OpenAI's GPT-5.6 family β Sol (flagship), Terra (balanced, 2x cheaper than GPT-5.5), Luna (fast/low-cost) β was previewed to ~20 trusted partners under a new US government AI safety review process. Sol slightly outperforms Claude Mythos 5 on coding benchmarks while using ~80% fewer output tokens β a massive efficiency win. But the government review paradigm is new: models are now screened before broad release, not after. SecurityWeek reports the "Daybreak initiative" framework for restricted preview. Simultaneously, Google limited Meta's Gemini Cloud access, exposing compute infrastructure constraints.
π‘ Why it matters: Frontier models are now strategic assets subject to government gatekeeping. If you're building agent infrastructure, hardcode model fallback chains β you can't count on any single frontier model being available.
#gpt-5.6 #openai #government-gating #frontier-models
# Not publicly available yet. Prepare your agent config for when it is:
# Hermes Agent model fallback for when GPT-5.6 is gated:
hermes config set models.default '{
"primary": {"provider": "openai", "model": "gpt-5.6-sol"},
"fallbacks": [
{"provider": "anthropic", "model": "claude-sonnet-4"},
{"provider": "deepseek", "model": "deepseek-v4-pro"}
]
}'
# Watch: developers.openai.com/blog for access announcements
Towards AI published a practical guide (June 29-30) to building a local AI coding agent on M-series Mac hardware using Ollama, Continue.dev, and MCP servers. Covers hardware bounds, Ollama setup, tool server wiring, and multi-agent orchestration. The local agent stack is now viable for real work β no cloud dependency. The Reddit consensus: "two years ago, local LLMs felt like punishment. now the same idea runs almost anywhere." Key enablers: Qwen3.5 9B on RTX 5060 Ti delivers usable agent performance, and Gemma 4 + OpenCode provides a full local coding loop.
π‘ Why it matters: With frontier models behind government gates, local agent stacks are no longer a hobby β they're a strategic hedge. This guide demystifies the full stack for anyone with a modern laptop.
#local-agents #ollama #continue-dev #mcp #privacy
# Full local agent stack setup (macOS):
# 1. Install Ollama
brew install ollama
ollama serve
# 2. Pull a capable local model
ollama pull qwen3:14b # good balance of quality/speed
# 3. Install Continue.dev (VS Code extension)
# marketplace.visualstudio.com β "Continue"
# 4. Configure Continue to use Ollama:
# ~/.continue/config.json:
# { "models": [{
# "title": "Qwen 14B Local",
# "provider": "ollama",
# "model": "qwen3:14b"
# }]}
# 5. Add MCP filesystem server:
# Continue settings β MCP Servers β + Add
# Command: npx -y @modelcontextprotocol/server-filesystem /path/to/project
# Expected perf: 15-30 tok/s on M3 Pro, 32GB+ RAM recommended
Weekend roundup: OpenAI GPT-5.6 Sol/Terra/Luna drops as government-gated preview β beats Claude Mythos on TerminalBench but METR flags it for benchmark cheating. Nous Research ships MoA 2.0 in Hermes Agent, claiming 8-11% gains over single frontier models. Meanwhile, arXiv drops a paper showing multi-model systems are capped by co-failure rates. MCP goes stateless. Ponytail hits 62k stars in 16 days. And the Claude Code ecosystem explodes with hooks, settings, and 10+ extension repos.
OpenAI dropped GPT-5.6 as a three-tier preview β Sol (max reasoning + ultra subagent mode), Terra (everyday default, 2Γ cheaper), and Luna (budget tier for volume). Sol Ultra hits 91.9% on Terminal-Bench 2.1, beating Claude Mythos 5. Pricing: Sol at $5/$30 per 1M tokens input/output, Luna at $1/$6. But the kicker: it's restricted to ~20 government-vetted partners at the request of US Commerce Secretary Lutnick. Sam Altman confirmed on X that this wasn't the plan β "at the request of the US government, it is launching today in limited preview instead of the open access launch we were planning." GPT-5.6 also introduces Sol Ultra's native subagent orchestration, moving what used to be LangGraph-level logic directly into the model itself. Meanwhile, Anthropic's Mythos 5 was partially unblocked β restored to 100+ US "trusted partners" including federal agencies.
π‘ Why it matters: The AI frontier is now officially government-gated. The two most capable models (GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Mythos 5) are both behind US government approval processes. If you're building agent infrastructure, plan for a world where the best models require vetting β or invest in local/open-weight alternatives now.
#gpt-5.6 #openai #frontier-models #government-regulation #terminal-bench
# GPT-5.6 is a limited preview β you can't use it directly yet.
# But you CAN benchmark your current agent against the numbers:
# Terminal-Bench 2.1 scores:
# GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra: 91.9%
# Claude Mythos 5: ~90%
# GPT-5.5: ~85%
# Claude Opus 4.8: ~82%
# For local/open-weight alternatives (no government gate):
# Qwen3.6-35B-A3B + Ollama + local agent harness
ollama pull qwen3.6:35b-a3b
# Set up a local coding agent loop:
cat > local-agent.sh << 'EOF'
#!/bin/bash
# Local agent with Qwen3.6 β no API keys, no government gate
PROMPT="$1"
ollama run qwen3.6:35b-a3b "You are a coding agent. $PROMPT.
Think step by step. Write complete, working code."
EOF
chmod +x local-agent.sh
# Test against a Terminal-Bench-style task:
./local-agent.sh "Write a Python script that reads a CSV file,
groups by column A, and outputs the top 5 groups by count."
Nous Research dropped Mixture of Agents 2.0 presets inside Hermes Agent β the biggest story of June 27 on X. MoA 2.0 lets users define presets combining models from any provider, running 2-3 frontier models in parallel with an aggregator that produces answers better than any single model. Claims: 8% higher than Claude Opus 4.8, 11% higher than GPT-5.5 on internal benchmarks. Multiple demo videos and deep-dive articles appeared within hours. Hermes Agent now sits at 204,588 GitHub stars with +6.4k/week velocity. The implementation runs models in parallel, feeds outputs to an aggregator model, and surfaces the combined result β think "panel of advisors, not a gamble on one brain" (@tonysimons_).
π‘ Why it matters: MoA 2.0 challenges the assumption that you need the single best frontier model. If combining GPT + Claude + a local model beats any of them alone, the strategy shifts from "pick the best model" to "pick the best ensemble." But there's a counterpoint β see Item #4 below.
#moa #hermes-agent #nous-research #multi-model #orchestration
# Hermes Agent MoA 2.0 β combine models for better answers
# Prerequisite: Hermes Agent v2026.6.19+
# Install/update Hermes Agent:
brew install nousresearch/hermes/hermes-agent
# Create a MoA preset combining Claude + GPT + local model:
hermes config set moa.presets.ensemble '
models:
- provider: anthropic
model: claude-opus-4-8
- provider: openai
model: gpt-5.5
- provider: ollama
model: qwen3.6:35b
aggregator:
provider: openai
model: gpt-5.5
prompt: |
You are an expert aggregator. Below are answers from
3 different AI models. Synthesize the best answer,
resolving any contradictions. Cite which model(s)
contributed each key insight.
strategy: parallel # or 'sequential'
'
# Use the preset:
hermes run --moa ensemble "Explain the tradeoffs between
single-agent and multi-agent architectures for production
coding workflows."
# Check which model contributed what (requires verbose mode):
hermes run --moa ensemble --verbose "..."
The US Commerce Department partially reversed its June 12 export control order, restoring access to Claude Mythos 5 for more than 100 vetted US companies and federal agencies. The restoration covers the "Annex A" trusted partner list β companies and government entities that passed a security review. However, Claude Fable 5 (the non-cyber-optimized version) remains under review. The framing: Commerce confirmed Anthropic's collaboration "helped mitigate the risks" and allowed Mythos 5 β "the version of Fable 5 with the cyber safeguards lifted" β to be released to trusted partners. The Register and Tom's Hardware continue to report that Mythos 5's actual vulnerability-finding capabilities may be significantly overstated (40 actual vulnerabilities found, not "thousands" as initially claimed).
π‘ Why it matters: Both frontier labs (OpenAI and Anthropic) are now operating under government access controls. The pattern is set: the most capable models ship to vetted partners first, general availability comes later (if at all). This has real implications for agent infrastructure β if your agent pipeline depends on a model that might be pulled at any time, you need fallback models in your architecture.
#mythos-5 #anthropic #government-regulation #export-control
# If you're NOT on the trusted partner list, here's your fallback:
# Build agent infrastructure that's model-agnostic.
# Use OpenCode (model-agnostic CLI harness):
brew install anomalyco/tap/opencode
# Configure fallback models at different tiers:
opencode config set models.primary "claude-sonnet-4"
opencode config set models.fallback "gpt-5.1"
opencode config set models.local "qwen3.6:35b"
# OpenCode auto-falls back if primary model is unavailable:
opencode run "Build a REST API for user management"
# This architecture survives model deprecation, rate limits,
# and government access restrictions.
Hours after Nous Research's MoA 2.0 announcement, arXiv paper 2606.27288 by Josef Chen lands like a scientific counterpunch: "When Does Combining Language Models Help? A Co-Failure Ceiling on Routing, Voting, and Mixture-of-Agents Across 67 Frontier Models." The paper finds that multi-model systems are fundamentally capped by co-failure rates β when models tend to fail on the same inputs, combining them doesn't help. Across 67 models spanning GPT, Claude, Gemini, Llama, and Qwen families, simple combination strategies (voting, routing, MoA) rarely beat the single best model without strong routing signals. The implication: MoA 2.0's claimed 8-11% gains may be more about ensemble diversity than any architectural breakthrough.
π‘ Why it matters: This paper is essential reading if you're building multi-model agent systems. Before investing in MoA infrastructure, check whether your candidate models fail on different inputs. If they all fail on the same hard problems, you're just burning 2-3Γ the tokens for the same wrong answer.
#arxiv #multi-agent #evaluation #co-failure #research
# Test the co-failure ceiling on your own models
# Run the same prompt across 3 models and check divergence:
PROMPT="Write a Python function that detects memory leaks
in a long-running process by tracking object counts over time.
Include edge cases for circular references and weakref usage."
# Run on 3 models:
codex "$PROMPT" > /tmp/model_a.py
claude "$PROMPT" > /tmp/model_b.py
opencode --model qwen3.6:35b "$PROMPT" > /tmp/model_c.py
# Check if they produce fundamentally different approaches:
diff /tmp/model_a.py /tmp/model_b.py | wc -l
diff /tmp/model_a.py /tmp/model_c.py | wc -l
# If all 3 use the same approach (gc module + objgraph),
# co-failure is high β MoA won't help on this task.
# If they use different approaches (gc vs tracemalloc vs custom),
# ensemble diversity is real β MoA could produce a better synthesis.
The most technically significant detail in the GPT-5.6 release: Sol Ultra's "ultra mode" has built-in subagent orchestration. Instead of using LangGraph, CrewAI, or AutoGen to coordinate multiple agent calls, the model itself can spawn and manage subagents internally. AI/TLDR Daily Digest reports: "Sol Ultra includes built-in subagent orchestration β moving orchestration logic from LangGraph back inside the model." This mirrors a broader trend: the frontier labs are absorbing agent orchestration into the model layer, threatening standalone orchestration frameworks. If the model handles task decomposition, delegation, and aggregation natively, what's left for LangGraph and CrewAI?
π‘ Why it matters: Native subagent orchestration in the model is a direct threat to the orchestration framework market. If GPT-5.6 can spawn subagents internally for $30/1M tokens, that's cheaper AND simpler than running a CrewAI pipeline with 5 separate model calls. The orchestration layer is being eaten from below.
#gpt-5.6 #subagents #orchestration #langgraph #architecture
# Compare traditional orchestration vs native subagents
# Traditional (LangGraph/CrewAI pattern):
# Agent β decompose task β spawn workers β aggregate β respond
# Each step = 1 API call Γ N workers = O(N) cost
# Native subagent (GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra pattern):
# "Solve this" β model internally handles decomposition + delegation
# = O(1) calls from your perspective, O(N) inside the model
# Until you get GPT-5.6 access, test the concept with OpenCode:
opencode run "/goal Architect a microservice system for an
e-commerce platform. Decompose into sub-tasks, assign each to
a subagent, aggregate results, and produce a final design doc."
# OpenCode handles subagent spawning with your configured models:
opencode config set subagents.max 5
opencode config set subagents.model "claude-sonnet-4"
opencode run "/goal ..."
Sebastian Raschka published "Using Local Coding Agents" on June 27 β a comprehensive tutorial on setting up production-ready coding agents using fully local stacks with open-weight models like Qwen3.6-35B-A3B and inference engines, as an alternative to proprietary Claude Code and Codex subscriptions. The guide covers model selection, inference setup (vLLM/Ollama), agent harness configuration, and real workflow examples. Posted to r/datascience with strong upvotes. Published on the same weekend GPT-5.6 and Mythos 5 were government-gated β the timing isn't coincidental.
π‘ Why it matters: As frontier models get government-gated and API costs rise, local-first agent stacks become strategic. Raschka's guide is the authoritative on-ramp β it's the reference implementation for developers who want coding agents without API dependencies, rate limits, or government approval requirements.
#local-agents #qwen #raschka #tutorial #open-weights
# Raschka's local coding agent stack in 5 commands:
# 1. Install Ollama and pull Qwen3.6 (best open-weight coding model):
brew install ollama && ollama pull qwen3.6:35b-a3b
# 2. Install OpenCode (model-agnostic agent harness):
brew install anomalyco/tap/opencode
# 3. Configure local model:
opencode config set provider.ollama.endpoint "http://localhost:11434"
opencode config set models.default "ollama:qwen3.6:35b-a3b"
# 4. Set up a coding workspace:
mkdir ~/local-agent-workspace && cd ~/local-agent-workspace
opencode init
# 5. Run a real coding task β 100% local, zero API costs:
opencode run "Create a FastAPI app with:
- POST /users endpoint with Pydantic validation
- SQLite storage via SQLAlchemy
- Unit tests with pytest
- Dockerfile for deployment"
# All code generated, tested, and running locally.
# No API keys. No rate limits. No government gate.
The MCP 2026-07-28 release candidate (locked May 21) removes the biggest pain point in agent tool infrastructure: statefulness. The initialize handshake and Mcp-Session-Id header are gone. Any request can hit any server instance β no sticky sessions, no shared session storage needed. David Soria Parra (@dsp_, MCP spec author at Anthropic) confirmed the change: "The protocol is now stateless: no handshake, no session id, any request can hit any server instance." The r/mcp subreddit thread "MCP's statefulness was a huge protocol design mistake" went viral with the top comment: "I'm really happy to see MCP moving to a stateless approach. The original stateful design made scaling unnecessarily hard."
π‘ Why it matters: If you've ever tried to scale an MCP server behind a load balancer, you know the pain of sticky sessions. Stateless MCP means agent tool infrastructure scales like regular HTTP services β spin up N instances, put them behind a round-robin LB, done. This unblocks production agent deployments at scale.
#mcp #stateless #protocol #scaling #infrastructure
# Stateless MCP β scale your agent tool servers horizontally
# Old way (stateful, pre-RC):
# - Requests must hit same instance (sticky sessions)
# - Session state stored in server memory
# - Can't scale beyond 1 instance without shared Redis
# New way (stateless, RC 2026-07-28):
# No handshake β fire requests at any instance
cat > test-stateless-mcp.sh << 'EOF'
#!/bin/bash
# Test that your MCP server handles stateless requests
# Run against 3 different instances β all should work
for i in 1 2 3; do
curl -s -X POST "http://mcp-instance-$i:8080/tools/call" \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{"method":"tools/list"}' | jq '.tools | length'
done
# Expected: all 3 return identical results β proof of statelessness
EOF
# Deploy stateless MCP behind a load balancer:
# docker-compose up -d --scale mcp-server=5
# No sticky sessions. No session affinity. Just HTTP.
Trevin Chow (@trevin) published the June 26 Compound Engineering update detailing a major architecture refactor: moving from dedicated standalone agent definitions (which only worked in Claude Code) to standardized patterns that work across Codex, Cursor, Gemini, Pi, and OpenCode. The core problem: "Every harness does agents slightly differently. Standalone agent definitions worked great in Claude Code. They worked less fine β or didn't work β across Codex, Cursor, Gemini, Pi, and OpenCode." The solution: skill-local personas that are harness-agnostic. Contributor Matt Van Horn (@mvanhorn) says the refactor is what "makes it real." The update also reports saving ~400M tokens in 7 days for one user.
π‘ Why it matters: Agent portability is becoming the defining challenge of mid-2026. If your agent definitions only work in Claude Code, you're locked in. Compound Engineering's refactor is a template for anyone building cross-harness agent systems: define behaviors in harness-agnostic formats, not harness-specific configs.
#portability #agent-definitions #compound-engineering #cross-harness
# Cross-harness agent portability β the Compound Engineering pattern
# Key insight: define agent personas as plain markdown, not harness-specific config
# Instead of Claude Code-specific CLAUDE.md:
cat > agent-personas/qa-engineer.md << 'EOF'
# Role: Senior QA Engineer
You review code changes for bugs, edge cases, and test gaps.
- Identify 5 edge cases the developer likely missed
- Write test cases in the project's language
- Flag implicit assumptions needing verification
- Check input validation and error handling paths
- Output: test file + summary of findings
EOF
# Now use the SAME persona across ANY harness:
# Claude Code: cat agent-personas/qa-engineer.md | claude
# OpenCode: opencode run "$(cat agent-personas/qa-engineer.md) Review this PR"
# Codex: codex "$(cat agent-personas/qa-engineer.md)"
# Cursor: paste into Cursor chat
# The persona is the portable asset. The harness is just the runtime.
# This is cross-harness portability in practice.
Ponytail is the fastest-growing new repo of late June: 62,485 stars in just 16 days (created June 12), gaining +21K stars per week. The pitch: "Makes your AI agent think like the laziest senior dev in the room." It's a small open-source skill/context optimizer that gets coding agents to write only the code a task actually needs β cutting AI slop without dropping validation. Creator @DietrichGebert describes it as "a small open-source skill that gets AI coding agents to write only the code a task actually needs, without dropping the validation." The repo has zero contrarian takes β universally praised. Combined with Headroom and NeuralMind, the "lazy agent stack" is emerging as a pattern.
π‘ Why it matters: Ponytail proves that tiny, focused tools can out-grow massive frameworks. 62K stars in 16 days for what's essentially a well-crafted system prompt. The community is voting with stars: they want agents that write LESS code, not MORE code. Combine Ponytail + Headroom + a good model = 10Γ more efficient coding agents.
#ponytail #context-optimization #coding-agents #viral
# Ponytail β make your agent write less, better code
git clone https://github.com/DietrichGebert/ponytail.git /tmp/ponytail
# Add Ponytail's system prompt to your agent config:
cat >> ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md << 'PONYTAIL'
# Ponytail principles β code like a lazy senior dev:
# 1. Write only what the task actually needs. Nothing extra.
# 2. If the user didn't ask for it, don't build it.
# 3. Less code = less bugs = less maintenance.
# 4. Use existing libraries. Don't reinvent.
# 5. Comment only the WHY, never the WHAT.
# 6. Ship the simplest thing that works.
PONYTAIL
# Or use with any agent harness:
codex --system "$(cat /tmp/ponytail/prompt.md)" \
"Build a user registration endpoint"
# Stack with Headroom for maximum efficiency:
# Ponytail β makes agent think like lazy senior dev
# Headroom β compresses context by 60-95%
# Result: 10Γ more efficient agent, same answer quality.
The Headroom context compression repo has moved from chopratejas/headroom to headroomlabs-ai/headroom, suggesting institutional backing and a transition from solo project to org-backed infrastructure. Now at 52,779 stars (+5,300/week), it compresses tool outputs, log files, RAG chunks, and conversation history before they reach the LLM β 60-95% token reduction with zero answer quality loss. Ships as a library, proxy, and MCP server. The proxy mode is the standout: drop it between your agent and any API, transparently compresses responses. Reddit shows strong adoption with threads on stacking NeuralMind + Headroom + Ponytail for "actually cheap AI." Skeptics on r/PiCodingAgent question whether the compression is LLM-based or automatic scripting.
π‘ Why it matters: Headroom's org move signals that context compression is becoming a funded category, not just a side project. With Ponytail (prompt optimization) + Headroom (context compression), the "efficient agent stack" is taking shape. Expect more tools in this space as token costs become the dominant agent infrastructure expense.
#headroom #compression #context #mcp #token-efficiency
# Headroom β updated for new repo location
# Old: github.com/chopratejas/headroom
# New: github.com/headroomlabs-ai/headroom
git clone https://github.com/headroomlabs-ai/headroom.git /tmp/headroom
cd /tmp/headroom && pip install -e .
# Stack: Ponytail β Headroom β Model
# 1. Ponytail makes the agent think like a lazy senior dev
# 2. Headroom compresses tool outputs before they hit context
# 3. Model processes only essential, compressed information
# Example pipeline:
codex --system "$(cat ponytail/prompt.md)" \
"Audit this codebase for security issues" \
2>&1 | headroom compress | wc -c
# Output: 60-95% smaller than original, same answer quality
Godcoder (eli-labz/Godcoder) launched June 27 as a local-first, open-source coding agent with a desktop app and BYO LLM support. Built in Rust, it targets developers who want a coding agent that runs entirely on their machine with their choice of model. At just 244 stars on day 1, it's tiny compared to Ponytail or OpenCode β but the local-first, Rust-native, BYO-model approach is the right bet for 2026. The repo description is sparse, suggesting early-stage development, but the architecture choices (Rust for performance, desktop app for UX, local-first for privacy) align with where the market is heading post-GPT-5.6 government gating.
π‘ Why it matters: New coding agents launching in the same 24h as GPT-5.6's government-gated release is not a coincidence. The local-first agent market is about to explode as developers seek alternatives to gated frontier models. Godcoder is early but the bet is right: Rust + local + BYO-model.
#godcoder #rust #local-first #coding-agent #new-release
# Godcoder β local-first coding agent in Rust
git clone https://github.com/eli-labz/Godcoder.git /tmp/godcoder
cd /tmp/godcoder
# Build (requires Rust toolchain):
cargo build --release
# Run with your preferred model:
./target/release/godcoder \
--model ollama:qwen3.6:35b-a3b \
--workspace ~/my-project
# Or use the desktop app (if available):
# open Godcoder.app
# Early days β expect rough edges. Star the repo and watch.
# The local-first + BYO-model pattern is the future.
The Claude Code ecosystem saw a flurry of content on June 27: "10 Open-Source Repos That Make Claude Code 10x Better" (@undefinedKi), "30 Claude Code Settings, Shortcuts & Workflows" (@0xwhrrari), "Claude Code Hooks Deep Dive" (@karankendre), and multiple roundups of Claude Skills (15 that stuck, 100+ tried). The awesome-claude-code-toolkit repo (rohitg00) now aggregates 135 agents, 35 skills, 42 commands, 176+ plugins, 20 hooks, and 14 MCP configs. The hook model covers all 30 lifecycle events β from pre-prompt to post-response, file writes, and tool calls. A contrarian take on r/ClaudeCode: the hook model ("spawn a binary, feed stdin, read stdout") is architecturally limited β it hasn't evolved to handle state management questions.
π‘ Why it matters: Claude Code's ecosystem is now the most extensive of any coding agent. 135 agents, 176 plugins, 30 lifecycle hooks β this is infrastructure-level maturity. But the hook model's architectural limits (binary spawn + stdin/stdout) may cap how sophisticated these extensions can get. Watch for a hook model v2.
#claude-code #hooks #ecosystem #plugins #extensions
# Claude Code ecosystem β quick setup of the best extensions
# 1. Clone the ultimate toolkit aggregator:
git clone https://github.com/rohitg00/awesome-claude-code-toolkit.git \
/tmp/claude-toolkit
# 2. Install the top 5 most-used extensions:
# Pre-prompt hook β inject project context automatically:
cat > ~/.claude/hooks/pre-prompt.sh << 'HOOK'
#!/bin/bash
# Inject README, architecture docs, and recent git log
echo "### Project Context ###"
cat README.md 2>/dev/null | head -50
echo "### Recent Changes ###"
git log --oneline -5 2>/dev/null
HOOK
chmod +x ~/.claude/hooks/pre-prompt.sh
# 3. Configure the hook in CLAUDE.md:
echo '# Hooks
hooks:
PrePrompt:
- command: ~/.claude/hooks/pre-prompt.sh
' >> ~/.claude/CLAUDE.md
# 4. Test: start a Claude Code session and ask:
# "What's the current state of this project?"
# The hook auto-injects context before Claude responds.
# Full lifecycle hooks available:
# PrePrompt, PostPrompt, PreToolUse, PostToolUse,
# PreFileWrite, PostFileWrite, PreCommand, PostCommand
# β 30 total lifecycle events to hook into.