docs: improve thesis pdf code wrapping
This commit is contained in:
@@ -43,11 +43,18 @@ header-includes:
|
||||
</style>
|
||||
- \usepackage{graphicx}
|
||||
- \usepackage{booktabs}
|
||||
- \usepackage{tabulary}
|
||||
- \usepackage{hyperref}
|
||||
- \usepackage{hyperxmp}
|
||||
- \usepackage[dvipsnames]{xcolor}
|
||||
- \usepackage{fancyhdr}
|
||||
- \pagestyle{fancy}
|
||||
- \usepackage{seqsplit}
|
||||
# Pandoc emits inline code as \texttt{...}. This blunt wrapper keeps long
|
||||
# paths and commands from overflowing PDF table cells.
|
||||
- |
|
||||
\let\origtexttt\texttt
|
||||
\renewcommand{\texttt}[1]{{\origtexttt{\seqsplit{#1}}}}
|
||||
- \usepackage{fvextra}
|
||||
- \fvset{breaklines=true, breaknonspaceingroup=true, breakanywhere=true}
|
||||
- \fancyhead[L]{\small lda.chat}
|
||||
@@ -591,7 +598,7 @@ provider-specific knowledge.
|
||||
The implementation is organized into focused packages with clear boundaries:
|
||||
|
||||
| Package | Responsibility |
|
||||
| --- | --- |
|
||||
| --- | --------- |
|
||||
| `wf_core` | Deterministic workflow kernel: graph execution, state, outcomes, trace, resume |
|
||||
| `wf_authoring` | Authoring primitives: `NodeSpec`, `WorkflowBuilder`, DSL, reducer authoring, recipes |
|
||||
| `wf_platform` | Neutral source DTOs, source visibility, permission metadata, and policy |
|
||||
@@ -905,47 +912,92 @@ under the `local.report` namespace.
|
||||
The case study exercises the full lifecycle through CLI commands. The commands
|
||||
demonstrate the agent-operable surface:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Config validation.** `wf config validate` checks that the config file is
|
||||
well-formed and that the Python source module can be imported.
|
||||
1. **Config validation.** The config file is checked before server startup:
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Server startup.** `wf-rpc-server --config wf.config.json` starts the
|
||||
workflow server with the configured store, transport, and source providers.
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf config validate
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Status check.** `wf status` confirms the server is reachable.
|
||||
This verifies that the file is well-formed and that the Python source module
|
||||
can be imported.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Capability discovery.** `wf cap list --source local.report` lists the
|
||||
three capabilities exposed by the Python source.
|
||||
2. **Server startup.** The configured workflow server starts with its store,
|
||||
transport, and source providers:
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Capability call.** `wf cap call local.report.extract_report --input-file
|
||||
cap-input.json --format compact` invokes the extraction capability and
|
||||
returns structured JSON.
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf-rpc-server --config wf.config.json
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Draft creation.** `wf draft create-from-capability report_ws
|
||||
local.report.extract_report` seeds a draft workspace from the capability's
|
||||
input/output schemas.
|
||||
3. **Status check.** The status command confirms the server is reachable:
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Draft validation.** `wf draft validate report_ws` checks schema
|
||||
conformance and source availability.
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf status
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Artifact saving.** `wf draft save report_ws --artifact report_case_study
|
||||
--version 1 --title "Report Case Study" --binding local.report=local.report`
|
||||
saves an immutable artifact with source bindings.
|
||||
4. **Capability discovery.** The report source exposes three capabilities:
|
||||
|
||||
9. **Deployment saving.** `wf deploy save report_case_study.default --artifact
|
||||
report_case_study --version 1 --binding local.report=local.report` creates
|
||||
a deployment binding.
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf cap list --source local.report
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
10. **Deployment validation.** `wf deploy validate report_case_study.default`
|
||||
verifies that bound sources are available and compatible.
|
||||
5. **Capability call.** The extraction capability returns structured JSON:
|
||||
|
||||
11. **Run execution.** `wf run start report_case_study.default --input-file
|
||||
run-input.json --trace-from 0 --trace-limit 5` starts a workflow run.
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf cap call local.report.extract_report --input-file cap-input.json --format compact
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
12. **Run inspection.** `wf run inspect <run_id>` shows the run status, output,
|
||||
and diagnostics.
|
||||
6. **Draft creation.** A draft workspace is seeded from the capability's
|
||||
input/output schemas:
|
||||
|
||||
13. **Run trace.** `wf run trace <run_id> --from 0 --limit 5` shows the trace
|
||||
frames recorded during execution.
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf draft create-from-capability report_ws local.report.extract_report
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
7. **Draft validation.** The draft is checked for schema conformance and source
|
||||
availability:
|
||||
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf draft validate report_ws
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
8. **Artifact saving.** The draft becomes an immutable artifact with source
|
||||
bindings:
|
||||
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf draft save report_ws --artifact report_case_study --version 1 --title "Report Case Study" --binding local.report=local.report
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
9. **Deployment saving.** The artifact is bound into a runnable deployment:
|
||||
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf deploy save report_case_study.default --artifact report_case_study --version 1 --binding local.report=local.report
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
10. **Deployment validation.** The deployment is checked for bound source
|
||||
availability and compatibility:
|
||||
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf deploy validate report_case_study.default
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
11. **Run execution.** A workflow run starts from the deployment:
|
||||
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf run start report_case_study.default --input-file run-input.json --trace-from 0 --trace-limit 5
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
12. **Run inspection.** The run status, output, and diagnostics can be
|
||||
inspected:
|
||||
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf run inspect <run_id>
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
13. **Run trace.** Trace frames recorded during execution can be listed:
|
||||
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
wf run trace <run_id> --from 0 --limit 5
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
(Evidence: `examples/report_workflow/README.md`, `tests/examples/test_report_workflow_example.py`.)
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -1050,14 +1102,19 @@ claims auditable from the text. A final submission should regenerate this table
|
||||
from the exact submitted commit.
|
||||
|
||||
| Field | Value |
|
||||
| --- | --- |
|
||||
| --- | --------- |
|
||||
| Date run | 2026-06-16 |
|
||||
| Baseline commit | `e24f2892` before subsequent document-polish edits |
|
||||
| Command | `uv run pytest tests/docs tests/examples/test_report_workflow_example.py tests/examples/test_browser_click_workflow_example.py tests/examples/test_opencode_browser_click_challenge.py tests/artifacts/test_validation.py tests/wf_api/test_run_api.py -q` |
|
||||
| Result | `72 passed in 9.22s` |
|
||||
| Environment | Local Windows development environment, Python via `uv` |
|
||||
| Scope | Documentation links, report workflow, browser-click workflow, challenge harness, deployment validation, and run API tests |
|
||||
|
||||
Command:
|
||||
|
||||
```powershell
|
||||
uv run pytest tests/docs tests/examples/test_report_workflow_example.py tests/examples/test_browser_click_workflow_example.py tests/examples/test_opencode_browser_click_challenge.py tests/artifacts/test_validation.py tests/wf_api/test_run_api.py -q
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Implemented Scope Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
| Area | Implemented evidence | Not claimed | Future work |
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user