You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
Repository navigation
Self-testing framework: observe UX patterns and identify self-improvement opportunities #23
Problem: Squad can't currently observe its own behavior patterns — rendering issues, UX quirks, output quality, timing — in a structured way. We rely on anecdotal user reports to identify problems.
Vision: A self-testing or self-observation framework where Squad can:
Capture behavioral snapshots — what does the output actually look like to users? Are there rendering issues, malformed tables, broken markdown, noisy tool output leaking through?
Pattern detection — across sessions, identify recurring UX problems (e.g., 'agents go silent for too long', 'tables render wrong in terminal X', 'output hygiene violations')
Self-improvement proposals — when patterns are detected, auto-file issues or suggest prompt/template changes
Regression testing — after changes to squad.agent.md or spawn templates, verify that known-good behaviors still work
Research questions:
How would Squad capture its own output for analysis? (session logs? dedicated test harness?)
Can we run 'smoke test' sessions that exercise common workflows and validate output format?
What metrics matter? (response time, output length, tool call count, rendering correctness, personality consistency)
Could a dedicated agent role ('QA Observer') watch sessions and flag issues?
How do we test across different terminal renderers / Copilot hosts?
Concrete first step: Design a test session format where Squad runs itself through scripted scenarios and a reviewer agent grades the output quality.
Goal: Design and implement self-improvement tests that run in GitHub Actions — NOT locally. The CLI environment stays free for the user to keep working.
Key Constraints
Tests run in Actions or via @copilot coding agent — offload test execution to CI, not the local CLI session.
Improvement opportunities file as issues in THIS repo only — bradygaster/squad. Never file issues in other repos. (We tried that once. Never again.)
Actionable output — when a test detects a pattern or regression, it files an issue with enough context to act on.
Deliverables
Sprint plan for implementing the self-testing framework
GitHub Actions workflow(s) that exercise common Squad scenarios (smoke tests)
A reviewer/grader mechanism that evaluates output quality (rendering, output hygiene, personality, timing)
Auto-file issues in bradygaster/squad when regressions or improvement opportunities are detected
Regression test suite for squad.agent.md and spawn template changes
What "Good" Looks Like
A PR changes squad.agent.md → Actions runs smoke tests → if output quality degrades → issue filed automatically in this repo
Periodic scheduled runs catch drift or new patterns → issues filed here
Zero local CLI overhead — all observation and testing happens in CI
Closing as go:no — this is a cool idea but it's out of scope for v0.4.0. The current sprint priority is VS Code client parity (#32-#34). Self-testing framework can be revisited post-v0.4.0 when the core multi-surface story is solid.
Key concern: this is significant infrastructure work (CI-based smoke tests, auto-filing issues, regression detection) that doesn't contribute to the immediate goal of shipping Squad on VS Code.
Activity
bradygaster commentedon Feb 12, 2026
Sprint Plan Scope (from Brady)
Goal: Design and implement self-improvement tests that run in GitHub Actions — NOT locally. The CLI environment stays free for the user to keep working.
Key Constraints
bradygaster/squad. Never file issues in other repos. (We tried that once. Never again.)Deliverables
bradygaster/squadwhen regressions or improvement opportunities are detectedsquad.agent.mdand spawn template changesWhat "Good" Looks Like
squad.agent.md→ Actions runs smoke tests → if output quality degrades → issue filed automatically in this repocc @copilot
bradygaster commentedon Feb 13, 2026
Closing as go:no — this is a cool idea but it's out of scope for v0.4.0. The current sprint priority is VS Code client parity (#32-#34). Self-testing framework can be revisited post-v0.4.0 when the core multi-surface story is solid.
Key concern: this is significant infrastructure work (CI-based smoke tests, auto-filing issues, regression detection) that doesn't contribute to the immediate goal of shipping Squad on VS Code.
Reopening candidate for v0.5.0 or later.
docs: add feature showcase prompts to sample-prompts.md
blog: add workstreams horizontal scaling post (github#23)
docs: add blog post github#23 — Squad Goes Enterprise (ADO support)
fix: add ADO platform awareness to governance file (squad.agent.md)
docs: add blog post github#23 — Squad Goes Enterprise (ADO support)
fix: add ADO platform awareness to governance file (squad.agent.md)
feat: Azure DevOps platform adapter — Squad for enterprise (#191)
feat: CommunicationAdapter — platform-agnostic agent-human communicat…
docs: add release notes blog github#26 + remove duplicate ADO blog gi…
docs: add release notes blog #26 + remove duplicate ADO blog #23 (#278)
docs(e2e): record E4 agent-binding verification result
docs(e2e): record E4 agent-binding verification result (PASS, n=1) (#…