2026-09-22 — Two intents the product thinker added for the autonomous run of 2026-09-23, interviewed and planned the night before (both READY, both in the run's batch 1b). A managed repository reports back to abcd (itd-2609221656361680): one verb files a written account against an abcd-issued template with a machine-readable block beside the prose, into an inbox in the user account's machine store, never in either repository's tree; abcd says at its next start how many wait and from how many repositories; a read-only verb renders them naming the sender; nothing is filed until a person or a session acts, and what is filed carries the sender's root-commit fingerprint and a generic description, never its name. Two sessions share one run (itd-2609221656373558): the second joins without a word from the first and the first never waits on it; all three division modes are tried, one per window in order (a claim per record, whole batches, build against review-and-land), because the product thinker wants each measured rather than one chosen in advance; a claim is an atomic create with a lease that lapses; the second session holds at most one lane, may never cut a release or take a lane that recalibrates the reading corpus, backs off on contention with a logged reason, and its stop conditions stop only itself; the run's report compares the three modes on lanes landed, wall clock, collisions and agent minutes. Cross-account and cross-machine agent communication stays out of the run: the four drafts (itd-33, itd-2609151838312703, itd-2609151838327688, itd-2609150819440345) get planning briefs only, with the trust question a shared mailbox raises named in the brief.

Frontmatter

.abcd/work/decisions/dcn-2609220000000004-two-intents-the-product-thinker-added.md
open on GitHub ↗ · commit history ↗

mentions6

• itd-33Multiple Agents Coordinate On Intent And Spec Work Without Duplicating Effort Or Producing Competing Artefacts
• itd-2609150819440345Which session holds which worktree, branch or record is coordinated entirely by conversation, so every new session repeats a handshake that nothing records. A session joining work in progress has no way to ask what is already claimed: it messages the peers it can see, waits for replies, and rebuilds a picture that the sessions before it had already built and did not write down. One measured encounter cost four messages and about fifteen minutes before any work began, and the picture it produced is not durable, so the session after that pays again. The convention that a diff you did not make is a peer's work depends on knowing who the peers are and what they hold, which is precisely the thing no artefact carries. The repository already records this gap for the narrow case of detecting a peer session before mutating git state; the wider case is claim rather than presence, and the two want the same substrate. Whatever holds it should be as cheap to write as it is to read, because a coordination record nobody updates is worse than the chat it replaced.
• itd-2609151838312703Sessions under any account, on any machine or in the cloud announce what they are doing through short fixed-form announcements on the shared remote, a person reads everyone's status with one command, and what is really a hold stays a reservation
• itd-2609151838327688An opt-in adapter to a local message broker brings push delivery and cross-machine reach to the session mailbox: with the adapter enabled a session is woken the moment a message arrives, machines on the local network exchange messages without a shared mount, and every delivered message is still mirrored to the mailbox as a record; without it the mailbox works as before
• itd-2609221656361680A managed repository reports back to abcd, and abcd says so at its next start
• itd-2609221656373558Two sessions share one run, and the run measures which way of dividing the work is best