Evidence workflow

Alcove review is advisory judgment layered on top of deterministic CI. Material findings should leave a trail you can close deliberately.

Unresolved review threads

When Alcove (or a human reviewer) raises a material concern on a PR, it opens or continues an unresolved review thread. That thread is the pointer for follow-up work.

Do not resolve a thread by vibes in chat. Resolve it when the evidence or decision is in the repo.

/research vs /experiment

Use GitHub Issue templates (paths vary by repo; the starter ships both):

• Research — answer a specific open question from existing sources. Stop when answered or explicitly unknown. Cite sources. Do not widen into a ranking of famous alternatives.
• Experiment — state one option that already meets written requirements, name what it would change, and seriously attempt to falsify why it should work.

Both Issues should link the parent PR or review thread.

decision-review

Trip repos can require a decision-review style check: material findings must be addressed before merge is considered complete. The check enforces process honesty — not taste.

Alcove never auto-merges. Disagreement does not silently rewrite main. The traveler merges when ready.

Closing the loop

1. Finding opens an unresolved thread
2. Research or experiment Issue gathers evidence
3. PR updates the trip state (or documents deferral)
4. Reviewer resolves the thread
5. Traveler merges

See also GitHub App review.