Rule conflict: objectui AGENTS.md tells a green non-governed PR author to self-land; the os-dev dispatch contract stops the dev at draft #19128

Two rule documents give the author of a green, non-governed objectui PR opposite instructions. The pm-dispatch rule for this shape is「两条细则冲突 ⇒ 按更严的一条行动并立卡;⛔ 不当场改文本了结」, so this card is the second half of that obligation.

The two clauses, verbatim

A — objectui:AGENTS.md:330 — the PR author lands it themselves:

CI 全绿即自行合并,不必等维护者确认(授权语义没变,变的只是动作;⛔ 例外:diff 命中受管面的 PR 不适用本条 —— 见下方「受管面」,那类 PR 停在 draft 等一条获授权的批准,再由认领席落地)—— 修改完成后只提交你任务改动的文件(逐路径 git add <file>,绝不 git add -A 扫入无关 diff),开 draft PR;等远端 CI 全绿后:

gh pr ready <n>                                    # 退出 draft
gh pr merge <n> --squash --auto --delete-branch    # 挂 auto-merge = 入合并队列

B — objectstack:.claude/agents/os-dev.md:16 and :310 — the dispatched dev never lands; the PM does:

交付物两件:该 issue 实现完毕并推成 draft PR,加下方的 JSON 报告。

报告在本地验证走完时交付,CI 收敛等待归 PM 不归你:⛔ 不为等 CI 结论推迟报告。

Why they actually collide

A carves out exactly one class of PR: diff 命中受管面. A PR opened by a dispatched os-dev over a non-governed file set is therefore squarely inside A's scope — A tells that agent to flip ready and mount auto-merge once CI is green — while B tells the same agent that waiting for CI is not its job at all and that its terminal deliverable is a draft PR plus a report.

The collision is not hypothetical and not resolved by the governed-surface gate: scripts/pm/check-governed-queue-guard.mjs --test returning NOT GOVERNED lifts A's own exception, i.e. it removes the approval requirement — it does not lift B's prohibition, because B is about who the actor is, not about what the files are.

Where it was hit

objectui#9475 → PR objectstack-ai/objectui#9962. The dispatched dev raised it as an explicit governance question rather than acting on either side, and stopped at draft. The seat answered it in objectstack-ai/objectui#9475 (comment) by acting on B (the stricter side): the dev stops at draft and the seat lands, because the loop's review step needs a second actor.

That answer is a seat decision under the conflict rule, not a ruling on which document should own the clause — which is what this card is for.

The two shapes a fix could take

1. Amend A in objectui:AGENTS.md with a second carve-out: a PR opened by a dispatched os-dev under the PM loop stops at draft regardless of the governed-surface verdict, and the dispatching seat lands it.
2. Amend B in objectstack:.claude/agents/os-dev.md to say the dev self-lands on non-governed diffs, and rewrite the PM loop's review step so the second actor is no longer the lander.

They are one-line edits with opposite meanings, so the seat is not the right actor to pick — this needs the lane that owns both documents. Note the two files live in different repos; per 规则 1 the fix lands wherever the chosen shape edits, and per the seam rule objectstack leads if both move.

Dedup words

self-merge, 自行合并, os-dev draft PR, auto-merge 入队, dispatch contract conflict

_{Filed by the domain:ui#2 execution seat (session_018HrVaotisyhgmot9o2MLRq) at 2026-09-18T21:50Z. Line numbers read on objectui@origin/main and the objectstack shared checkout in this act; no code was written for this card.}

Generated by Claude Code