The CEO was ignoring the focused wake reason and doing a full heartbeat
scan of all cases/issues before getting to the actual comment. Added
step 0: check $PAPERCLIP_WAKE_REASON first — if user_commented, skip
directly to comment handling. Don't scan other cases.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
CEO was missing get_chair_directions, record_chair_feedback,
list_chair_feedback, and search_case_documents. Without these tools
it couldn't read or update chair directions when processing draft
annotations.
Now the CEO will:
1. Read existing chair_directions via MCP tool
2. Record each draft annotation as chair_feedback
3. Update analysis-and-research.md
4. Post summary for user review before routing to writer
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
When the user writes editing instructions inside a draft DOCX, the CEO
must not just forward them as a checklist. Instead:
1. Read analysis-and-research.md + existing chair_directions
2. Translate draft annotations into methodological structure (syllogism)
3. Update chair_directions with the new analysis
4. Post summary to user and WAIT for approval
5. Only after approval → create issue for writer
This gives the user a chance to verify the CEO understood correctly
before the writer starts working.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Even when the user asks to edit specific paragraphs in an existing
draft, the CEO must first analyze through the methodology: identify
which legal issue the edit serves, build syllogistic structure,
reference specific source documents, and state the review standard.
Without this, the writer gets a technical checklist instead of
methodological guidance.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Agent JWT cannot wake other agents directly (returns "Agent can only
invoke itself"). The correct pattern: create an issue + assign to the
target agent → Paperclip triggers wakeup automatically.
Also documented all correct API routes in HEARTBEAT.md:
- POST /api/issues/{id}/comments (not /issues/)
- POST /api/companies/{company-id}/issues (not /api/issues)
- PATCH /api/issues/{id}
- POST /api/agents/{id}/wakeup (self only, with payload.issueId)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The CEO was sending empty issues like "הועבר לכתיבה" without any
methodological content. The writer needs: syllogistic structure per
issue, source document references, claim handling table, chair
directions, style guidelines, and draft file path when available.
Added "תבנית issue לכותב ההחלטה" with all 5 required sections.
Updated comment routing to read drafts word-by-word and use the template.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
When a user comments on a Paperclip issue, the built-in automation wakes
the assigned agent directly, bypassing the CEO. This meant user instructions
(like "read the uploaded draft and route to the right agent") were ignored.
Changes:
- Plugin: add issue.comment.created event handler that wakes the CEO agent
with the comment context (plugin-legal-ai, separate repo)
- HEARTBEAT: add steps 2b (read recent user comments) and 2c (check
attachments) before agents start working
- CEO agent: add comment-routing section — read, check attachments, route
- Writer agent: add step 0 — check for uploaded DOCX drafts before writing
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
After Dafna fills her positions in the analysis document, the analyst
now runs a second pass to: verify cited case law against corpus and
case documents, deepen factual findings based on the chosen direction,
close open questions, and strengthen CREAC preparation.
Pipeline flow updated: direction_approved → analyst pass 2 →
analysis_enriched → CEO creates writer issue → ready_for_writing.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The status map was using informal descriptions ("מסמכים הוגהו")
instead of actual DB values. Now each row shows:
- The exact status string in cases.status
- Which agent sets it
- What the CEO should do next
New statuses added: proofread, analyst_verified, research_complete,
qa_passed, qa_failed, exported. Removed ambiguous conditions.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Every agent now has explicit instructions in its own definition file,
not just in HEARTBEAT.md. An agent following only its own step-by-step
instructions will do the right thing on any new case.
All 6 non-CEO agents: explicit wakeup CEO block in completion step
(curl API + psql fallback, with agent name customized)
legal-ceo.md: issue template for analyst with 5 mandatory items
(document mapping table, no-extract list, split large docs,
wakeup CEO, blocked if failed)
legal-writer.md: explicit Read of decision-methodology.md as step 1
(before case_get, not just "read before starting")
legal-qa.md: methodology_compliance severity → critical
(was warning — decisions without syllogisms/steel-man now blocked)
legal-proofreader.md: added case_update tool + status='proofread'
(was missing entirely — CEO couldn't know proofreading was done)
legal-researcher.md: added case_update + mail notification
(was missing — CEO couldn't know research was done)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Test run on case 1130-25 revealed critical gaps. This commit fixes:
HEARTBEAT.md (#1, #11):
- Agents MUST wake CEO after completing any task (wakeup request)
- New "blocked" status option — agents cannot mark "done" if something failed
- Fallback: direct DB insert if API wake doesn't work
legal-analyst.md (#2):
- New step 6: completeness checks BEFORE finishing
- Verify all appeal/response documents extracted successfully
- Verify all extracted documents produced claims
- Verify classification is correct (no claims from committee)
- If any check fails → status = "blocked", not "done"
legal-ceo.md (#3, #6, #7, #12, #13, #14, #15):
- Step A rewritten with 3 sub-checks:
A1: extraction completeness (no missing documents)
A2: negative checks (wrong classification, abnormal counts, missing parties)
A3: methodology compliance (syllogisms, CREAC prep, steel-man, etc.)
- Any failure blocks progress to step B
legal-qa.md (#6 reinforcement):
- New step 2b: negative checks on the written decision
- Missing issues, bare quotes, empty formulas, mixed findings/conclusions
Also:
- Synced all agent files to /home/chaim/legal-ai/ (Paperclip reads from there)
- Synced methodology + lessons + corpus docs
- Fixed claim classification in DB: 20 committee/applicant claims → response (#5)
Remaining gaps (3):
- #4: Paperclip cache may need restart to pick up new definitions
- #7: Matmon document retry (25K words, 0 claims extracted)
- #9: 53 appellant claims may need synthesis (high but not blocking)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
brainstorm_directions tool uses claude -p subprocess which times out
when called from inside a claude session (agent). CEO should think
about directions directly — it already has all the context.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
CEO now follows a step-by-step interactive flow:
A. Check status and what's been done
B. Summarize case + ask Chaim for outcome (1/2/3)
C. Read response, run brainstorm, present directions
D. Read direction choice, approve, launch writer agent
E. Monitor writing progress
F. QA and export
All interaction happens through Paperclip comments.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Manages the decision writing pipeline:
- Creates issues and assigns to specialist agents
- Tracks status across all active cases
- Reports to human (Chaim) when approvals needed
- Never writes or analyzes directly — delegates
All 4 specialist agents now report to CEO.
Hierarchy: עוזר משפטי → מנתח/חוקר/כותב/בודק
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
