farm-tfcompat-bugs

name	farm-tfcompat-bugs
description	Run a sustained bug-farming round — keep a full swarm hunting until N distinct OpenTofu-vs-pulumi-hcl divergences are proven, then ship each as its own draft PR containing only the failing test. Use when the user asks to "find 10 more bugs", "raise the next N issues", or run another bug-hunting round.

Farm: N proven divergences, N draft PRs

A round ends when N distinct, vetted divergences each have their own draft PR containing only the failing test. This is the steady-state version of swarm-tfcompat-bugs, which stops at one bug and reports. Everything there about partitioning, exclusion lists, and the direction rule still applies — read it first. This skill adds what only shows up when you run the swarm to a quota, round after round: sustained headcount, adjudication under duplicate pressure, PR staging, and saturation accounting.

The three jobs that are actually yours (the lead's): de-confliction, adjudication, and shipping. Hunters never open PRs. You vet every candidate personally.

Round setup

1. git fetch && git pull master. Re-derive the exclusion list from this master: git log since the last round, gh pr list --state all, gh issue list --state open, and ls tests/tfcompat/testdata/cases. Last round's fixes are this round's exclusions.
2. Read docs/terraform-compatibility.md and put its "Known Limitations" in every hunter prompt verbatim. That file is the owner's ruling on which divergences are accepted and documented — unsupported terraform-block fields, the List<Object> empty-vs-null limit, destroy-ordering of late-created instances, unsupported/extra functions. A divergence listed there is settled, not a bug, no matter how cleanly it reproduces. It grows every round (an owner closing one of your PRs by documenting it lands here), so re-read it each round rather than trusting last round's copy.
3. Fence anything the user is actively working. If they have an open PR or a live branch in an area, that whole area is off-limits — not just the specific bug. State the fence as a positive constraint in every prompt ("your signal must be a value, type, mark, or op kind — never op order and never a dependency edge"), because a negative fence alone gets rounded down to "avoid that one test".
4. Carry the exhausted-domain list forward from previous rounds' memory notes and fold it into the exclusion list. Domains that returned clean negatives twice are not worth a third agent.
5. Partition into N disjoint domains, spawn all N in one message (general-purpose, run_in_background: true, unique name).

What a hunter prompt needs beyond the swarm skill's list

• WRITE ALL FILES TO THIS WORKTREE: <absolute path> on its own line. Without it hunters write into the main checkout and you will hunt for their deliverables. This is the single highest-value line in the prompt.
• Rebuild before judging: make build, then PATH="$PWD/bin:$PATH" go test ./tests/tfcompat/ -run 'Test(L1|L2)<Name>' -count=1 -v. A stale bin/ produces failures that no longer exist on master.
• Capture, don't eyeball: go test … > /tmp/<name>.txt 2>&1, then grep for expected:|actual|Messages:|error:|does not contain. The harness diff carries ANSI and wrapping that defeats a naive grep of scrollback.
• Report negatives honestly, naming what was probed. A clean negative is a result — it retires a domain. A fabricated bug costs more than an empty round.

Sustaining headcount

Hold N hunters working until the quota is met — the drain is real: some domains come back clean, some candidates get rejected, and later bugs cost more than early ones.

Re-task with SendMessage, don't respawn. A hunter that just proved its domain clean already knows the harness, the providers, and the rejection bar. Send it the new domain plus the updated exclusion list (including whatever just got filed). A fresh Agent call pays for all that context again.

Expect to re-task roughly half the swarm once or twice to reach 10. If a hunter needs a third domain, the search space is telling you something — see Saturation.

Adjudication

The bar: you personally reproduce it 3/3 deterministic FAIL, on freshly built binaries, with -count=1. Not the hunter's run — yours. A hunter FAIL that PASSes for you is a stale-binary artifact; reject it and re-task.

Then walk the rejection classes. Every one of these has cost a real round:

Reject when	Why
pulumi-hcl is more lenient than OpenTofu	Wrong direction; no migration depends on it
SDKv2 optional-attr null vs ""	Zero-value artifact of the shim, not a divergence
Computed field recomputed on update	Self-healing, by design
Plan-time unknown-refinement diff	Unobservable to a user
Secret / sensitive over-propagation	Pulumi's stickier marks are by design
Only difference is number representation	Deferred float64 family — flag it, don't file it
Signal is op order or a dependency edge	Fenced; belongs to the scheduling work
Structurally indistinguishable on the wire	E.g. MaxItemsOne empty-vs-absent block
Listed in docs/terraform-compatibility.md	Accepted, documented limitation — settled

Verify every claimed duplicate before rejecting on it. gh issue view / gh pr view the number. Issues get closed by a different PR than the one that names them, and a "fixed in #X" that actually landed in #Y still fails on master — that is a live bug, not a duplicate. Equally: a bug you remember being filed may be closed and scoped to a path that doesn't cover your case.

Borderline goes in the PR, with the relationship named. If a candidate might be a sibling of an open issue, or might be intended behavior in the Pulumi model, file it and say so in the body. The owner folds or closes it in seconds; a silently dropped real bug is gone. Do not let "possibly by design" become a rejection reason on your own authority.

Take evidence-backed pushback from hunters. A lead's exclusion can be wrong. When a hunter comes back with an empirical probe contradicting a fence you set, verify it and change the fence. One round's #430 exists only because a hunter refused a bad exclusion.

Shipping: one draft PR per bug

Stage from a detached worktree so the session tree stays untouched:

git worktree add --detach <staging> origin/master

Then per bug, in <staging>: branch off origin/master → copy only that bug's tests/tfcompat/<case>_test.go + testdata/cases/<case>/ (plus its provider file if it added one) → git add those exact paths → commit → push → gh pr create --draft.

• Test only. No fix, no changelog. CI failing is the point; say so in the body.
• One bug per PR, off master, never stacked.
• Body: the divergence in one line (OpenTofu does X, pulumi-hcl does Y), the repro command, the captured failure output, and any flagged relationship to an open issue.
• Never git add .; never touch the user's index in the session tree.

Closing the round

1. Verify all N PRs exist (gh pr list) and note any the user has already adopted or retitled — that is the signal the round landed.
2. Clean both trees. Hunters leak files into the main checkout as well as the worktree. git status --short both, rm/rm -rf the exact untracked scratch paths (test files, case dirs, deferred/rejected candidates), then git worktree remove --force + git worktree prune the staging tree. Never git add/reset/rm --cached.
3. Write the round memory note, linked to the previous round's. It must carry: master SHA, the PR numbers, the rejections with their reasons, and the domains proven clean — the next round starts from this note's exclusion list.
4. Report to the user: the PR table, the judgment calls you flagged, the rejections, the exhausted domains, and cleanup status.

Saturation is a finding

Yield decays across rounds. When most hunters need re-tasking, when negatives repeat a domain a third time, or when reaching the quota requires filing borderlines — say so plainly in the closing report and name where the remaining yield is concentrated. "A round 6 will likely return fewer than 10 without new surface landing first" is more useful than ten thin PRs. Do not pad a round to hit N.

Checklist

• Master pulled; exclusion list re-derived from this master + carried exhausted domains
• User's active work fenced as a positive constraint, in every prompt
• N disjoint domains, spawned in one message, each told the absolute worktree path
• Every candidate vetted by you at 3/3 on freshly built binaries
• Rejection classes walked; every claimed duplicate verified with gh
• Borderlines filed with the relationship flagged, not dropped
• One draft PR per bug, test-only, off master
• Both trees clean, staging worktree removed, index untouched
• Memory note written with PRs + rejections + clean domains
• Saturation stated honestly