Day ShiftResourcesAnswer page
Turn agent work into a bounded repository contract with named validation and a written implementation summary.
Direct answer
Make the review unit a repository artifact, not a chat session: define the objective, allowed paths, validation command, and acceptance criteria before implementation; then require a summary of the changed paths and passing evidence before review.
Practical guidance
A task definition records the objective, implementation target paths, and validation before an agent edits code. The reviewer can compare the result to that declared boundary instead of reconstructing intent from prompts.
An implementation summary captures completed work, changed paths, and validation results in the repository. That makes the evidence available to a later human or agent without relying on a chat transcript.
Reconciliation rolls task evidence back to the milestone acceptance criteria, creating one explicit decision point for whether the work is accepted or needs follow-up.
Verified demo evidence
Repository-writing command
Prompt: "Create implementation-sized tasks from the selected milestone plan."
outcome: Created 2 declared tasks and implementation summariesAuthorship and sources
Keep exploring
A practical checklist for handing work to a coding agent and receiving reviewable implementation evidence back.
Read nextRequire executable validation up front and recorded results before coding-agent work can be accepted.
Read nextPlain-language explanation of the Human-Agent-Contract: explicit intent, scope, validation, evidence, and reconciliation for coding-agent work.
Read nextFind your answer
Search practical answer pages and product context, then follow each result to the canonical workflow or reference owner.
Search by a problem, workflow step, or tool boundary, or choose a filter.