[aviggiano]

Closes #795

Problem

@ultrafuzz/prompts built its bundled prompt assets into dist/prompts/, while two other places expect dist/assets/prompts/:

• packages/prompts/src/assets.ts — new URL("./assets/prompts/", import.meta.url), and assets.js is emitted at dist/assets.js
• scripts/validate-audit-profile-package.mjs — requires dist/assets/prompts/review/aggregate-test-files.md and dist/assets/prompts/review/dedupe-findings.md

So the packaged lookup could never succeed, and the two directories never matched.

A workspace checkout masks it. builtInPromptRoot() falls back to ../../../.ultrafuzz/prompts/ relative to dist/assets.js, which resolves to the repository's own .ultrafuzz/prompts. Inside a sealed workflow execution snapshot the package is relocated under modules/@ultrafuzz/…, so that same relative path lands at …/runtime/node_modules/.ultrafuzz/prompts, both lookups fail, and the run dies during prompt rendering:

render frame: built-in prompt assets were not found in the package
(<snapshot>/modules/@ultrafuzz/runtime/node_modules/@ultrafuzz/prompts/dist/assets/prompts/)
or source tree
(<snapshot>/modules/@ultrafuzz/runtime/node_modules/.ultrafuzz/prompts/)

Change

Point the build destination at dist/assets/prompts, the location the resolver and the package validator already agree on. files: ["dist"] already ships it.

Verification

• After a clean rebuild, dist/assets/prompts/ is populated (6 entries) and both files named by validate-audit-profile-package.mjs exist. Before the change the directory did not exist at all.
• The packaged branch of builtInPromptRoot() now resolves, so the source-tree fallback is no longer load-bearing outside a checkout.

Note

This was found downstream of #793: with that confinement bug fixed, launches got far enough to render prompts and hit this. The two are independent and this PR stands alone.

Greptile Summary

The PR aligns bundled prompt assets with the packaged paths used by both prompt and output-contract resolution.

• Copies the prompt tree into dist/assets/prompts.
• Resolves output-contract templates from the new packaged location while retaining legacy fallbacks.
• Adds a relocated-package rendering test that excludes the repository fallback.

Confidence Score: 5/5

The PR appears safe to merge.

The previously reported packaged output-contract failure no longer remains: the build copies templates into dist/assets/prompts, the resolver checks that exact location, and the relocated-package test exercises rendering without a source-tree fallback.

Important Files Changed

Filename	Overview
packages/prompts/package.json	The build now copies bundled prompts into the directory consumed by packaged asset resolution.
packages/prompts/src/render.ts	Output-contract template lookup now includes the packaged dist/assets/prompts layout, resolving the previously reported failure.
packages/prompts/test/render.test.ts	The added test relocates the built package without a repository fallback and verifies packaged output-contract rendering.

Flowchart

%%{init: {'theme': 'neutral'}}%%
flowchart LR
  A[Source prompt assets] -->|package build| B[dist/assets/prompts]
  B --> C[Built-in prompt resolver]
  B --> D[Output-contract template resolver]
  C --> E[Packaged prompt rendering]
  D --> E

Loading

_{Reviews (2): Last reviewed commit: "fix(prompts): resolve output-contract te..." | Re-trigger Greptile}

[greptile-apps]

Output-contract templates remain unresolved

When a clean installed or relocated package calls renderPrompt, this build no longer produces the dist/prompts/_templates/output-contract directory that the unconditional template resolver still reads, causing every prompt render to throw unable to locate the packaged output contract templates.

Knowledge Base Used: Prompt library

Prompt To Fix With AI

This is a comment left during a code review.
Path: packages/prompts/package.json
Line: 19

Comment:
**Output-contract templates remain unresolved**

When a clean installed or relocated package calls `renderPrompt`, this build no longer produces the `dist/prompts/_templates/output-contract` directory that the unconditional template resolver still reads, causing every prompt render to throw `unable to locate the packaged output contract templates`.

**Knowledge Base Used:** [Prompt library](https://app.greptile.com/monad-foudnation/-/custom-context/knowledge-base/monad-developers/ultrafuzz/-/docs/prompt-library.md)

---

For each issue above, determine whether it is valid and should be fixed. If so, fix it directly.

[aviggiano]

Pushed a second commit: this PR as it stood was incomplete and takes runs down mid-flight.

Moving the prompt tree to dist/assets/prompts fixes builtInPromptRoot(), but outputContractTemplateRoot() in the same file still looks at dist/prompts, which this build no longer emits. The repository fallback (../../../.ultrafuzz/prompts/...) then becomes the only resolvable candidate.

That fallback exists in a source checkout, so rendering succeeds at submission time and the test suite passes. It does not exist in a sealed execution snapshot, where the package sits at modules/@ultrafuzz/prompts/dist and ../../../ reaches modules/.

A campaign run therefore submitted cleanly, ran for 1h25m to 24/91 nodes, and then died the first time dynamic expansion re-rendered the workflow from inside the snapshot:

WORKFLOW_RENDER_FAILED: unable to locate the packaged output contract templates from
  .../execution-snapshots/<id>/modules/@ultrafuzz/prompts/dist

The fix adds the packaged layout as the first candidate and keeps both existing ones.

Also worth noting why the existing installed package layout test could not catch this: it stages assets at dist/prompts by hand, which is the layout this PR removes. The added test copies the built dist into a directory deep enough that the repository fallback cannot resolve, reproducing the snapshot condition. I verified it fails without the resolver change and passes with it. 103/103 prompts tests, format clean.

[aviggiano]

LGTM