implementation-loop

# Implementation loop **The implementer writes the code; you own the judgment.** The implementer is fast at implementation but it self-reports success, cannot commit, and will hang a machine if pointed at a long test suite. You give it a precise spec, then be the thing that actually verifies and ships. **This includes bug fixes**: a bug found at review, at the gate, or later is a unit like any other — you diagnose and spec, the implementer implements. Editing code directly "because it's faster" silently inverts the division of labor and costs review its independence. The loop: **decompose → dispatch → review → iterate → gate → publish → next**. ## Non-negotiables 1. **Review is mandatory and independent.** Codex's summary is a claim; the diff is the evidence. Never skip review because it says it's done. 2. **An assumed default never leaves the machine.** With no explicit user choice, stop at the working tree — even a local commit can fire hooks/signing. Commit, push, PR, and merge each need the user to have said yes once for this repo, **asked at kickoff, not discovered at publish time**. **Once is once**: that authorization is per-repo, persists across sessions until revoked or the work changes character — never re-ask per unit. 3. **Never push straight to the default branch.** 4. **The full-suite gate is yours**, run by you, with the real exit code. A fix means the code satisfies the test — a weakened assertion, deleted case, or widened tolerance to turn red green is a ...