Firfi

I was tired of agents ignoring AGENTS.md mid-session, then introducing invalid states (representable) into interfaces and building upon them, until finally being caught only by reviewer agents (only if!) or by manual reviews. Agents are much more cooperative when their hand is slapped right after a wrong assumption. That assumption doesn't poison the context no more after that. So, Hapsland was born. Behold.

TLDR: edit tools hook + semantic enhancement + decision api; full control over "what goes to Jev" and "what is saved to the disk"

Well, in some sense, yes. There's a seed, of course! It's not always 4 unless it IS : )

I needed to roll some "2d10 + 3"-like expressions in TypeScript, but found that there was no TypeScript dice library for some reason. There you go, then. Rolls both at compile time and at runtime.

TLDR

```ts const r = evaluate("d20", initializedState); // r knows it rolled "12" on type-level const v = valueOf(r); // value of v is 12, type is literal 12 ```

The code is controlled slop; tokens were burnt with mindfulness.

A very small writeup on branded types [in Typescript, but the approach is applicable to many other languages] in application to Connascence of Execution

Now I'll be thinking of "L" in ETL as "Land" and not "Load". Although the article doesn't propose that but uses a lot of "Land" terminology. "Load" => "load where? or FROM where?" - ambiguous "Land" => "land where?" - clear

That's a great idea, in fact. I'll try it out next time. Maybe even a mix, because I do sometimes want to be very specific about some expressions and experiment with wordplay

In my view, the edge cases like so (I think peasant railgun even mentioned in dm handbook) are more of a community problem than the game's. If it can be called a problem, of course - some tables enjoy those shenanigans, some don't.

What players and DMs are forgetting more often than not is the wording somewhere in the start of dm book: dm can overrule any rule. [to facilitate the game mood and direction that the table has agreed upon] [and a larger overarching problem is probably that there's often no such agreement before the game]

That's the plan! D&D combat can be a slog sometimes, and when it is, that kills a lot of fun for me as a story-first approach adept. I'd really just ask about that or that rule from a chatbot, or have a list of weighted actions presented to me at my turn. That's where I'm moving towards - a good spec is hopefully what should enable that direction. Hopefully...

Sorry for that, everyone. I did use the AI to help me with structure and English. I thought I'd proofread and edited that enough to be readable, but apparently it still smells. I'll update the wording soon.

Right. Quint is not used in runtime and is not supposed to be. It's a strong testing layer. But there's much more to it. My bigger idea is that I would generate whatever implementation from it, hopefully, with an agentic loop - the MBT test is a natural feedback harness to leave coding overnight. So dnd-rust at some point, maybe? If someone develops a game, they would be able to generate a core logic in rust for bevy, in c# for unity, in (whatever it's used there) for godot. That's in an ideal world.

Dungeons & Dragons rules are a spec spanning thousands of pages, not formalized, but thoroughly tested by the community. Moving them to a formal specification language (Quint) was an obvious next step. It worked and proved to also be a great LLM self-checker.