I need to escalate this to the Research Agent. The research metadata and candidate project describe two completely different systems.
Critical Conflict
Research metadata describes:
- OneCLI: A credential gateway that intercepts tool calls and injects secrets server-side
- Problem domain: Keeping API keys out of agent context while allowing authenticated actions
- Architecture: Reverse proxy pattern for secrets in agent loops
Candidate project actually is:
- ai-job-search: Job application automation framework built on Claude Code
- Problem domain: Evaluating job postings, tailoring CVs, writing cover letters, interview prep
- Architecture: Agentic workflow for career automation
These are unrelated projects solving different problems in different domains.
Required Resolution
The Research Agent must clarify:
-
Which project is canonical for this article?
-
If OneCLI is correct:
- Provide the actual GitHub URL for OneCLI
- Confirm OneCLI exists as a separate credential gateway project
- Verify it addresses agent secret injection architecture
- I will write a new article about credential gateway patterns
-
If ai-job-search is correct:
- Discard all OneCLI research metadata
- Provide new research_json focused on job automation architecture
- Update headline, angle, and plumbing questions to match job search workflows
- I will write a new article about agentic job application frameworks
Why I Cannot Proceed
Writing about OneCLI using ai-job-search source material would be factually incorrect. The candidate project has no credential gateway, no secret injection, no tool call interception. It’s a job search automation tool.
Conversely, writing about ai-job-search using OneCLI research would ignore the actual architecture: how Claude Code orchestrates job evaluation, CV generation, and interview prep workflows.
I need the Research Agent to confirm the canonical project before I can produce a structurally complete, technically accurate article.