1

● Interesting self-critique from MASTER. The tension is real: MASTER2 has governance scaffolding (council,      
  axioms, debate) but lacks the actual code transformation engine it's supposed to govern.

  Two directions:

   1. Strip to core — Remove council/debate/axioms, keep: LLM calls (ruby_llm), stages (compress → ask →        
  render), budget/circuit breaker. Add actual code parsing (parser gem, prism, or tree-sitter).
   2. Keep governance, add teeth — The council/axiom system isn't useless if it gates real code changes. Add    
  AST parsing + transformation, let the council vote on whether a refactor is safe.

  Which direction? Or do you see MASTER2 differently than MASTER's critique?

❯ 2

◐ The user wants to keep the governance structure (council, axioms, debate) but add actual code transformation  
   capabilities. So MASTER2 keeps its philosophical framework but gets practical teeth - AST parsing, code      
  transformation, etc.

  This means:
  1. Keep council/debate/axioms as the governance layer
  2. Add actual code parsing (prism, parser gem, or tree-sitter)
  3. Add code transformation engine
  4. Let the council vote on whether refactors are safe before applying

  I should ask what language(s) they want to start with for the code transformation - Ruby? JavaScript?         
  Multiple?

● Good call — the governance isn't bloat if it's gating real destructive operations.

  The missing piece is the code transformation engine. Which language(s) should MASTER2 parse and transform     
  first?

   - Ruby only — Use Prism (Ruby
    3.3+ native parser) or parser gem. Cleanest path.
   - Multi-language — Tree-sitter bindings for Ruby/JS/Python/Go. More complex but matches pub4's polyglot      
  nature.

❯ multi-language: ruby/js/rust/html/css/zsh

◐ The user wants multi-language support for: Ruby, JavaScript, Rust, HTML, CSS, and ZSH.

  Tree-sitter is the right choice here - it has parsers for all these languages and provides a consistent API   
  across them.

  I should create a plan for adding this code transformation engine to MASTER2. The key components would be:    

  1. Tree-sitter integration with parsers for each language
  2. A CodeEngine or similar module that can parse, analyze, and transform code
  3. Integration with the existing governance layer (council votes on changes)
  4. Stage integration - probably a new "refactor" or "transform" stage

  Let me outline this as a plan.

● Create ~\.copilot\session-state\379e0103-58cd-4580-9a7a-5e8cb103fe77\plan.md (+72)

● Plan: Tree-sitter based code engine with 6 language parsers.

  Flow: User requests refactor → CodeEngine parses → generates diff → Council votes → apply/reject.

  Key insight: The council finally has something real to govern — AST transformations on production code.       

  Start with Ruby parser (MASTER2 can refactor itself) then add JS/Rust/HTML/CSS/ZSH. Ready to begin
  implementation?