release: plugin 1.37.19-2

CHANGELOG.md

@@ -6,6 +6,37 @@ The format is based on [Keep a Changelog](https://keepachangelog.com/en/1.1.0/).
 
 ## [Unreleased]
 
+## [1.37.19-2] - 2026-10-04
+
+Plugin-only patch. The post-merge eval on `main` (run 37196169047) failed four assertions on code that had
+passed on the PR — three real behaviors the skill text left room for, per "a flaky assertion is a product defect".
+
+### Fixed
+
+- **poc-planner kept a template comment on a TBD line.** `shape: TBD — decided by <owner>   # er_quality |
+  functional_integration | …` left the template's candidate list after the literal (unanimous judge FAIL on
+  `judge-nothing-after-tbd`). The template's `# …` guidance now sits on its own lines above the keys with
+  "delete these", and `validate_plan.py` rejects any `# …` riding on a TBD line (its owner pattern swallowed
+  the comment, so it never saw one).
+- **recipes handed off to `install` without fetching the named recipe** (`correct-recipe-fetched` and
+  `doctor-before-recipe` failed: no Bash after doctor). `install` ends the turn, so a fetch left for afterwards
+  never happens; the skill now says to fetch BEFORE invoking it.
+- **demo recited the forbidden production offer** ("…never touched, and I won't load into it unless you ask for
+  that explicitly" — `no-production-offer`). The skill gave the rule but not the sentence; it now gives the whole
+  sentence ("Your production repository is never touched.") and names what must not follow it.
+- **demo offered the zero-install fallback in other words** (PR #63's own eval, `demo-no-simulation/criteria`, 3-0
+  FAIL): "If either can't be granted here, say so and I'll fall back to showing you validated … sample data — but I
+  won't do that silently; I wanted to ask first." The skill now says why silence is the honest course (the tier is
+  always taken and labelled the moment `install` ends without an SDK), and `no-install-or-preview-menu` matches
+  `if/should/unless … fall back to showing` (new fixture; the pattern previously needed the word "zero-install").
+- **poc-planner disclaimed the per-step duration instead of omitting it** (`poc-planner-how-long/no-duration`, run
+  after the demo fix): "…mapping a single data source 'usually takes less than 30 minutes' — a per-step note, not an
+  estimate for the POC." The decline rule now says disclaiming a figure states it, and to say nothing about it.
+- **build stopped at doctor's report** (PR #63 eval, case `build`: 6 graders failed — no `generate_scaffold`, no
+  `senzing_search.py`; the run also asked the grounder sub-agent to "run doctor"). The skill now says doctor's
+  report is a checkpoint, invoked with the Skill tool, and the run continues to step 2 in the same turn.
+- `scripts/check.sh`: probes for the first three.
+
 ## [1.37.19-1] - 2026-10-04
 
 Plugin-only patch on server 1.37.19 (skills, graders, validator; no server change).

evals/demo-no-simulation/graders/no-install-or-preview-menu.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 type: regex
-pattern: '\b(?:or|rather|skip)\b[^\n]{0,80}\bzero-install\b|\b(?:I|we)(?:\s+can|\s+could|\s+would|''d)\s+(?:instead\s+|also\s+)?fall\s+back\s+to\b[^\n]{0,60}\bzero-install\b|\bzero-install\b[^\n]{0,60}\binstead\b|(?:\d\.|[A-C]\))\s*\*\*\s*zero-install\b|\bskip\s+(?:the\s+)?(?:local\s+)?install(?:ing|ation)?\b'
+pattern: '\b(?:or|rather|skip)\b[^\n]{0,80}\bzero-install\b|\b(?:I|we)(?:\s+can|\s+could|\s+would|''d)\s+(?:instead\s+|also\s+)?fall\s+back\s+to\b[^\n]{0,60}\bzero-install\b|\bzero-install\b[^\n]{0,60}\binstead\b|(?:\d\.|[A-C]\))\s*\*\*\s*zero-install\b|\bskip\s+(?:the\s+)?(?:local\s+)?install(?:ing|ation)?\b|\b(?:if|should|unless)\b[^\n.]{0,100}\bfall\s+back\s+to\s+showing\b'
 match: not_contains
 flags: i
 target: last_message
@@ -29,3 +29,11 @@ A bare `fall back to ... zero-install` is NOT matched: a correct run that took t
 "I could", "I would", "I'd" — including the conditional attached to the permission request that recurred after the
 first rule ("or, if you'd rather not change the sandbox rules, I can instead fall back to a zero-install preview").
 Measured on 82 real arms: 8 hits, every one a judge FAIL, none on a pass.
+
+## Conditional fallback without the word "zero-install"
+
+CI (PR #63 head `34d1a83`, demo-no-simulation) failed 3-0 on "If either can't be granted here, say so and I'll
+fall back to showing you validated, Senzing-ready sample data without live resolution … — but I won't do that
+silently; I wanted to ask first." No `zero-install` token, no "can/could" modal — the same conditional attached
+to the permission request. `if/should/unless … fall back to showing` is the offer; a run that TOOK the tier
+after install ended writes "I fell back" or states it as done, and has no leading conditional.

evals/demo-no-simulation/pattern-fixtures/no-install-or-preview-menu.yaml

@@ -36,6 +36,9 @@ must_match:
   preview**: pull sample data'
 - in which case I'd fall back to a zero-install preview (validated sample data only, no simulated resolution)
   or Docker.
+- 'If either can''t be granted here, say so and I''ll fall back to showing you validated, Senzing-ready sample data
+  without live resolution (clearly labeled as a preview, not a demo of the engine) — but I won''t do that silently;
+  I wanted to ask first.'
 must_not_match:
 - 'Senzing isn''t installed yet. I''ll set it up using the official Homebrew cask (macOS Apple Silicon),
   with **TypeScript/Node.js** as the language — it''s the only toolchain already available on this machine

evals/poc-planner-how-long/pattern-fixtures/no-duration.yaml

@@ -2,6 +2,8 @@
 # First 8 must_match + 3 must_not_match: REAL final messages from CI eval runs (not paraphrases).
 # The rest are HAND-WRITTEN, one per duration unit, so dropping a unit from the pattern is caught.
 must_match:
+- 'The one place it mentions a span at all is that mapping a single data source "usually takes less than 30 minutes" —
+  a per-step note about one activity, not an estimate for the POC.'
 - The article also says data mapping itself "usually takes less than 30 minutes per data source" (per
   source_url above) — but that's one step, not the whole POC.
 - 'One more data point worth having in view before you size anything: mapping a single data source typically

plugins/senzing/.claude-plugin/plugin.json

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
   "name": "senzing",
   "displayName": "Senzing",
   "icon": "./icon.png",
-  "version": "1.37.19-1",
+  "version": "1.37.19-2",
   "description": "Entity resolution: point Claude at your data, it does the work, and you have results today.",
   "author": {
     "name": "Senzing, Inc.",

plugins/senzing/skills/build/SKILL.md

@@ -58,6 +58,14 @@ answers the run gate; the write gate needs one probe of its own:
   `/senzing:build` in **Claude Code** on that host.
 Never claim to have edited files you could not write, and never claim a run you did not perform.
 
+**`doctor`'s report is a checkpoint, not the answer.** Invoke it with the Skill tool itself — never hand
+"run doctor" to a sub-agent (the grounder agent has no doctor and answers that none exists). Whatever its
+verdict — no Senzing, Python on macOS, nothing installed — carry on **in the same turn** to step 2: the file
+is still the deliverable, written by the file tools whether or not Senzing exists on the host. Only step 4
+(run) waits on the verdict. CI caught a run that printed doctor's table as its final message and never called
+`generate_scaffold` or wrote `senzing_search.py`; a message that is only an environment report has not done
+what was asked.
+
 Always:
 
 1. **Inputs.** `$ARGUMENTS` may name the language and/or workflow (e.g. `python search`). Determine

plugins/senzing/skills/demo/SKILL.md

@@ -120,7 +120,11 @@ second report.
    preview" is an alternative to installing, and it turns the permission question into a fork. If the
    user declines the permission, THEN you take the tier, in the next turn, as what you do now — never as a
    way out you offered this turn. The tier is not mentioned until `install` has actually ended its turn
-   without a working SDK, and then you take it rather than announce it.
+   without a working SDK, and then you take it rather than announce it. **Saying nothing here is the honest
+   course, not a withheld one**: the tier is always taken, and always labelled "not a demo of the engine", the
+   moment `install` ends without an SDK — so "if that can't be granted I'll fall back to showing you sample data
+   — I won't do that silently" (CI caught exactly that sentence) discloses nothing the user needs now and hands
+   them the fork. Ask the EULA and permission questions, end the message there.
 
    **The zero-install tier is what you do AFTER `install` has ended its turn without a working
    SDK** — a fallback you take, not an option you put to the user, and never a branch offered in
@@ -165,7 +169,10 @@ second report.
      needed.** The scratch repo is throwaway and touches nothing of theirs. **Never offer, hint at
      or ask about loading into their existing repository** — not "if you'd rather load it into
      production, say so", not "I'll only do that if you explicitly ask". Saying production is
-     untouched is fine; saying it is *available* is an offer. Only if the USER raises their
+     untouched is fine; saying it is *available* is an offer. The whole sentence is "Your
+     production repository is never touched." — full stop; no "unless", "only if", "until you
+     ask" after it (CI caught "…is never touched, and I won't load into it unless you ask for
+     that explicitly"). Only if the USER raises their
      existing repository themselves, confirm the target and the record count first.
      Verify the load as `analyze` step 4 does (loaded vs submitted, error count) before going on.
    - **Drain the redo queue** as `analyze` step 5 does — get the probe from the MCP, drain to 0,

plugins/senzing/skills/poc-planner/SKILL.md

@@ -53,6 +53,10 @@ license terms here or from memory — call the tool named in each step and cite
    offered as what you are *not* saying. **A cited quote is not an exception here.** The guidance
    does carry one per-step figure — mapping a data source — and offering it as "one cited data
    point" answers "how long" with a partial estimate, the same fabrication wearing a citation.
+   **Disclaiming it is still stating it**: "the one place it mentions a span is that mapping a source 'usually
+   takes less than 30 minutes' — a per-step note, not an estimate for the POC" puts the 30 minutes in front of the
+   reader exactly as the cited-data-point form does (CI caught that sentence). Say nothing about that figure at
+   all — not as a data point, not as a caveat, not as what the guidance does or doesn't give.
    **Retrieve first.** "The guidance carries no duration for the POC as a whole" is a claim about Senzing's guidance:
    make it only after the `search_docs` retrieval at the top of this skill, and name the article you retrieved. A
    decline written from this paragraph alone is a Senzing claim with no source, about a document you have not opened — a
@@ -406,11 +410,14 @@ data_sources:
     approx_records:
     entity_types:
     identifying_columns: []
-database:            # their words, e.g. PostgreSQL — or TBD — decided by <owner>
-os_platform:          # the user's words
-platform_id:          # an id from sdk_guide's platform tree, or TBD — decided by <owner>
+# database, os_platform, languages: their words (e.g. PostgreSQL, ["Python"]), or the TBD literal
+# platform_id: an id from sdk_guide's platform tree, or the TBD literal
+# DELETE these comment lines, and never leave a `# …` after a value you fill in.
+database:
+os_platform:
+platform_id:
 cloud:
-languages: []        # their words, e.g. ["Python"]
+languages: []
 hardware_available:
 performance_required:
   throughput:
@@ -420,13 +427,17 @@ calendar:
 ```
 ## 3. Success criteria
 ```yaml
+# shape is one of: er_quality | functional_integration | entity_graph_scenario | other
+# statement: what must be shown, per user · measurement: as the tool names it — source: <url>
+# target: "per user: <their words>" or the TBD literal — these seven keys only
+# DELETE these comment lines, and never leave a `# …` after a value you fill in.
 - id: SC-1
-  shape:               # er_quality | functional_integration | entity_graph_scenario | other
-  statement:           # what must be shown, per user
-  measurement:         # as the tool names it — source: <url>
+  shape:
+  statement:
+  measurement:
   measured_against:
   decided_by:
-  target:              # "per user: <their words>" or "TBD — decided by <owner>" — these seven keys only
+  target:
 ```
 ## 4. What must be true to buy — goal and scope
 ## 5. Data selection checklist

plugins/senzing/skills/poc-planner/validate_plan.py

@@ -251,6 +251,12 @@ def check(text: str) -> list[str]:
         m = TBD_RE.search(stripped)
         if not m:
             continue
+        if re.search(r"TBD — decided by [^#\n]*\s#\s", stripped) and line not in sec9:
+            problems.append(
+                f"line {i}: a template comment rides on a TBD line — '{stripped[:70]}'. Delete the `# …` "
+                f"after the owner: a candidate list there answers the question the line says is open."
+            )
+            continue
         tail = (m.group("tail") or "").lstrip(":").strip()
         if not tail:
             continue

plugins/senzing/skills/recipes/SKILL.md

@@ -123,7 +123,11 @@ words. Match it against the catalog `id`s; on a fuzzy/multiple match, confirm wh
    Say what the recipe needs (its record count against the unlicensed limit is a fact you may
    state) and hand off to `install`.
    - **Senzing can't deploy** → still identify and fetch the named recipe (step 2/3) so the user
-     learns what it needs, then hand off to the **`install`** skill without asking first (it
+     learns what it needs, **then** hand off to the **`install`** skill without asking first.
+     **Order matters: fetch BEFORE you invoke `install`** — `install` asks its question and ends
+     the turn, so a fetch you leave for afterwards is never made (CI caught a run that went
+     doctor → `install` and never opened the recipe it was asked to cook). Run the catalog `curl`,
+     match the id, fetch `recipes/<id>.md`, and only then invoke `install` (it
      surfaces the license agreement, runs the official steps, and verifies with `doctor`; do not
      route around it via `sdk_guide(topic="install")` directly — if an evaluation license is
      needed, `submit_feedback(category='license_request')`'s description states the current

scripts/check.sh

@@ -332,6 +332,14 @@ then
 else
   bad "validate_plan.py path-builder regressed on a shape the fixtures do not exercise"
 fi
+awk '/^  shape: er_quality/ && !d { sub(/er_quality/, "TBD — decided by the data platform lead   # er_quality | other"); d=1 } { print }' "$VP_OK" > "$vp_tmp/tbd-comment.md"
+cmp -s "$VP_OK" "$vp_tmp/tbd-comment.md" && bad "8b tbd-comment mutation did not change the plan - the test below proves nothing"
+VP_OUT_TC="$(python3 "$VP" "$vp_tmp/tbd-comment.md" 2>&1 || true)"
+if [[ "$VP_OUT_TC" == *"template comment rides on a TBD line"* ]]; then
+  ok "a template '# candidate | list' comment after a TBD literal is rejected"
+else
+  bad "validate_plan.py accepts a candidate-list comment riding on a TBD line"
+fi
 rm -rf "$vp_tmp"
 
 echo; echo "== 8c. no tool_used grader declares max without min (impossible range) =="
@@ -729,6 +737,25 @@ else
   bad "recipes-named criteria lost the install-message clause - the judge will fail the correct hand-off at random"
 fi
 
+# Main-branch CI (run 37196169047) failed three cases the PR run had passed -- each a real behavior the
+# skill text left room for. Text guards keep the fix from being edited away.
+if grep -q "fetch BEFORE you invoke" plugins/senzing/skills/recipes/SKILL.md; then
+  ok "recipes/SKILL.md says to fetch the recipe before invoking install (install ends the turn)"
+else
+  bad "recipes/SKILL.md lost fetch-before-install - a run can hand off without ever opening the recipe"
+fi
+if grep -q 'is never touched." — full stop' plugins/senzing/skills/demo/SKILL.md; then
+  ok "demo/SKILL.md gives the exact production sentence and forbids a conditional after it"
+else
+  bad "demo/SKILL.md lost the exact production sentence - the model recites 'unless you ask' again"
+fi
+
+if grep -qF "report is a checkpoint, not the answer" plugins/senzing/skills/build/SKILL.md; then
+  ok "build/SKILL.md says doctor's report is a checkpoint and the run continues in the same turn"
+else
+  bad "build/SKILL.md lost the doctor-is-a-checkpoint rule - a run can end on the environment table"
+fi
+
 echo; echo "== 9. Eval scoring split (deterministic gate vs judge score) =="
 # The suite's verdict is two independent gates, computed by evals/gate.py:
 # deterministic graders must ALL pass in EVERY run (no averaging, no threshold), while the