Project workflow and communication

Browser Workflow System (BWS)

The browser transport between projects and coordinators.

Implemented · tested (documented) · runs on the operator's workstation.

Many businesses run on web portals with no API. I built a browser-automation system that works inside the operator's own logged-in browser: a person teaches a workflow once, approves every step, and the system replays it or captures data visibly. It never touches passwords or bypasses protections, and every action is logged.

BROWSER WORKFLOW
  1. 01 Open and verify the browser surface
  2. 02 Execute defined browser steps
  3. 03 Capture the result and hand-off evidence
Result Execution status and an artifact reference
BWSRelay
Coordinator exchangeInstruction and response transport; session context
Review bundleArtifact presented for review; the decision returns to the workflow
Feedback loop
Conceptual Illustration A browser workflow with a return path; not a capture of the software.

Purpose

BWS is the browser transport: it owns the browser surfaces and carries messages and review bundles to and from the GPT coordinators.

The problem

The coordinators are reached only through a browser. Work has to travel there and back reliably, exactly once, with a person in charge of sign-in.

What it contributes

Project communication: the transport between PWS and the coordinators. Bringing up a new coordinator is a repeatable BWS procedure with one operator-only step; PWS decides when one is needed.

Principal capabilities

  • Integrations

    Written in TypeScript on Playwright and split into two processes: a persistent Browser Agent that keeps one headed browser alive, and a Controller that sends it typed commands over a local socket through a serial queue. The agent attaches only to a browser the operator launched, so the human owns authentication; a credential-field guard and a no-hidden-API policy are enforced in code.

  • Verification

    File channels give exactly-once claims, crash-resumable requests and generation-numbered socket ownership. The message-submission sequence is proven by mutation tests to send at most once, and an append-only, hash-chained context log lets the system resume after a crash.

    Exactly-once channels
  • Automation

    Teaching stages each step for explicit approval and produces versioned workflow files with declared inputs; replay stops on typed failures.

Implementation evidence

  • The coordinator loop has run unattended end to end since 26 August 2026.
  • Implemented and tested (documented); runs on the operator's workstation.

Back to Project workflow and communication

Visuals

BROWSER WORKFLOW
  1. 01 Open and verify the browser surface
  2. 02 Execute defined browser steps
  3. 03 Capture the result and hand-off evidence
Result Execution status and an artifact reference
BWSRelay
Coordinator exchangeInstruction and response transport; session context
Review bundleArtifact presented for review; the decision returns to the workflow
Feedback loop
Conceptual Illustration A browser workflow with a return path; not a capture of the software.

Case studies

  • Reliability

    Exactly-once channels

    Implemented · tested (documented) · runs on the operator's workstation

    When two programs hand work to each other through files and a socket, a crash or a retry can make the same message go out twice. These channels make every request claimable exactly once and resumable after a crash, and the message-sending sequence is proven to send at most once.

  • Workflow engine

    Workflow authority: governed AI-assisted delivery

    In daily use · coordinating the operator's project sessions and verifying their work against evidence

    AI coding agents are fast but hard to trust. My delivery process makes every unit of work produce sealed, verifiable evidence; an independent AI reviewer rules on it; nothing advances without that ruling; and only a person decides on credentials, spending or anything irreversible. The result is auditable delivery instead of unchecked automation.

  • Review & assurance

    Engineering Review & Assurance System

    Review surface implemented · 971 proof assertions executed across its 17 specified parts

    A provenance-first review surface: every claim about the state of a project shows where it came from, and approval can only come from an authorised reviewer, never from the system being reviewed.

Capabilities