Converge the intent corpus under context/intent

.github/workflows/ci.yml

@@ -60,12 +60,12 @@ jobs:
         # corpus from a missing one. Fail on absence explicitly, before checking.
         run: |
           set -euo pipefail
-          test -d intent || { echo "::error::corpus directory 'intent/' does not exist"; exit 1; }
+          test -d context/intent || { echo "::error::corpus directory 'context/intent/' does not exist"; exit 1; }
 
       - name: strict check reports no diagnostics
         run: |
           set -euo pipefail
-          ./target/release/intent check intent --profile strict --json > report.json || {
+          ./target/release/intent check context/intent --profile strict --json > report.json || {
             cat report.json >&2; exit 1;
           }
           jq -e '
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ jobs:
         # a wrong path, and non-empty only when artifacts were genuinely read.
         run: |
           set -euo pipefail
-          ./target/release/intent graph intent --json > graph.json
+          ./target/release/intent graph context/intent --json > graph.json
           nodes="$(jq '.nodes | length' graph.json)"
           echo "graph nodes: $nodes"
           jq -e '(.nodes | length) > 0' graph.json > /dev/null \
@@ -97,8 +97,8 @@ jobs:
       - name: fixtures and the enforcement schema are present
         run: |
           set -euo pipefail
-          fixtures="intent/15-evaluation/semantic-review"
-          schema="intent/16-enforcement/review-result.schema.json"
+          fixtures="context/intent/15-evaluation/semantic-review"
+          schema="context/intent/16-enforcement/review-result.schema.json"
           test -d "$fixtures" || { echo "::error::missing fixtures root: $fixtures"; exit 1; }
           test -f "$fixtures/fixture-format.md" || { echo "::error::missing fixture-format.md"; exit 1; }
           test -f "$schema" || { echo "::error::missing review-result schema: $schema"; exit 1; }
@@ -107,8 +107,8 @@ jobs:
         # Fully offline: every schema is a local file, so none is ever fetched.
         run: |
           set -euo pipefail
-          fixtures="intent/15-evaluation/semantic-review"
-          schema="intent/16-enforcement/review-result.schema.json"
+          fixtures="context/intent/15-evaluation/semantic-review"
+          schema="context/intent/16-enforcement/review-result.schema.json"
           found=0
           for fixture in "$fixtures"/*/; do
             [ -d "$fixture" ] || continue

README.md

@@ -10,9 +10,9 @@ people who were there. The problem is not that the knowledge is missing; it is
 that nothing says which of those places is authoritative, so none of them can be
 trusted, and none can be checked.
 
-`intent/` is that contract, specified in itself. The corpus in this repository
-uses its own conventions to define its own conventions — `intent/vision.md` is a
-vision document written to the rules that `intent/01-vision/` specifies.
+`context/intent/` is that contract, specified in itself. The corpus in this repository
+uses its own conventions to define its own conventions — `context/intent/vision.md` is a
+vision document written to the rules that `context/intent/01-vision/` specifies.
 
 ## What it is for
 
@@ -37,10 +37,10 @@ the middle of the specification.
 
 Read in this order:
 
-1. **`intent/vision.md`** — what this is and what it deliberately is not.
-2. **`intent/requirements.md`** — the constraints the contract holds itself to.
-3. **`intent/spec.md`** — how the artifacts fit together.
-4. **`intent/ontology.md`** — the vocabulary. Worth reading early; the terms are
+1. **`context/intent/vision.md`** — what this is and what it deliberately is not.
+2. **`context/intent/requirements.md`** — the constraints the contract holds itself to.
+3. **`context/intent/spec.md`** — how the artifacts fit together.
+4. **`context/intent/ontology.md`** — the vocabulary. Worth reading early; the terms are
    used precisely and the precision is the point.
 
 Then follow whichever numbered section matches the artifact you care about.

context/cli/requirements.md

@@ -4,14 +4,14 @@
 
 This document defines testable constraints for the `intent` CLI: Intent hygiene,
 graph extraction, and enforcement diagnostics. It builds on the enforcement contract in
-[intent/16-enforcement](../../intent/16-enforcement/).
+[intent/16-enforcement](../intent/16-enforcement/).
 
 The `AXE.INTENT-*` requirement namespace is a stable document identifier carried
 from the originating CLI contract; it does not name an executable command.
 
 ## Assumptions
 
-- **A01 Intent owns semantics:** The root contract in [intent](../../intent/)
+- **A01 Intent owns semantics:** The root contract in [intent](../intent/)
   owns artifact semantics, file contracts, review smells, and enforcement rules.
 - **A02 CLI owns operator ergonomics:** `intent` gives humans and agents one
   discoverable command surface for Intent checks without making the CLI the

context/cli/spec.md

@@ -20,8 +20,8 @@ Defines:
 Does not define:
 
 - Intent artifact semantics, file contracts, review smells, or enforcement rules;
-  see [intent](../../intent/) and
-  [intent/16-enforcement](../../intent/16-enforcement/);
+  see [intent](../intent/) and
+  [intent/16-enforcement](../intent/16-enforcement/);
 - semantic LLM review rubric content beyond routing diagnostics;
 - future typed-source Intent authoring;
 - Plan storage or workflow semantics.
@@ -250,11 +250,11 @@ emits an ambiguous-structure diagnostic rather than inventing a node or edge.
 bounded review packet from:
 
 - the baked Intent semantic-review prompt owned at
-  [intent/16-enforcement/review-prompt.md](../../intent/16-enforcement/review-prompt.md);
+  [intent/16-enforcement/review-prompt.md](../intent/16-enforcement/review-prompt.md);
 - the target Intent files;
 - `intent check --json` diagnostics;
 - the semantic review output schema at
-  [intent/16-enforcement/review-result.schema.json](../../intent/16-enforcement/review-result.schema.json).
+  [intent/16-enforcement/review-result.schema.json](../intent/16-enforcement/review-result.schema.json).
 
 The command invokes `$CODING_AGENT` through the Coding Agent Invocation Contract
 (specified in `context/coding-agents/22-invocation-contract/spec.md` in the
@@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ not imply a nonzero exit code unless a future explicit fail policy is added.
 ## Fixture Review Grading
 
 `intent review-fixtures` is the runner for the semantic-review fixtures owned by
-[intent/15-evaluation](../../intent/15-evaluation/spec.md). It exists so the
+[intent/15-evaluation](../intent/15-evaluation/spec.md). It exists so the
 minimum-assertion contract is executable rather than descriptive.
 
 For each selected fixture it:

intent/14-grill-intent/requirements.md → context/intent/14-grill-intent/requirements.md

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@
 
 ### Must Apply Intent, Not Redefine It
 
-- **INTENT.GRILL-R01 Intent contract source:** `intent/` is the source of truth
+- **INTENT.GRILL-R01 Intent contract source:** `context/intent/` is the source of truth
   for artifact structure, lifecycle, and review rules.
 - **INTENT.GRILL-R02 Procedural skill:** `grill-intent` owns the interview procedure:
   questioning, pressure-testing, validation, and inline Intent updates.

intent/14-grill-intent/spec.md → context/intent/14-grill-intent/spec.md

@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ Draft.
 ## Relationship
 
 ```text
-intent/        normative intent-layer contract
+context/intent/        normative intent-layer contract
 grill-intent           procedure that interrogates and updates the contract
 ```
 
@@ -34,6 +34,6 @@ arrives at those facts with a human or through code/research investigation.
 ## Skill Reduction
 
 When the operational skill is updated, it should keep procedural rules and link
-to `intent/` for artifact details. The skill should not carry independent
+to `context/intent/` for artifact details. The skill should not carry independent
 templates for decisions, ontology, requirements, experiments, deltas, or roadmap
 when the root Intent contract already defines them.

intent/15-evaluation/semantic-review/fixture-format.md → context/intent/15-evaluation/semantic-review/fixture-format.md

@@ -8,7 +8,7 @@ owned by [16-enforcement](../../16-enforcement/spec.md).
 Each fixture should live in a stable, descriptive directory:
 
 ```text
-intent/15-evaluation/semantic-review/<fixture-slug>/
+context/intent/15-evaluation/semantic-review/<fixture-slug>/
   fixture.json
   input/
     context/<scenario>/

intent/15-evaluation/spec.md → context/intent/15-evaluation/spec.md

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ The scenario should include at least:
 
 ## Eval Procedure
 
-1. Read `intent/` and `nixpkgs/ai/skills/grill-intent.md`.
+1. Read `context/intent/` and `nixpkgs/ai/skills/grill-intent.md`.
 2. Create the scenario in a temporary directory outside tracked repo files.
 3. Apply the `grill-intent` procedure as if shaping the scenario with a user.
 4. Produce the miniature Intent tree.

intent/16-enforcement/review-prompt.md → context/intent/16-enforcement/review-prompt.md

@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ Classify semantic Intent issues that deterministic lint cannot prove safely:
 - Empty companion directories or README-style Intent entry points appear where the
   root Intent contract does not allow them.
 
-Use the review-smell catalog in `intent/13-review-smells/spec.md` as the
+Use the review-smell catalog in `context/intent/13-review-smells/spec.md` as the
 primary rubric when it is supplied.
 
 ## Finding Rules

intent/16-enforcement/spec.md → context/intent/16-enforcement/spec.md

@@ -103,7 +103,7 @@ the proposed strict shape, but the wider `context/**/.decisions` corpus is not
 ready for repo-wide blocking without migration or scoped enforcement.
 
 Initial strict decision-shape enforcement applies only to
-`intent/.decisions/`. Other `context/**/.decisions/` records may be scanned
+`context/intent/.decisions/`. Other `context/**/.decisions/` records may be scanned
 for migration diagnostics later, but they are not part of the first strict
 decision-shape scope.
 
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ mode; prompt and schema changes are Intent changes and should be evaluated throu
 fixtures before becoming the baked version.
 
 Real-provider execution policy is owned by the
-[Intent command spec](../../context/cli/spec.md). Enforcement
+[Intent command spec](../../cli/spec.md). Enforcement
 owns the baked prompt, result schema, semantic finding shape, and fixture-backed
 quality evidence. The command spec owns when providers may run, which CAIC
 contract pieces are required, and how stdout/report routing behaves.
@@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ Structured enforcement output should preserve enough routing context for agents:
   "kind": "deterministic | semantic",
   "severity": "error | warning | info",
   "gate": "blocking | advisory | review",
-  "artifact": "intent/requirements.md",
+  "artifact": "context/intent/requirements.md",
   "owner": "02-requirements",
   "rule": "INTENT.ENF.<rule-id>",
   "evidence": "Requirement IDs skip INTENT-R12.",

intent/spec.md → context/intent/spec.md

@@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ validate assumptions, compare against code and references, and update the
 correct Intent artifact as understanding crystallizes.
 
 The procedure must not duplicate detailed artifact rules that live in
-`intent/`; it should point to the root Intent contract and stay focused on how
+`context/intent/`; it should point to the root Intent contract and stay focused on how
 to conduct the interview.
 
 Ontology handling is part of `grill-intent`, not a separate skill by default.

intent/vision.md → context/intent/vision.md

@@ -39,4 +39,4 @@ working state.
 3. Proposed decisions, experiments, references, and deltas have clear lifecycles
    and do not pollute the durable contract.
 4. Operational skills such as `intent.md` and `grill-intent` can become thin
-   procedures over the normative `intent/` contract.
+   procedures over the normative `context/intent/` contract.

crates/intent/Cargo.toml

@@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ name = "intent"
 path = "src/lib.rs"
 
 [dependencies]
-clap = { version = "4.5", features = ["derive", "env"] }
+clap = { version = "4.5", features = ["derive", "env", "string"] }
 serde = { version = "1.0", features = ["derive"] }
 serde_json = "1.0"
 # Runtime, not just tests: `review` stages the diagnostics packet and the CAIC

crates/intent/src/lib.rs

@@ -1,13 +1,15 @@
-use clap::{Parser, Subcommand, ValueEnum};
+use clap::{CommandFactory, FromArgMatches, Parser, Subcommand, ValueEnum};
 use serde::Serialize;
 use serde_json::Value;
 use std::collections::{BTreeSet, HashSet};
-use std::ffi::OsStr;
+use std::ffi::{OsStr, OsString};
 use std::fs;
 use std::io::{self, Write};
 use std::path::{Path, PathBuf};
 use std::process::{Command, ExitCode};
 
+const CORPUS: &str = "context/intent";
+
 // Positions INSIDE a corpus, so they hold for any repository that adopts the
 // layout. Resolving the review assets relative to the corpus root rather than the
 // repository root is what keeps tool and corpus co-located: `review` reads both
@@ -214,6 +216,30 @@ impl Defaults {
     fn fixtures_or_default(&self, arg: Option<PathBuf>) -> PathBuf {
         arg.unwrap_or_else(|| self.corpus_root.join(SEMANTIC_REVIEW_SUBDIR))
     }
+
+    pub fn command(&self) -> clap::Command {
+        let root = self.corpus_root.clone().into_os_string();
+        let fixtures = self
+            .corpus_root
+            .join(SEMANTIC_REVIEW_SUBDIR)
+            .into_os_string();
+        IntentCli::command()
+            .mut_subcommand("check", |cmd| default_root(cmd, root.clone()))
+            .mut_subcommand("graph", |cmd| default_root(cmd, root.clone()))
+            .mut_subcommand("review", |cmd| default_root(cmd, root))
+            .mut_subcommand("review-fixtures", |cmd| default_root(cmd, fixtures))
+    }
+
+    pub fn parse(&self) -> IntentCli {
+        match IntentCli::from_arg_matches_mut(&mut self.command().get_matches()) {
+            Ok(cli) => cli,
+            Err(error) => error.exit(),
+        }
+    }
+}
+
+fn default_root(cmd: clap::Command, value: OsString) -> clap::Command {
+    cmd.mut_arg("root", |arg| arg.default_value(value))
 }
 
 impl Default for Defaults {
@@ -1198,12 +1224,12 @@ pub fn graph_root(root: &Path) -> Result<GraphReport, Box<dyn std::error::Error>
     })
 }
 
-// Corpus-relative only. A removed fallback guessed a repository-specific
-// `.decisions` path when handed a repository root. That was silently wrong for
-// other layouts and let a misaimed invocation look clean. Pointing this at a
-// corpus is the caller's job.
 fn root_intent_decision_dir(root: &Path) -> PathBuf {
-    root.join(".decisions")
+    let direct = root.join(".decisions");
+    if direct.is_dir() {
+        return direct;
+    }
+    root.join(CORPUS).join(".decisions")
 }
 
 fn check_markdown_links(
@@ -1623,13 +1649,11 @@ fn markdown_files_direct(dir: &Path) -> Result<Vec<PathBuf>, Box<dyn std::error:
 /// artifacts may not escape.
 ///
 /// This is still repository-scoped rather than corpus-scoped: a reviewer reasoning
-/// about a corpus needs the repository around it. A removed repository-specific
-/// sentinel was only reached when `.git` was absent. Falling back to the corpus
-/// root keeps that no-`.git` case working without teaching the tool a repository
-/// layout.
+/// about a corpus needs the repository around it. In exported trees and build
+/// sandboxes without `.git`, the canonical corpus position identifies that boundary.
 fn review_workspace(root: &Path) -> PathBuf {
     for ancestor in root.ancestors() {
-        if ancestor.join(".git").exists() {
+        if ancestor.join(".git").exists() || ancestor.join(CORPUS).is_dir() {
             return ancestor.to_path_buf();
         }
     }
@@ -2263,6 +2287,21 @@ mod tests {
         );
     }
 
+    #[test]
+    fn a_callers_default_reaches_the_help_it_renders() {
+        let defaults = Defaults::corpus_root("context/intent");
+        let check = defaults
+            .command()
+            .find_subcommand_mut("check")
+            .expect("check subcommand")
+            .render_help()
+            .to_string();
+        assert!(
+            check.contains("[default: context/intent]"),
+            "help:\n{check}"
+        );
+    }
+
     // Covers the fallback used when there is no `.git`, such as a Nix build
     // sandbox or vendored source tree. Interactive runs normally take the
     // enclosing-repository branch instead.
@@ -2275,6 +2314,16 @@ mod tests {
         assert_eq!(review_workspace(&corpus), corpus);
     }
 
+    #[test]
+    fn review_workspace_finds_the_repository_by_corpus_layout_when_there_is_no_git() {
+        let tempdir = tempfile::tempdir().unwrap();
+        let repo = fs::canonicalize(tempdir.path()).unwrap();
+        let corpus = repo.join("context/intent");
+        fs::create_dir_all(&corpus).unwrap();
+
+        assert_eq!(review_workspace(&corpus), repo);
+    }
+
     #[test]
     fn review_workspace_prefers_the_enclosing_repository() {
         let tempdir = tempfile::tempdir().unwrap();

crates/intent/src/main.rs

@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
-use clap::Parser;
 use std::process::ExitCode;
 
 // The binary is a thin shell over the library entry point so standalone and
 // embedded callers execute the same checker behavior.
 fn main() -> ExitCode {
-    intent::run(intent::IntentCli::parse())
+    let defaults = intent::Defaults::default();
+    intent::run_with(defaults.parse(), &defaults)
 }