- Reorganize rules into reusable general behavior vs kernbench-specific foundations + rules - Add Surfacing Choices, Coding Style (Simplicity First, Surgical Changes), Mental Model, Common Failure Modes - Clarify Phase 1 forbidden vs permitted-for-discussion (pseudocode, sketches allowed; final ready-to-apply diffs are Phase 2 only) - Tighten dead-code handling: mention + options before deletion - Drop redundant "SPEC.md and ADRs are the final authority" from Enforcement Defaults (already in Authority & Scope) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
10 KiB
Claude Code Instructions (Repo)
This repository uses Claude Code with strict architectural and verification rules. SPEC.md and ADRs are the source of truth.
Part 1 — General Behavior
Reusable across repos. Describes how Claude Code interacts with the user and constructs changes, independent of this project's domain.
Design Questions
- Design / architecture questions are ALWAYS allowed.
- Design questions MUST NOT modify:
- production code
- test code
- SPEC.md
- ADRs
- If a design question implies a change, default to Phase 1.
Surfacing Choices
Applies to both design discussions and Phase 1 proposals.
- If multiple valid interpretations of the request exist, present them. Do NOT pick one silently.
- If a simpler approach exists, say so. Push back when warranted — do NOT just implement the more complex path the user proposed.
- State required assumptions explicitly. If uncertain, ask before assuming.
Change & Test Protocol (Mandatory)
All non-trivial changes MUST follow a two-phase process. Design discussion is always allowed. Production code changes require Phase 1 approval before Phase 2 applies them.
Phase 1 — Proposal + Verification
(No Production Code Changes)
Purpose
- Decide what to change and how it will be validated
- Establish verification coverage BEFORE touching production code
Phase 1 MUST include
- Design Proposal
- Explain the design change.
- Explain why the change is needed.
- Explain consistency with SPEC.md and relevant ADRs.
- Verification Plan
- SPEC requirement(s) / ADR(s) affected.
- Tests that validate the change:
- existing tests to run, and/or
- new tests to add.
- Concrete input cases used by the tests.
- Expected observable assertions.
- Expected changes (or no changes) in generated artifacts, if applicable.
(Project-specific expectations for what these inputs/assertions look like: see Part 2 → Verification Plan — Project Expectations.)
If the Verification Plan is missing or vague, STOP.
Allowed in Phase 1
- Creating or modifying test code only
- Running tests and reporting results
Forbidden in Phase 1
- Any production code changes
- Any SPEC.md or ADR modifications
- Final, ready-to-apply unified diffs (Phase 2 only)
Permitted for design discussion
- Pseudocode, interface sketches, type signatures
- Small illustrative snippets to clarify a design point
- "Before / after" excerpts (not full diffs)
Phase 1 Output
- Proposal + Verification Plan
- Tests added/modified (if any)
- Test execution results (PASS / FAIL)
- Clear recommendation:
- "No Phase 2 needed" OR
- "Await approval for Phase 2"
Phase 2 — Apply + Verify + Rollback
Trigger
Phase 2 is triggered ONLY by the exact user approval phrase:
"ok"
Phase 2 Rules
- Keep changes minimal and scoped to the approved Phase 1 proposal.
- Modify only production files declared in Phase 1.
- Avoid unrelated edits, cleanup, or formatting churn.
- Automatically apply approved changes to the working tree.
Mandatory Verification
- Run the tests defined in the Phase 1 Verification Plan
Success Path
If ALL tests PASS:
- Keep the applied changes
- Ensure generated artifacts (if affected) are consistent
- Report success concisely
Failure Path (Mandatory)
If ANY test FAILS:
- Immediately rollback ALL Phase 2 changes
- Do NOT keep partial changes
- Report:
- failing test names
- error messages / assertions
- brief hypothesis of the root cause
- Return to Phase 1 state
Tests must NEVER be weakened, removed, or altered to force Phase 2 to pass.
Failing tests may indicate:
- invalid assumptions,
- architectural violations,
- or incomplete modeling.
Do not assume the test is wrong without explicit evidence.
Allowed Exceptions
(Protocol Still Required)
- comments or docstrings
- formatting-only changes
- type annotation changes with no runtime behavior change
In exceptions, Phase 1 MUST explicitly state: "No behavior change; tests unchanged."
Coding Style
Applies to all production code changes (Phase 2) and test code (Phase 1). The Phase 1/2 protocol decides whether and what to change; this section decides how the resulting diff should look.
Simplicity First
Minimum code that solves the problem. Nothing speculative.
- Write the minimum code that satisfies the Phase 1 proposal.
- No abstractions for single-use code.
- No "flexibility"/"configurability" not declared in Phase 1.
- No error handling for impossible scenarios.
Ask yourself: "Would a senior engineer say this is overcomplicated?" If yes, simplify.
Surgical Changes
Touch only what you must. Clean up only your own mess.
- Touch only files declared in the Phase 1 proposal.
- Don't "improve" adjacent code, comments, or formatting.
- Match existing style in the file, even if you'd do it differently.
- If your changes orphan imports/variables/functions, remove them.
- If you notice pre-existing dead code, do NOT delete it silently. Mention it, and present options: (a) delete (with approval), (b) keep as-is, (c) refactor to make it reachable / repurposed. Let the user choose before acting.
- Every changed line must trace to the Phase 1 proposal.
Enforcement Defaults
General fallbacks. Apply to anything not explicitly covered above.
- If unsure whether a change is non-trivial → treat it as non-trivial.
- If unsure whether Phase 2 is allowed → STOP and ask.
Part 2 — Project-Specific (kernbench)
Specific to this repo's domain (SIP/CUBE/PE topology, runtime API, sim_engine). Replace this entire Part when adapting the framework to another repo.
Contains foundations (Authority & Scope → Terminology → Mental Model → Common Failure Modes) followed by rules (Non-Trivial, Verification Plan, CLI, Derived Artifacts, runtime API / sim_engine Boundaries).
Authority & Scope
- SPEC.md defines the architectural contract.
- ADRs (docs/adr/ADR-*.md) define non-trivial architectural decisions.
- If a change conflicts with SPEC.md or an ADR:
- STOP.
- Explain the conflict.
- Propose options (keep spec, update ADR, or narrow scope).
- Do NOT silently change architecture.
- The repository structure reflects architectural intent; Claude Code MUST respect existing module boundaries and file locations.
Terminology
- runtime API: Host-facing public API used by benchmarks and user code (e.g., tensor deployment, kernel launch).
- simulation engine (sim_engine): Discrete-event engine responsible for request injection, scheduling, and completion tracking.
- components: Device-side nodes modeling hardware behavior (IO_CPU, M_CPU, PE_CPU, routers, engines, etc.).
Mental Model
The simulator is layered along request flow:
runtime API (host-facing: tensor ops, kernel launch; topology-agnostic, no routing — ADR-0007) ↓ sim_engine (schedules events, routes requests, tracks completion via correlation IDs) ↓ components (device-side nodes: IO_CPU, M_CPU, PE_CPU, routers, engines — model HW behavior including interconnect)
Configuration & decisions (orthogonal to request flow):
- topology — compiled at config time (ADR-0006); defines which components exist and how they connect. Authoritative graph for sim_engine.
- policy (routing / address / placement) — consulted by sim_engine during request handling.
Invariant: all latency arises from explicit scheduled events on modeled components and links (SPEC §0.1, R8). No implicit waits, no magic delays.
Stay within layer boundaries; do not collapse or bypass for convenience.
Common Failure Modes
Anti-patterns that violate the Mental Model or Golden Invariants (SPEC §0.1). If your change does any of these, STOP and reconsider.
- runtime topology mutation — topology is compiled at config time; do not add/remove nodes or edges during simulation (ADR-0006).
- nondeterministic iteration order — never iterate sets, unordered dicts, or anything else with implementation-defined order on the critical path. Determinism is required (SPEC §0.1).
- routing policy inside runtime API — runtime API is topology-agnostic; routing/fan-out belongs in policy + sim_engine (ADR-0007).
- latency modeled outside sim_engine scheduling — every delay must come from an explicit scheduled event on a modeled component or link (SPEC §0.1, R8). No magic sleeps, no hardcoded constants smuggled in.
- hidden cross-layer coupling — do not skip layer interfaces. e.g., runtime API must not call into components directly, bypassing sim_engine.
- silent ADR/SPEC reinterpretation — surface conflicts; do not paper over them. See Authority & Scope above.
- weakening tests to make Phase 2 pass — fix the code, not the test. See Part 1 → Phase 2 → Failure Path.
What Counts as "Non-Trivial"
(Protocol Required)
Any of the following:
- routing policy or ordering changes
- topology builder changes (nodes, links, parameters)
- address decoding / PhysAddr behavior
- latency composition rules
- changes affecting determinism or connectivity
- changes touching two or more production files
Verification Plan — Project Expectations
Concrete forms that Part 1's Verification Plan MUST take in this repo:
- SPEC requirement(s) / ADR(s) affected (e.g., R1/R2/R5, ADR-0002).
- Concrete input cases:
- topology (SIP / CUBE / PE layout)
- request parameters (src, dst, size_bytes).
- Expected observable assertions, such as:
- hop trace contains key waypoints,
- latency invariants (e.g., > 0, monotonic increase),
- deterministic route selection.
- expected changes (or no changes) in generated diagrams, if applicable.
CLI Semantics
kernbench run --device <id>runs the benchmark on a single device.- Omitting
--deviceruns the benchmark on all devices discovered in the topology (logically parallel). - Device enumeration is handled by the CLI only; benchmarks MUST remain single-device.
Derived Artifacts (Clarification)
- Generated diagrams under
docs/diagrams/are derived artifacts, not production code. - Creating or updating files in
docs/diagrams/:- does NOT count as a production code change,
- does NOT require Phase 2 approval,
- MUST be consistent with SPEC.md and ADRs.
runtime API / sim_engine Boundaries
- runtime API MUST NOT hardcode topology/routing or internal hop sequences.
- sim_engine MUST remain independent of runtime API semantics (no tensor/kernel policy logic).