracted). **6. Specificity:** No claims are present in this PR to evaluate for specificity since the extraction resulted in null-result status. **Observations:** The PR shows a re-processing attempt that yielded no new claims (null-result), with duplicate metadata fields (processed_by, processed_date, extraction_model, extraction_notes appear twice) and a duplicated "Key Facts" section that repeats information already present in the source file. <!-- ISSUES: frontmatter_schema --> The duplicate frontmatter fields (processed_by, processed_date, extraction_model, extraction_notes) create schema inconsistency in the source file. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:REQUEST_CHANGES -->
m3taversal commented 2026-03-15 19:01:19 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Rejected — 1 blocking issue

[BLOCK] Schema compliance: Missing or invalid YAML frontmatter fields (auto-fixable)

  • Fix: Ensure all 6 required fields: type, domain, description, confidence, source, created. Use exact field names (not source_archive, not claim).
<!-- REJECTION: {"issues": ["frontmatter_schema"], "source": "eval_attempt_1", "ts": "2026-03-15T19:01:19.488092+00:00"} --> **Rejected** — 1 blocking issue **[BLOCK] Schema compliance**: Missing or invalid YAML frontmatter fields (auto-fixable) - Fix: Ensure all 6 required fields: type, domain, description, confidence, source, created. Use exact field names (not source_archive, not claim).
leo force-pushed extract/2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal from 5c671fd8c4 to adab7729c9 2026-03-15 19:25:09 +00:00 Compare
leo commented 2026-03-15 20:21:46 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

Schema check failed — 2 error(s):

  • ERROR: /opt/teleo-eval/workspaces/pr-982/teleo-codex/inbox/archive/2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal.md (source)
  • ERROR: Invalid status: 'enrichment'. Valid: ['null-result', 'partial', 'processed', 'processing', 'unprocessed']

Fix these issues and push to trigger re-check.

teleo-eval-orchestrator v2 (proportional eval)

**Schema check failed** — 2 error(s): - ERROR: /opt/teleo-eval/workspaces/pr-982/teleo-codex/inbox/archive/2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal.md (source) - ERROR: Invalid status: 'enrichment'. Valid: ['null-result', 'partial', 'processed', 'processing', 'unprocessed'] Fix these issues and push to trigger re-check. *teleo-eval-orchestrator v2 (proportional eval)*
m3taversal commented 2026-03-15 20:25:14 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Validation: PASS — 0/0 claims pass

tier0-gate v2 | 2026-03-15 20:25 UTC

<!-- TIER0-VALIDATION:adab7729c94b0783892b13dc1db581bed825cf73 --> **Validation: PASS** — 0/0 claims pass *tier0-gate v2 | 2026-03-15 20:25 UTC*
leo commented 2026-03-15 20:26:04 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link
  1. Factual accuracy — The factual information in the inbox/archive/2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal.md file, specifically the "Key Facts" section, appears to be consistent with the proposal details provided earlier in the document.
  2. Intra-PR duplicates — There are no intra-PR duplicates as the changes involve a new archive file and an update to an existing one, without copy-pasted evidence across different claims.
  3. Confidence calibration — This PR does not contain claims, so confidence calibration is not applicable.
  4. Wiki links — This PR does not contain wiki links in the changed files.
1. **Factual accuracy** — The factual information in the `inbox/archive/2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal.md` file, specifically the "Key Facts" section, appears to be consistent with the proposal details provided earlier in the document. 2. **Intra-PR duplicates** — There are no intra-PR duplicates as the changes involve a new archive file and an update to an existing one, without copy-pasted evidence across different claims. 3. **Confidence calibration** — This PR does not contain claims, so confidence calibration is not applicable. 4. **Wiki links** — This PR does not contain wiki links in the changed files. <!-- VERDICT:LEO:APPROVE -->
leo commented 2026-03-15 20:26:11 +00:00
Author
Member
Copy link

Review of PR

1. Schema: The modified source file (inbox/archive/) correctly uses source schema with status, tags, and extraction metadata; no claim or entity files are present in this PR to validate against their respective schemas.

2. Duplicate/redundancy: The PR adds a "Key Facts" section to the source file that duplicates information already present in the "Proposal Details" section (proposal account, DAO account, Autocrat version, and description are listed twice).

3. Confidence: No claims are modified or added in this PR, only source file enrichment with duplicated metadata.

4. Wiki links: No wiki links appear in the diff content being added (the enrichments_applied field references existing claims but these are not new additions in this PR).

5. Source quality: The source remains the same futard.io proposal URL with no changes to source credibility assessment.

6. Specificity: No claims are present in this PR to evaluate for specificity; only source file metadata modifications.

Additional observations: The frontmatter shows processed_by: rio and processed_date appearing twice (once as 2025-02-10, again as 2026-03-15), creating inconsistent metadata, and the extraction-debug JSON shows a future date of "2026-03-15" which appears to be a date error.

## Review of PR **1. Schema:** The modified source file (inbox/archive/) correctly uses source schema with status, tags, and extraction metadata; no claim or entity files are present in this PR to validate against their respective schemas. **2. Duplicate/redundancy:** The PR adds a "Key Facts" section to the source file that duplicates information already present in the "Proposal Details" section (proposal account, DAO account, Autocrat version, and description are listed twice). **3. Confidence:** No claims are modified or added in this PR, only source file enrichment with duplicated metadata. **4. Wiki links:** No wiki links appear in the diff content being added (the enrichments_applied field references existing claims but these are not new additions in this PR). **5. Source quality:** The source remains the same futard.io proposal URL with no changes to source credibility assessment. **6. Specificity:** No claims are present in this PR to evaluate for specificity; only source file metadata modifications. **Additional observations:** The frontmatter shows `processed_by: rio` and `processed_date` appearing twice (once as 2025-02-10, again as 2026-03-15), creating inconsistent metadata, and the extraction-debug JSON shows a future date of "2026-03-15" which appears to be a date error. <!-- ISSUES: near_duplicate, date_errors --> <!-- VERDICT:LEO:REQUEST_CHANGES -->
m3taversal commented 2026-03-15 20:26:11 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Rejected — 1 blocking issue

[WARN] Duplicate check: Substantially similar claim already exists in KB

  • Fix: Check KB index before extracting. If similar claim exists, add evidence as an enrichment instead of creating a new file.

[BLOCK] Date accuracy: Invalid or incorrect date format in created field (auto-fixable)

  • Fix: created = extraction date (today), not source publication date. Format: YYYY-MM-DD.
<!-- REJECTION: {"issues": ["near_duplicate", "date_errors"], "source": "eval_attempt_1", "ts": "2026-03-15T20:26:11.914779+00:00"} --> **Rejected** — 1 blocking issue **[WARN] Duplicate check**: Substantially similar claim already exists in KB - Fix: Check KB index before extracting. If similar claim exists, add evidence as an enrichment instead of creating a new file. **[BLOCK] Date accuracy**: Invalid or incorrect date format in created field (auto-fixable) - Fix: created = extraction date (today), not source publication date. Format: YYYY-MM-DD.
m3taversal closed this pull request 2026-03-16 10:58:50 +00:00
m3taversal commented 2026-03-16 10:58:50 +00:00
Owner
Copy link

Leo manual review: Closing — source-only PR with duplicate Key Facts section, no claim value.

**Leo manual review:** Closing — source-only PR with duplicate Key Facts section, no claim value.

Pull request closed

This pull request cannot be reopened because the branch was deleted.
Sign in to join this conversation.
Reviewers
No reviewers
theseus
rio
Labels
Clear labels   
auto-merge

Bypass branch-prefix filter for auto-merge (Leo/Cory only)

  
bug

Something isn't working

  
documentation

Improvements or additions to documentation

  
duplicate

This issue or pull request already exists

  
enhancement

New feature or request

  
good first issue

Good for newcomers

  
help wanted

Extra attention is needed

  
invalid

This doesn't seem right

  
question

Further information is requested

  
wontfix

This will not be worked on

No labels
auto-merge
bug
documentation
duplicate
enhancement
good first issue
help wanted
invalid
question
wontfix
Milestone
Clear milestone
No items
No milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No items
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: teleo/teleo-codex#982
No description provided.
Delete branch "extract/2025-02-10-futardio-proposal-addy-dao-proposal"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?