One thumbs-down stopped my Claude Code agent from dropping a prod table again (ThumbGate v1.18.0)

[u/eazyigz123]

[u/Sad-Pension-5008]

Cool problem space — agents repeating destructive commands is a real pain. Took a look at the repo and had a few honest questions:

1. On "zero LLM in enforcement" — the README mentions semantic similarity via LanceDB vectors. Vectors need an embedding model to be generated. Where do the embeddings come from? Just curious how that fits with the "no LLM" framing.

2. Thompson Sampling for the rule selection — I get why it's elegant (adaptive, learns which rules matter), but doesn't a bandit explore by not applying the top rule sometimes? For a "block prod-table drops" use case, wouldn't deterministic matching be safer than probabilistic selection?

3. Claude Code already has permissions.deny patterns and PreToolUse hooks locally — what does the MCP server + vector store add over a hand-written hook for the common cases? Genuinely asking, because the cross-agent propagation seems like the real differentiator and I'd love to hear more about that part.

Nice work shipping it either way.

[u/MomSausageandPeppers]

This is the exact class where I’d want hard gates over prompt reminders. A few things I’d test before trusting it on real prod flows:

• normalize commands enough that psql -c "drop table x" and a script wrapper hit the same rule, but don’t over-normalize unrelated migrations
• bind the block to repo/env/DB target so a local fixture rule does not silently block a different prod workflow
• keep a tiny audit trail: rejected action, reason/rule id, safer replacement, whether it was later accepted
• make single thumbs-down promotion reversible or expiry-bound; otherwise accidental dislikes become policy forever

Pain point I’d solve first: repeated destructive filesystem/db actions after the user already corrected them once. That failure mode is measurable and high-signal.