swarm-controller's `InitAgentConfigRepo` node already covers config-repo
creation, so this deletes a duplicate rather than a capability; old
`init_config` rows are skipped by `collect_lenient` with no migration, by
operator decision.
Refs #4398
The swarm writes agent-configs/<agent> when it creates an agent, before
any hive is told to deploy it. setup_proposed authored a second copy of
those same bytes locally, so an agent's initial config had two sources
of truth, each unaware of the other and free to disagree. It now clones
that repo and falls back to the template only when there is nothing
there to take.
Preferred-source rather than a new-path-only variant because
provision_container is the Provision node for the swarm deploy and the
approval flow both, and cannot tell them apart. The approval flow
creates agent-configs/<agent> only after the first spawn
(forge_after_first_spawn), so it finds nothing and lands on the
template: the fallback becomes unreachable when hive-level create is
removed, rather than becoming something someone has to find and delete.
clone, not the neighbouring init+fetch. A failed fetch leaves an empty
.git behind, and that .git is exactly the byte setup_proposed reads to
decide whether seeding is still needed, so the fallback would have seen
a seeded repo. git removes a directory it created when a clone fails.
--branch main also makes an empty repo fail cleanly instead of cloning
to an unborn HEAD that would look seeded.
Seven places described an authoring flow that does not exist: the
manager editing and committing a child's config in the bind-mounted
config dir. mara, on the snapshot issue: "the pr workflow is the main
one, anything else is legacy … the config dir in agent container is
read only copy to see own config … changes need to go through local
clone and via forge".
Two of the seven are the request_init_config MCP tool description and
its args struct, which are rendered into the system prompt of every
agent holding the approvals tool group. A wrong tool description is not
a stale comment; it is an instruction the whole hive reads as fact,
which is why the claim kept being repeated back.
The init tool creates the repo and seeds it. Nothing else. Tailoring
the seeded template is not a separate mechanism - it is the ordinary
config-change flow, a PR reviewed like any other.
Prose only; the code already implements the PR flow (an approval's
commit_ref is a PR number). Where a doc justified the parent's
read-write mount on the child's config dir with the authoring model,
the justification is removed rather than replaced: that mount is a
defect tracked on its own issue, and it should not read as intentional
while it waits.
Rewrite the approval flow's step 4 as the three phases, with the reason
the rollback state is a git ref, and refresh the coordinator's node
inventory + dispatch table. Fix four doc comments that still pointed at
the deleted `run_merge_config_pr`.
