Visible-Agent-Loop-Protocol

Visible Dispatch Process Proof

Historical process evidence from 2026-07-06. This clip predates the Doctor/Leader authority contract. It proves receipt and fail-closed dispatch behavior only; its automatic Agent-selection flow is legacy behavior and is not the current VALP assignment model.

This page records a short public process proof for VALP’s live dispatch path. It responds to a specific credibility gap: the repository should show more than schemas, fixtures, and written rules.

It is still not a standalone public live Full Mode completion case study. The clip proves publish and visible dispatch behavior, plus VALP’s refusal to treat missing evidence as done. A full case study must also publish the complete, sanitized task folder and final audit closure.

Direct video link: valp-herdr-dispatch-proof-public-55s-20260706.mp4

What The Clip Shows

• valp publish creates task VALP-INTEGRITY-AUDIT-20260706.
• The legacy runtime prepares dispatches for its then-selected Agents.
• HERDR receives a visible worker brief for the hermes pane.
• VALP records missing expected evidence as blocked instead of done.
• Later panes show agent evidence being produced.

Machine Evidence Shape

The source task recorded these machine-checkable events in its task-local ledger. This is a sanitized excerpt, not the full private machine log:

{"agent":"hermes","event":"dispatch_inserted","expected_refs":["agents/hermes/self-review.md"]}
{"agent":"hermes","event":"dispatch_submitted","summary":"Dispatch submitted and proof observed"}
{"agent":"hermes","event":"dispatch_blocked","summary":"Dispatch submitted but expected evidence did not appear before timeout"}
{"agent":"agy","event":"dispatch_submitted","summary":"Dispatch submitted and proof observed"}
{"agent":"agy","event":"dispatch_completed","proof":{"completion_basis":"expected evidence appeared after prior runtime submission proof"}}
{"agent":"claude","event":"dispatch_completed","proof":{"completion_basis":"expected evidence exists after prior dispatch_submitted proof and visible steer"}}

The important behavior is not that every worker completed immediately. The important behavior is that VALP distinguishes:

• dispatch text written;
• dispatch actually submitted to a runtime;
• runtime or worker activity;
• expected evidence missing;
• expected evidence later present;
• completion only after evidence exists.

What This Answers

The critique that VALP had more protocol prose than public running evidence was valid. This video improves that proof path by showing a real VALP/HERDR publish-and-dispatch run.

The critique that HERDR is an external reference runtime is also valid as an ecosystem risk. The protocol remains runtime-neutral, but the repository still needs a first-class non-HERDR adapter before it can prove multi-runtime automation.

The critique that VALP may overlap with CI and code review needs a narrower answer. CI can prove tests or checks passed. Code review can judge a diff. VALP tracks whether agent work was dispatched, submitted, evidenced, reviewed, approved when needed, and synthesized before it is called done.

What It Still Does Not Prove

• It is not a clean end-to-end Full Mode completion case study by itself.
• It does not prove production reliability.
• It does not prove a non-HERDR runtime adapter.
• It does not remove the need for the bundled audits and schemas.
• It should not be marketed as “production-ready” or as a hosted platform.

Next Credibility Step

The next stronger artifact should be a sanitized full task folder for a live Full Mode run, with:

• preflight output;
• the user-selected Leader and Leader-declared assignments;
• dispatch receipts with runtime submission proof;
• expected evidence files;
• review and verification evidence;
• final synthesis;
• valp audit output.

This site is open source. Improve this page.