346 — ccteam roblog fixture contains a substantive review/fix conversation Reviewed 2026-09-06 UTC. Stronger than a role roster or illustrative scenario: a published, purportedly captured mailbox contains interlocking Chinese-language development and review reports. Runtime, model identity, code output and geographic/lab attribution remain unverified. No connection to escaped scratch-memory actors or XZ established. SOURCE AND INTEGRITY Repository https://github.com/firstintent/ccteam Pinned revision 3ed05d4ab8b31299508ce81c819f77618c0adf00 Files: crates/ccteam-core/tests/fixtures/agent_teams/config-roblog.json crates/ccteam-core/tests/fixtures/agent_teams/inbox-team-lead.json Both downloaded files matched their Git blob SHA-1 identifiers in the previously captured complete tree. This verifies correspondence to that revision, not authentic execution. The adjacent README says the files came from a host observation of Anthropic Agent Teams. Public file-history lookup returned one commit, 1dfca798583f82e0ac0652beb944765f8a1c48fc, with committer timestamp 2026-05-17T10:24:32Z. Its message says captured roblog files were moved from an ignored references location into test fixtures. This corroborates the publisher's stated provenance within the same repository; it is not independent witnessing, and Git dates can be set by the publisher. COUNTS: DO NOT CALL THIS 39 AGENT REPLIES 39 records = 13 ordinary text messages + 26 JSON idle_notification records. frontend-dev: 7 ordinary messages, 15 idle notices. reviewer: 5 ordinary messages, 9 idle notices. researcher: 1 ordinary message, 1 idle notice. pm: 0 ordinary messages, 1 idle notice. Recorded range: 2026-05-16T13:45:19.594Z to 14:12:12.541Z, about 26m53s. This is the mailbox's timestamp span, not authenticated continuous run duration. Config lists team-lead, researcher, frontend-dev, reviewer, pm. The lead model label is deepseek-v4-pro[1m]; other four labels are sonnet. These are metadata strings, not provider receipts. PM membership plus an idle notice is not evidence of substantive PM work in this excerpt. SUBSTANTIVE CHAIN Zero-based record indices below refer to the captured JSON array. 3: researcher reports a Next.js/Velite/Markdown blog architecture and proposed dependencies. 5–6: frontend-dev reports scaffold and content-layer completion, including build observations and remaining work. 9: developer explicitly says a new leader instruction crossed with its earlier completion message; it reports adding author/image/metadata fields and renaming body to content. The leader's outgoing instruction is not in this mailbox. 11: reviewer reports missing Shiki dark-mode CSS plus configuration/dependency concerns. 13: developer reports the CSS fix and shared Shiki configuration, alongside page implementation. 18: reviewer reports page review, including silent MDX-render failure and theme-toggle layout concerns. 20: developer reports visual changes and review requests. 27: reviewer reports visual-review concerns including reduced-motion handling. 31: developer says earlier findings are closed. 34: reviewer reports final review, says six historical findings are closed, but identifies new documentation and Lighthouse-verification gaps. 37: developer reports initial MVP commit, 78 files and 14,247 insertions, with deployment/content/performance checks still remaining. The review/fix references and crossed-message acknowledgment are useful conversation evidence. They do not prove edits, successful builds, actual peer delivery, or the final review's security/performance assertions. In particular, Lighthouse results are absent even in the participants' own description. INCOMPLETENESS Only the leader's incoming mailbox is present here. It lacks the leader's outgoing prompts, other members' inboxes, model requests/responses, tool invocations and full shared task ledger. Direct developer-to-reviewer requests are reported in text, not independently captured in this excerpt. Reviewer findings files and blog source paths are referenced locally but not supplied by these two fixtures. Some snapshots of task status lag other messages, consistent with asynchronous reports but not conclusive proof of concurrency. No commit hash for the claimed blog MVP is supplied. Searches for roblog with firstintent, Velite and the insertion count returned no results. The owner's public repository listing returned 32 repositories, no next page; no obvious roblog/blog match appeared in names/descriptions. This is a bounded discovery result, not proof no public output exists elsewhere. Do not access the private host named by the fixture README. ASSESSMENT AND NEXT LEAD Count this as Chinese-language, publisher-claimed captured agent-team coordination, with an explicit review/fix sequence. Do not classify it as a proven Chinese-lab swarm merely because the lead label says DeepSeek, or as cross-machine execution merely because ccteam supports that architecture. The fixture uses native Anthropic team files and may predate ccteam's integration. The same public repository listing exposes firstintent/a2a-bridge and ccteam-hub as follow-up leads. Check public artifacts and operator accounts, and distinguish original repositories from forks before counting anything separately. Higher-value next evidence would be a matching public blog commit, another mailbox covering the same task, or an independently published run output. PRESERVATION Raw fixture files and repo/history responses remain in 346-private, not copied onto the public website. Published report omits private host/session identifiers and local absolute paths. inbox-summary.json preserves reproducible counts. SHA256SUMS inventories captures. No target code or instructions executed and no external writes performed.