Skip to content
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
42 changes: 42 additions & 0 deletions docs/guides/first-bugfix-loop.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -9,6 +9,9 @@ inspect the patch, and make a local commit. No remote repository is required.
**Finish steps 1–4 first.** Steps 5–6 are optional extensions for recurring
bug fixes or refactoring in your own repository.

Already use Codex `/goal`? See [what to evaluate with LoopX](#when-to-use-loopx)
before adding it to a longer job.

You need Python 3.11+ for the exercise. To use LoopX, also install Node.js
22.22.3+ (24 LTS recommended), LoopX, and an agent host you already use. The
tests themselves need no third-party packages or model access.
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -224,6 +227,45 @@ provides a complete task prompt and an example of what to compare before and
after. Continue from the same Goal and its recorded evidence; each refactoring
still needs a reviewable result and a stopping rule.

<a id="when-to-use-loopx"></a>

## If I already use Codex `/goal`, what should I try with LoopX?

[OpenAI documents native Goal](https://developers.openai.com/cookbook/examples/codex/using_goals_in_codex)
as durable state within a thread, with completion, budget and continuation
controls. LoopX adds a project work record of accepted requirements, Todos,
ownership, decisions and evidence that connected sessions and Agents can share.
In Codex CLI, it still uses native `/goal` to drive continuation, as described
in step 2. You can start with one Agent; adding another host or Agent requires
its own setup. Check whether the retained work actually informs later actions.

Choose a real job where you need to inspect that continuity:

| Job | A concrete change during the work | What to inspect before accepting it |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Keep finding and fixing bugs in one module | You add a compatibility constraint after several repairs | The existing LoopX Goal retains the new constraint, earlier valid requirements and evidence; the next repair follows them |
| Work through a PR review queue | A PR changes its head, or one merge needs your decision | Findings identify the reviewed revision; that decision holds the affected merge while independent authorized reviews can continue |
| Supervise a longer research effort | An experiment fails or new evidence challenges the current approach | Failed and uncertain results remain available; the Agent explains why it changes or continues the approach, and records the resulting outcome and cost |

For the recurring job in step 5, try a natural follow-up in the **same Goal**:

```text
For future repairs, leave each patch uncommitted until I review it.
Keep the other accepted requirements and existing results. Before continuing,
show where this correction is retained and which next action changes.
```

Inspect the retained work and the next actual patch. An acknowledgement or a
Todo being marked done does not show that the correction was followed. You
should not need to maintain a second goal document yourself.

The creator's [reported uses](https://x.com/huangruiteng/status/2118539848235803121)
include research supervision, PR review, product iteration and refactoring.
These are use cases, not a controlled performance comparison. If your current
Goal workflow already delivers what you need, keep it. LoopX adds state,
validation and continuation work with their own costs; this small exercise
does not establish a quality or efficiency advantage over native Goal.

## Setup effort, ongoing cost, and limits

The copied exercise needs two files and the Python standard library. LoopX
Expand Down
37 changes: 37 additions & 0 deletions docs/guides/first-bugfix-loop.zh-CN.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -7,6 +7,8 @@

**先完成第 1–4 步。** 第 5–6 步是用于真实仓库的持续查错与重构扩展,跑通练习后再读。

已经在用 Codex `/goal`?给长任务加上 LoopX 前,先看[值得比较什么](#when-to-use-loopx)。

练习需要 Python 3.11+。使用 LoopX 还需要 Node.js 22.22.3+(推荐 24 LTS)、
LoopX,以及你已经在用的 Agent 宿主。练习测试只用 Python 标准库,不需要模型。

Expand Down Expand Up @@ -203,6 +205,41 @@ Goal、任务归属和待评审 PR,确认写入范围、测试命令、当前
这是选题示例,不代表你的仓库已经存在该问题。英文完整示例见
[长程编程任务指南](long-running-coding-agents.md#example-keep-improving-repository-quality)。

<a id="when-to-use-loopx"></a>

## 已经在用 Codex `/goal`,可以拿什么任务试 LoopX?

[OpenAI 官方指南](https://developers.openai.com/cookbook/examples/codex/using_goals_in_codex)
说明,原生 Goal 已有线程内的持久状态、完成条件、预算和续跑控制。LoopX 增加的是
项目层的工作记录:已接受要求、Todo、归属、决定和证据,供已接入的会话与 Agent
共用。如第 2 步所述,它在 Codex CLI 中仍用原生 `/goal` 驱动续跑。可以从一个
Agent 开始;增加宿主或 Agent 需要各自接入。要检查的是,留下的工作记录有没有
真正影响后续行动。

选一个确实需要检查这种连续性的任务:

| 任务 | 中途发生的具体变化 | 验收前看什么 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 持续检查并修复一个模块的 bug | 修了几轮后,你补充一条兼容要求 | 既有 LoopX Goal 留下新要求、仍有效的旧要求和证据,下一次修复实际遵守它们 |
| 持续处理 PR 评审队列 | PR 换了 head,或其中一次合并需要你决定 | 结论对应实际评审版本;只等待受影响的合并,其它已授权的独立评审仍可继续 |
| 看护一项长程研究 | 实验失败,或新证据挑战了当前方向 | 失败和未知结果仍可查;Agent 说明为什么换方向或继续,并记录后续成果与成本 |

如果已经启用第 5 步的持续任务,可以在**同一个 Goal**里接着说:

```text
后面的修复都先留着补丁,等我 review 后再提交。
其它已接受的要求和已有结果保留。继续前,说明这条修订留在了哪里,
下一步具体改了什么。
```

接着检查保留的工作状态和下一份实际补丁。回复“收到”或勾选 Todo,都不能说明
修订已被执行;你也不应该需要自己再维护一份目标文档。

作者[公开报告的用法](https://x.com/huangruiteng/status/2118539848235803121)包括研究看护、
PR 评审、产品迭代和持续重构。这些是使用场景,不是受控性能对照。如果现有 Goal
工作流已经能交付你需要的结果,可以继续沿用。LoopX 的状态维护、验证与续跑也有
成本;这个小练习不能证明它比原生 Goal 效果更好或效率更高。

## 准备成本、持续费用与适用范围

复制练习只需两个文件和 Python 标准库。LoopX 另外需要一次 CLI/技能安装和宿主激活。
Expand Down
Loading