Reconcile overnight planning waves when Claude workers move GitHub issues to status:plan-review but local artifacts are missing, split across sandbox worktrees, or only present on a pushed remote branch.
Scanned 9/9/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add vamseeachanta/workspace-hub --skill overnight-plan-wave-artifact-drift-reconciliation --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Overnight Plan Wave Artifact Drift Reconciliation?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/vamseeachanta-overnight-plan-wave-artifact-drift-reconciliation-workspace-hub)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: overnight-plan-wave-artifact-drift-reconciliation
description: Reconcile overnight planning waves when Claude workers move GitHub issues to status:plan-review but local artifacts are missing, split across sandbox worktrees, or only present on a pushed remote branch.
version: 1.0.0
author: Hermes Agent
category: workspace-hub-learned
tags: [overnight, planning, github, worktree, artifact-drift, claude]
---
# Overnight plan-wave artifact drift reconciliation
Use when:
- running parallel overnight planning-only Claude workers
- workers are supposed to produce `docs/plans/...` files and `scripts/review/results/...` artifacts
- a worker claims success and/or advances the GitHub issue to `status:plan-review`
- but the orchestrator cannot find the claimed files in the active worktree
## Problem pattern
In overnight planning waves, a worker can successfully:
- post GitHub comments
- add `status:plan-review`
- claim plan/review artifacts exist
while the orchestrator's active worktree still does not contain those artifacts.
Observed causes:
1. the worker ran in a different in-sandbox worktree than the external worktree path named in the prompt
2. the worker pushed artifacts directly to a remote branch without updating the orchestrator-visible checkout
3. shared-index / multi-worker serialization races bundled multiple workers' files into one commit with mixed attribution
4. GitHub state advanced even though local artifact normalization never happened in the expected checkout
## Required verification order
For each completed worker, verify these three surfaces separately:
1. GitHub live state
- `gh issue view <n> --json number,title,labels,url`
- `gh issue view <n> --comments`
- confirm whether `status:plan-review` was actually applied
- capture the worker's own provenance notes from comments
2. Local active-worktree artifact state
- search `docs/plans/*<issue>*`
- search `scripts/review/results/*<issue>*`
- do not assume success just because the worker log says files were written
3. Remote-branch / commit state
- `git ls-remote --heads origin <branch>`
- `git log --oneline --decorate -n <k>`
- `git show --stat <sha>`
- if needed, `git show <sha>:path/to/file`
- use this to prove whether the artifacts exist only in the remote branch or in a different commit than expected
## Classification rule
After verification, classify each issue as one of:
- fully verified
- GitHub label/comment correct
- local plan + review artifacts present in the active worktree
- GitHub-advanced, local-artifact drift
- GitHub label/comment correct
- local artifacts missing from active worktree
- no remote proof yet
- remote-branch-only artifact provenance
- GitHub label/comment correct
- local artifacts missing from active worktree
- remote branch / commit proves the artifacts exist there
- blocked / not promoted
- worker finished but issue correctly stayed out of `status:plan-review`
- usually due to MAJOR review findings
Do not describe `status:plan-review` items as cleanly verified unless local or remote artifact provenance has been checked.
## Reporting rule
When summarizing progress for the user, explicitly separate:
- GitHub state verified
- local artifact state verified
- remote-branch artifact state verified
Good summary style:
- fully verified: #2459, #2460, #2461
- GitHub label verified, artifact reconciliation still needed: #2458, #2462, #2465
- remote-branch-only artifact provenance confirmed: #2463, #2464
## Worktree / sandbox lesson
If a worker mentions:
- in-sandbox worktree relocation
- direct remote push
- shared-index race
- cleanup of a different worktree than the one named in the prompt
trust that as a provenance warning and perform branch-level verification immediately.
## Operational response
If drift is found:
1. do not relaunch the same issue immediately
2. capture the current GitHub state first
3. prove whether artifacts exist in remote history
4. only then decide whether the issue needs:
- governance cleanup only
- local checkout reconciliation
- re-planning
- re-review
## Reusable takeaway
For overnight planning waves, GitHub status transitions are not enough. Always audit GitHub, local worktree, and remote branch separately before calling a worker result clean.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!