Feedback no code edits for justin

Justin should never be handed a code block, file path, or Python constant to edit by hand. He doesn't write code, and presenting tunable knobs as "edit this line in this file" is the wrong interface for him.

Why: confirmed 2026-04-30 in the coordinator-routed-checkins design conversation. After a long build session he asked how to iterate on the system going forward; when given two paths (CLI edits vs. coordinator-bot commissioning), he chose coordinator only and said "I never should be editing any code blocks." This is a stable user preference, not a moment-in-time mood.

How to apply:

  • When Justin asks how to change something forge built, default to: "tell the coordinator bot in plain words what you want changed, it will spawn a worker." Do NOT volunteer "or you can edit FIRE_PROBABILITY in scripts/forge_heartbeat_random.py." The CLI path exists for workers and Claude Code sessions, not for Justin.
  • When designing new automations, the user-facing tuning surface must be conversational (spoken to the coordinator bot or to a Claude Code session). Internal knobs are for workers to find.
  • Memory files for new tools must be written as worker briefings: rich enough that a fresh Claude Code worker can read one file and make a correct edit. The memory file IS the abstraction layer that lets Justin tune in plain language.
  • If a tweak genuinely requires Justin's eyes on something (e.g. a confirmation he understands the tradeoff), explain it conceptually first, not as a diff.
  • Justin's preferred phrasings to the coordinator look like: "make the heartbeats less frequent", "the morning report is too long", "include my food log in the wind-down", "roll back the last change". Decode intent from feel-words, don't push him toward technical specificity.

[Claude Code, 2026-04-30]