Trigger boundary (avoid DISPATCH COLLISION):

• docs-sync triggers on a PR event ("PR opened/synchronized", source-diff-driven).
• docs-corpus-audit triggers on a maintainer ask for a WHOLE-CORPUS pass ("audit the corpus", "reground", "pre-release sweep") -- no PR required, no diff required, the whole corpus is the input.

If a maintainer asks "review this PR's doc impact", route to docs-sync. If they ask "audit all our docs" or "the docs feel stale everywhere", route here.

Architecture invariants

• Wave-batched, not flat. Pages are partitioned into 6-8 disjoint scopes; each scope is one verifier subagent. Cost scales with wave size, not corpus size. A wave of 6 agents on ~10 pages each is the canonical shape.
• Disjoint page ownership. Each subagent has EDIT AUTHORITY on its scope only. No two agents touch the same file -- guarantees no merge conflicts during fan-in.
• S7 verification is mandatory. Every factual claim is verified against deterministic source: uv run apm <verb> --help for CLI, grep -n src/apm_cli/ for symbols, python -c "import ..." for module shape, file-existence checks for nav links. Never assert from LLM recall.
• Surgical edits only. 1-3 line patches per drift, preserving voice. Restructuring is deferred to the orchestrator post-pass, never auto-applied by per-scope agents.
• Single-writer interlock for git. Subagents NEVER run git commit, git push, or gh pr <write>. Orchestrator commits per wave; pushes once per session.
• Alignment loop (A8). After waves return, orchestrator re-greps the corpus for the patterns the agents claimed to fix. Any residue triggers a targeted re-dispatch (max 2 redrafts) or is escalated to maintainer.

Roster (composition, not invention)

Reuse docs-sync's personas. Do NOT invent a one-off "grounding- verifier" role; that's R3 EXTRACT in reverse.

…

cli-logging-ux

优化 APM 代码库中的 CLI 输出、日志提示与诊断信息体验

apm-review-panel

对 microsoft/apm 的标记 PR 发起多专家联合审查并给出综合建议