Source note

Self-evolving repo for team and coding agent collaboration

Code IntelligenceAutomated Software ProductionMulti Agent Software EngineeringHuman AI InteractionAgent Memory

Sepo turns a GitHub repository into a structured workspace where coding agents answer questions, implement changes, review pull requests, and iterate under human supervision. Its main contribution is persistent, traceable agent work combined with project-specific rubrics and memory.

  • Coding-agent work on long-horizon tasks can become difficult to trace, verify, and coordinate across humans and agents.
  • Teams need a shared record of requests, decisions, reviews, and code changes so that later agent runs can use project context rather than repeat prior work.
  • Users mention @sepo-agent in GitHub issues, pull requests, or discussions; the agent responds in the thread and records work as linked issues, pull requests, and comments.
  • Commands such as /implement, /review, /fix-pr, and /orchestrate support implementation, rubric-based review, repair, and repeated implement-review-fix loops.
  • The system stores agent work on an agent/memory branch, distills lessons from discussions and reviews into project rubrics, and uses those rubrics to guide later implementations.
  • Large tasks can be split into sub-issues, while scheduled jobs can inspect the repository and propose improvements that humans may review and approve before merging.
  • The provided material reports no quantitative benchmark, accuracy metric, task-completion rate, latency evaluation, or comparison with another coding-agent system.
  • It gives concrete workflow claims: a single issue can trigger an implement-review-fix loop, large issues can fan out into sub-issues, and agent changes remain organized as GitHub issues and pull requests.
  • The setup is described as a 3-step process: create or install the repository template, install the GitHub App and add a model credential, then mention the agent in an issue.
  • The example review identifies missing retry safeguards while checking rubric items and tests, but the excerpt does not report whether the resulting code passed an independent evaluation.