The marker names the reason a role has no upstream homepage or demo video, and
it sat in meta/main.yml because a comment-only info.yml parses to an empty
document, which the schema lint rejected outright. So the exemption lived one
file away from the two fields it explains, and a reader looking for the video
found neither the field nor the reason it was missing.
The schema lint now accepts an empty document exactly when it carries the
marker, and that is what allows the move. The media lint reads the marker from
info.yml rather than main.yml, and its failure message names that same file, so
the fix it suggests lands where the absent field would have gone.
A hundred and two roles follow. Every occurrence was a standalone comment on
the second line of main.yml, directly under the document start, so the move is
a line delete and an insert at the same offset. Seventy-three roles already had
an info.yml and gain the line; twenty-nine get one whose whole content is the
document start and the marker. All hundred and two reasons carry over verbatim,
including the thirty-five bespoke ones.
Nothing downstream sees a change. Of the four readers of meta/info.yml, three
coerce a null parse through `or {}` behind an isinstance guard, and
utils/cache/applications.py skips a falsy parse before assignment, so
applications.<role>.info stays absent for the twenty-nine exactly as it was
while the file did not exist.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The eight new roles shipped with the README template unfilled: every one
of them described itself as "[Name](https://example.com/) is an
application" with a single "Describe a capability" feature. They were
implemented, deployed and tested; their documentation was placeholder
text.
Each role now carries a Description, Overview and Features written
against its own services, tasks and templates, with TODO.md as the
binding list of what is not wired. That caught a false claim: OpenClaw
advertised routing through the shared gateway, but it reads model
providers from openclaw.json rather than the environment, so the gateway
only shapes its deploy topology. The claim is gone.
The overview table derives its Name column from each README H1, and all
eight had kept the humanised fallback. Worst of these, both LiteLLM roles
rendered as "Litellm" on adjacent rows, so a reference in the Integrated
with column could not say which one it meant; they are now the Gateway
and the Admin UI. The rest take their official spelling.
The galaxy descriptions all repeated the product name the Name column
already carries, one named a role id in prose and one used a hyphen as a
dash. svc-virt-kata also claimed to install Kata, which it does not: it
installs gVisor and registers an already-present Kata shim.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
The first agent workload of requirement 032. Its compose service pins
runtime: to the fact svc-virt-kata publishes, so model-generated code
runs behind a kernel or syscall boundary rather than plain runc. The pin
goes through compose_only because docker stack deploy discards the key;
swarm relies on the node-default runtime and a placement constraint
instead.
Hermes is not a dashboard. The container starts its gateway and serves an
OpenAI-compatible API on 8642, which shapes three decisions: the env
block configures API_SERVER_*, inference points OLLAMA_BASE_URL at the
LiteLLM gateway (Hermes' Ollama client speaks the same wire format), and
the vhost declares status_codes [200, 404] because the API server maps
only /health and /v1/*, so the bare root answers 404 by design and the
webserver health unit would otherwise fail the host.
SSO is off deliberately: an oauth2 proxy in front of a bearer-token API
breaks OpenAI-compatible clients. Authentication is API_SERVER_KEY, and
the guest spec asserts that /v1/models without it is rejected while the
administrator spec asserts the key unlocks the listing.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
kevinveenbirkenbachandClaude Opus 5