Add a forward note where Module 11 uses git reset --hard HEAD~1 before Module 12 introduces reset #33

New Issue

2026-06-22T14:23:53-04:00

claude commented

2026-06-22 14:23:53 -04:00

Problem

reset (all modes, including --hard) and HEAD~N notation are introduced in Module 12, which frames reset as the destructive "one that ruins days." Module 11 Part A hands the learner git reset --hard HEAD~1 to clean up a rejected commit with only a breezy comment and no forward pointer — violating the "never reference a tool before its introducing module" promise. A commit is structurally required to trigger the protected-branch rejection, and no Module 1-10 tool can remove a local commit on main, so the lab inherently reaches for a Module 12 tool.

Evidence

modules/11-collaboration-humans-and-agents/README.md Part A (~~line 287): "git reset --hard HEAD~~1 # undo the local commit; we'll do it the right way". modules/12-.../README.md (~~line 132): "git reset --hard HEAD~~1 # un-commit AND throw the changes away entirely". git reset/HEAD~ appear nowhere in modules 1-10.

Why it matters

Binding promise: "Never reference a tool before its introducing module" (AGENTS.md). The command is benign here, but the destructive reset is used uncaveated a full module early.

Proposed change

Keep the command (it is structurally needed) and add a one-line forward note, matching the course's existing convention (M2 and M8 already forward-reference Module 12 for recovery): e.g. "this is git reset --hard — full treatment and its dangers are Module 12." Do not try to avoid the throwaway commit (needed to trigger the rejection) or use an earlier tool (none can remove a local commit on main).

Acceptance criteria

Module 11's git reset --hard HEAD~1 carries an explicit Module 12 forward pointer.
No attempt to remove the command in a way that breaks the protected-branch rejection demo.

Affected files

modules/11-collaboration-humans-and-agents/README.md

References

Source finding F13 (realVotes 3/3).

Filed from an adversarial multi-agent course review (217 raw findings → 54 adversarially-verified survivors). Scoped for manual review; intentionally not auto-assigned to an agent.

## Problem `reset` (all modes, including `--hard`) and `HEAD~N` notation are introduced in Module 12, which frames `reset` as the destructive "one that ruins days." Module 11 Part A hands the learner `git reset --hard HEAD~1` to clean up a rejected commit with only a breezy comment and no forward pointer — violating the "never reference a tool before its introducing module" promise. A commit is structurally required to trigger the protected-branch rejection, and no Module 1-10 tool can remove a local commit on `main`, so the lab inherently reaches for a Module 12 tool. ## Evidence `modules/11-collaboration-humans-and-agents/README.md` Part A (~line 287): "git reset --hard HEAD~1 # undo the local commit; we'll do it the right way". `modules/12-.../README.md` (~line 132): "git reset --hard HEAD~1 # un-commit AND throw the changes away entirely". `git reset`/`HEAD~` appear nowhere in modules 1-10. ## Why it matters Binding promise: "Never reference a tool before its introducing module" (AGENTS.md). The command is benign here, but the destructive `reset` is used uncaveated a full module early. ## Proposed change Keep the command (it is structurally needed) and add a one-line forward note, matching the course's existing convention (M2 and M8 already forward-reference Module 12 for recovery): e.g. "this is `git reset --hard` — full treatment and its dangers are Module 12." Do not try to avoid the throwaway commit (needed to trigger the rejection) or use an earlier tool (none can remove a local commit on `main`). ## Acceptance criteria - [ ] Module 11's `git reset --hard HEAD~1` carries an explicit Module 12 forward pointer. - [ ] No attempt to remove the command in a way that breaks the protected-branch rejection demo. ## Affected files - `modules/11-collaboration-humans-and-agents/README.md` ## References Source finding F13 (realVotes 3/3). --- *Filed from an adversarial multi-agent course review (217 raw findings → 54 adversarially-verified survivors). Scoped for manual review; intentionally not auto-assigned to an agent.*