From 8c5d813310614db2fe4c627f294150f022617912 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John Morrissey <544926+tachyon-beep@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 15:12:06 +1000 Subject: [PATCH 1/3] design: demote the newsroom analogy to a single appendix rendering (ADR-0009) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Owner-directed 2026-08-09. The Namespec 2.0 codename grammar is the sole operating frame; the newsroom survives only as Appendix E, reframed as an alternative rendering for readers to whom the codenames don't speak. Normative content re-anchors to its invariants: "the newsroom rule" is cited as the evidence-routing rule (INV-07/INV-09) everywhere it was a constraint name. No invariant displaced (ADR-0009 §Displaced constraints). - 02-constitution §5.5: sidebar + 14-role mapping collapsed to a native statement of INV-07/INV-09 plus the Appendix E pointer - 04-architecture §7.6: duplicate mapping collapsed; Tamiyo view line points at the Appendix E projection - 01-claim, 03-principles 6.9, good-bad-sentences, migration, repo-structure §30, model.dsl, AGENTS.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, README.md, adr/README.md, vision.md (mechanical citation rename, flagged for grant review) - appendices/newsroom.md: retitled "The Newsroom Rendering"; E.1 rewritten as the second-way-in framing with the lockstep-maintenance duty - site: architecture page desk table collapsed to the evidence-routing rule with a wiki deep link; index/404/lineage reworded - 00-INDEX: also fixes the stale "Namespec: 1.0" header missed by the ADR-0008 cascade Gates: wiki strict build green (55 pages, 4040 links), linkcheck green, html-validate green. Tracker: simic-7e2683f3cd. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_012qVBdHQtjsNsUbfMHSdyeF --- AGENTS.md | 6 +- ARCHITECTURE.md | 7 +- README.md | 14 ++-- docs/adr/0009-newsroom-demotion.md | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++ docs/adr/README.md | 2 +- docs/design/00-INDEX.md | 6 +- docs/design/01-claim.md | 6 +- docs/design/02-constitution.md | 35 ++------ docs/design/03-principles.md | 2 +- docs/design/04-architecture.md | 24 +----- docs/design/appendices/good-bad-sentences.md | 2 +- docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md | 12 +-- docs/design/assets/model.dsl | 2 +- docs/design/ops/migration.md | 2 +- docs/design/ops/repo-structure.md | 2 +- docs/product/vision.md | 5 +- site/404.html | 2 +- site/architecture.html | 59 +++++-------- site/index.html | 9 +- site/lineage.html | 2 +- tools/pdf/chapters.txt | 2 +- 21 files changed, 159 insertions(+), 130 deletions(-) create mode 100644 docs/adr/0009-newsroom-demotion.md diff --git a/AGENTS.md b/AGENTS.md index a7271d9..9b3df29 100644 --- a/AGENTS.md +++ b/AGENTS.md @@ -60,8 +60,10 @@ in Tolaria's matched common-future branches and certifies evidence → Isperia adjudicates provider-blind against no-op and issues warrants → Wrenn germinates/blends/commits under an admission warrant → Emrakul later sedates/decays/lyses under maintenance warrants → Urborg records everything → -Tamiyo reveals it. The newsroom rule (`appendices/newsroom.md`): **Nissa sends -the photograph; Aurelia sends only the assignment brief.** +Tamiyo reveals it. The evidence-routing rule (INV-07/INV-09): **Nissa sends +the evidence directly; Aurelia sends only the assignment brief** +(`appendices/newsroom.md` retells the authority model as a newsroom — an +alternative lens, ADR-0009). ## Non-negotiable invariants (`02-constitution.md` has all 45; these are the spine) diff --git a/ARCHITECTURE.md b/ARCHITECTURE.md index 24806bd..d6a1db4 100644 --- a/ARCHITECTURE.md +++ b/ARCHITECTURE.md @@ -59,10 +59,9 @@ Tamiyo; those edges are omitted above for legibility. Two details in the diagram are load-bearing: - **Nissa publishes the same observation identity independently to Aurelia - and Momir.** Aurelia is not a telemetry proxy; the newsroom formulation is - "Nissa sends the photograph; Aurelia sends only the assignment brief." A - `GrowthIntent` carries scope and operational constraints only — diagnosis, - topology and ancestry hints are schema-invalid (INV-07, INV-09). + and Momir.** Aurelia is not a telemetry proxy: a `GrowthIntent` carries + scope and operational constraints only — diagnosis, topology and ancestry + hints are schema-invalid (INV-07, INV-09). - **The request resolver is not a fifteenth agent.** It is a pure Leyline service that combines `GrowthIntent` + `StrategicEnvelope` + Wrenn's `RegionContract` + the active `GrammarProfile` into one canonical diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index be8b8c4..98f604c 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -47,13 +47,13 @@ The other eleven are agents, summarised by the canonical sentence > Tolaria, Isperia judges, Wrenn embodies, Emrakul destroys, and Tamiyo > reveals; every precedent is kept in Urborg. -The architecture deliberately resembles a newsroom -([`docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md`](docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md)): -observation, assignment, authorship, standards, production, fact-checking, -publication judgement, and archive are separate desks, because letting one -desk control the whole chain corrupts both evidence and accountability. The -load-bearing routing rule: **Nissa sends the photograph directly to the -designer; the assignments editor sends only the assignment brief.** +The load-bearing routing rule: **Nissa publishes the evidence directly to +the designer; Aurelia sends only the assignment brief** — evidence never +arrives pre-captioned by the desk that commissioned it (INV-07, INV-09). +And for readers who would rather picture an institution than learn a +mythology, [`docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md`](docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md) +retells the whole authority model as a newsroom — the same separations, no +new vocabulary. ## Guarantees diff --git a/docs/adr/0009-newsroom-demotion.md b/docs/adr/0009-newsroom-demotion.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6446844 --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/adr/0009-newsroom-demotion.md @@ -0,0 +1,88 @@ +# ADR-0009 — Demote the newsroom analogy to a single appendix rendering + +Date: 2026-08-09 · Status: accepted +Deciders: John (owner-directed, product session 11) · Tracker: simic-7e2683f3cd + +## Context + +Namespec 2.0 (ADR-0008) locked the codename grammar as the design's operating +frame: the canonical sentence, the faction layer, and the sentence lint in +`../design/02-constitution.md` are how authority is stated, checked, and +smelled. The newsroom analogy, however, still operates as a second co-primary +frame: the constitution carries a full fourteen-role newsroom sidebar +(§5.5), `../design/04-architecture.md#76-the-newsroom-authority-model` +repeats the complete mapping, the README and public site introduce the +architecture as "deliberately resembling a newsroom", and several Tier-0 +constraint lists cite "the newsroom rule" as if the metaphor were the rule's +identity. + +Two parallel operating analogies split the design's voice. Every authority +change must be narrated twice; the metaphor reads as normative when the +enforcement was always contractual — INV-07 (direct evidence publication), +INV-09 (assignment-brief boundary), blinding by schema absence, and the +authority tests. One frame must own the design; the other must serve it. + +## Decision + +The Namespec 2.0 codename grammar is the sole operating frame. The newsroom +becomes exactly one thing: **Appendix E** +(`../design/appendices/newsroom.md`), reframed as an alternative rendering +of the authority model — a deliberate second way in for readers to whom the +codenames do not speak. It stays tightly coupled to the design: any change +to an authority boundary must update the rendering in the same change set. +It is no longer given primacy anywhere else. + +Mechanics: + +- Normative statements formerly cited as "the newsroom rule" are cited by + their invariants: **INV-07** and **INV-09** (with INV-08, INV-10, INV-11, + INV-12 supporting). The rule was never the metaphor. +- Chapters keep at most a one-line pointer to Appendix E; no chapter carries + a parallel role mapping. The §5.5 sidebar and the §7.6 mapping collapse to + native statements of the routing rule plus the pointer. +- Appendix-tier and implementation-surface couplings are retained: the + glossary's newsroom column, the package-README "Newsroom analogue, where + useful" line, Tamiyo's optional newsroom projection (`newsroom_view.py`), + and the good/bad-sentences translation aid. +- Historical records (the archived monolith, ADR bodies 0001–0008, PDRs, + peer reviews) are never rewritten (INV-36). + +## Displaced constraints + +None. INV-07, INV-08, INV-09, INV-10, INV-11 and INV-12 are unchanged in +wording and force. The Tier-0 constraint lists that named "the newsroom +rule" (`README.md` in `docs/adr/`, `../design/ops/repo-structure.md` +§30, and the repo-discipline line of the authority grant) now name **the +evidence-routing rule (INV-07/INV-09)** — a citation rename, not a +constraint change. + +## Options considered + +- **Keep both frames co-primary (status quo).** Rejected: two operating + analogies split the voice, double the narration cost of every authority + change, and let the metaphor masquerade as the enforcement mechanism. +- **Delete the newsroom entirely.** Rejected: it is genuinely useful to + readers outside the codename idiom, and live design surface couples to it + (Tamiyo projection, glossary column, package-README line); deletion would + orphan those and discard a good teaching instrument. +- **Move it outside the HLD (site/marketing only).** Rejected: outside + design custody it would drift from the authority model it renders; the + appendix keeps it under the ADR discipline and the same-change-set + coupling duty. + +## Consequences + +The constitution gets shorter and speaks with one voice; Appendix E becomes +the only complete mapping and explicitly carries the duty to track authority +changes. Updated in this change set: `02-constitution.md` §5.5, +`04-architecture.md` §7.6 and the Tamiyo view line, `01-claim.md`, +`03-principles.md` 6.9, `appendices/newsroom.md` (reframed), +`00-INDEX.md`, `appendices/good-bad-sentences.md`, `ops/migration.md`, +`ops/repo-structure.md` §30, `assets/model.dsl`, `AGENTS.md`, +`ARCHITECTURE.md`, `README.md`, `docs/adr/README.md`, the vision +repo-discipline citation (mechanical; flagged for grant review), and the +public site pages. Wiki and site gates re-run. + +Reversal trigger: if new contributors or publication reviewers repeatedly +fail to grasp the authority model from the codenames alone, re-promote a +condensed mapping into `04-architecture.md` — by ADR, never silently. diff --git a/docs/adr/README.md b/docs/adr/README.md index ef6ea14..12cfd9d 100644 --- a/docs/adr/README.md +++ b/docs/adr/README.md @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ Design-doc tiering (PDR-0002, `docs/product/decisions/0002-design-doc-tiering.md - **Tier 0 — Constitution.** The HLD chapters under `docs/design/` (entry: `00-INDEX.md`; the locked core is `02-constitution.md`). Constitutional constraints — Namespec 2.0, the INV-01..45 invariants, authority boundaries, - the newsroom rule, the no-op requirement, scaffold withdrawal — change only + the evidence-routing rule (INV-07/INV-09), the no-op requirement, scaffold withdrawal — change only through an ADR that **names the displaced invariant** (`../design/ops/repo-structure.md#30-repository-handoff-and-custody` / repo discipline in the authority grant). diff --git a/docs/design/00-INDEX.md b/docs/design/00-INDEX.md index 6b5f315..56cffd8 100644 --- a/docs/design/00-INDEX.md +++ b/docs/design/00-INDEX.md @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ # Simic HLD — Index -**Architecture version:** 4.1 · **Namespec:** 1.0 — locked · **Status:** canonical +**Architecture version:** 4.1 · **Namespec:** 2.0 — locked (ADR-0008) · **Status:** canonical design authority (decomposed from the v4.1 monolith per [ADR-0001](../adr/0001-hld-decomposition-structure.md); the monolith is archived, content-identical, at [`../concept/archive/simic-v4.1-monolith.md`](../concept/archive/simic-v4.1-monolith.md)). @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ load the chapters your task names; do not load the rest. | `ops/observability.md` | Live/investigation/audit views and the naming-smell view | | `ops/repo-structure.md` | Target codebase layout, dependency direction, repository handoff | | `ops/migration.md` | Current-to-target migration | -| `appendices/` | Newsroom principle, scaffold-withdrawal pattern, glossary, good/bad sentences | +| `appendices/` | Newsroom rendering (alternative lens), scaffold-withdrawal pattern, glossary, good/bad sentences | | `TEMPLATE-lld.md` | Header template for Tier 2 LLDs; LLDs land just-in-time under `lld/` (reserved, empty until Phase A) | ## Reading paths @@ -42,7 +42,7 @@ load the chapters your task names; do not load the rest. - **Admission / adjudication work:** `02` + `domains/isperia.md` + `domains/jin-gitaxias.md` + `07-counterfactual-engine.md`. - **Contract / schema work:** `02` + `05-leyline-contracts.md` + `04-architecture.md` (flow). - **Experiment / curriculum design:** `02` + `01-claim.md` + `programme/*`. -- **New here:** `01` → `04` → `02`, then `appendices/newsroom.md` for the authority model. +- **New here:** `01` → `04` → `02`; if the codenames aren't carrying the authority model for you, `appendices/newsroom.md` retells it as a newsroom. ## Citation convention diff --git a/docs/design/01-claim.md b/docs/design/01-claim.md index 67e8025..ece78eb 100644 --- a/docs/design/01-claim.md +++ b/docs/design/01-claim.md @@ -78,11 +78,11 @@ The locked narrative grammar is: The deliberately goofy names are not decorative aliases. They encode which parts of the system are allowed to exercise agency, which parts must remain neutral infrastructure, and which sentences should sound architecturally wrong. The naming layer therefore acts as a lightweight responsibility and dependency lint. -The architecture also resembles a newsroom for a non-coincidental reason: both systems must keep source observation, commissioning, authorship, standards review, production, fact-checking, publication judgement, integration, correction, archival memory, and presentation distinct. The central newsroom rule is load-bearing here: +At the centre of the authority model sits one load-bearing routing rule: -> **Nissa sends the photograph directly. Aurelia sends only the assignment brief. Momir must never receive reality through Aurelia's caption.** +> **Nissa publishes the evidence directly to Aurelia and Momir (INV-07). Aurelia sends only the assignment brief (INV-09). Momir must never receive reality through Aurelia's caption.** -The newsroom analogy is documented as an explanatory aid in §5.5 and Appendix E. The actual enforcement remains contractual: direct evidence publication, a narrow `GrowthIntent`, deterministic request resolution, immutable provenance, and tests that reject diagnostic or structural hints in Aurelia's channel. +The enforcement is contractual: direct evidence publication, a narrow `GrowthIntent`, deterministic request resolution, immutable provenance, and tests that reject diagnostic or structural hints in Aurelia's channel. (Readers who want the authority model without the codenames will find it retold as a newsroom in Appendix E.) A uniform **Scaffold Withdrawal Pattern** governs how the architecture learns under initially noisy, variable, or sparse conditions. Tolaria first establishes causal ground truth under an Academy profile with bitwise-exact replay, Aurelia first learns on repeated host trajectories, and Momir first learns near a viable Urborg reference population. Each scaffold then passes through controlled relaxation and an independent withdrawal gate. Withdrawal removes the scaffold as an ordinary production dependency while retaining it as a reference, calibration, regression, or escalation capability. Exact replay is therefore Tolaria's metrology laboratory—not a requirement that every future field execution remain bitwise identical. diff --git a/docs/design/02-constitution.md b/docs/design/02-constitution.md index 72768c4..66d388f 100644 --- a/docs/design/02-constitution.md +++ b/docs/design/02-constitution.md @@ -125,34 +125,13 @@ Leyline imported Aurelia to decide a default action. The sentence test is not a proof, but it is an intentionally cheap architecture lint. -### 5.5 The newsroom principle - -> **Sidebar — Why the architecture resembles a newsroom** -> -> The similarity is structural rather than decorative. A newsroom separates source observation, assignment, authorship, standards review, production, fact-checking, publication judgement, placement, correction, archive, and presentation because allowing one desk to control the complete chain corrupts both evidence and accountability. -> -> In this architecture: -> -> - Nissa is the reporting, photography, and data desk: it publishes what was observed. -> - Ugin is the editor-in-chief or managing editor: it allocates desks, time, and strategic resources. -> - Aurelia is the assignments editor: it decides whether there is a story, which beat owns it, what scope and deadline apply, and what resources may be spent. -> - Momir is the writer or investigative journalist: it determines the substantive answer from the evidence and commission. -> - Elesh is the copy and standards desk: it enforces structural, typed, and house-form conformity without deciding whether the story is valuable. -> - Urabrask is production, layout, and manufacturing: the factory that prints the edition without changing meaning. -> - Jin-Gitaxias is fact-checking and QA: cold, empirical, perfectionist; it establishes what the finished artefact actually does. -> - Isperia is the publishing editor: it decides whether the evidence justifies running, returning, deferring, or spiking the story. -> - Wrenn is the live-edition integrator: the symbiote who hosts the accepted story in the running edition. -> - Emrakul handles correction, withdrawal, and retirement after publication. -> - Urborg is the morgue and archive, including corrections, failed investigations, and abandoned drafts. -> - Tamiyo is presentation: front page, broadcast desk, dashboards, and public account. -> - Leyline is the stylebook, editorial constitution, and record format. -> - Tolaria is the newsroom production environment, CMS, presses, and test editions. -> -> The load-bearing rule is: **Aurelia does not send the photograph. Nissa sends the photograph directly to Momir. Aurelia sends only the assignment brief. Momir must never receive reality through Aurelia's caption.** -> -> The code-review question is therefore: **does this field belong in an assignment brief, or does it impose an editorial angle?** Scope, region, resource class, deadline, maturity mode, and assurance class are assignment fields. A deficit diagnosis, topology preference, ancestor choice, expected mechanism, or proposed solution is an editorial angle and is prohibited from Aurelia's channel. -> -> Appendix E develops the analogy, its smell tests, and its limits. The metaphor is never the enforcement mechanism; Leyline contracts and authority tests are. +### 5.5 The evidence-routing rule + +The naming grammar carries one routing rule important enough to state here in full. Nissa publishes one canonical observation identity independently to Aurelia and Momir (INV-07). Aurelia commissions work from that evidence but is never the channel through which Momir receives it: a `GrowthIntent` carries scope and operational constraints only — insertion region, resource class, urgency, tactical deadline, maturity mode, assurance class — and a deficit diagnosis, topology preference, ancestor choice, or mechanism hint is schema-invalid (INV-09). **Nissa sends the evidence. Aurelia sends only the assignment brief. Momir must never receive reality through Aurelia's caption.** + +The code-review question is therefore: **does this field specify the assignment, or does it smuggle a conclusion?** Scope fields commission work; conclusion fields do the designer's job for it, and are prohibited from Aurelia's channel. + +For readers who prefer an institution to a mythology, Appendix E (`appendices/newsroom.md`) retells the entire authority model as a newsroom — the same separations in civilian dress, kept in lockstep with this constitution (ADR-0009). The rendering is explanatory only; Leyline contracts, blinding by construction, and the authority tests are the enforcement mechanism. ### 5.6 Dependency consequence diff --git a/docs/design/03-principles.md b/docs/design/03-principles.md index 7096702..5c423bc 100644 --- a/docs/design/03-principles.md +++ b/docs/design/03-principles.md @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ A growth begins at zero or negligible influence. Influence is controlled through ### 6.9 Doing nothing is a real competitor -Every adjudication includes a mandatory no-intervention alternative whose policy utility is exactly zero. A growth request does not imply that any growth must be admitted. In newsroom terms, every story may be spiked. +Every adjudication includes a mandatory no-intervention alternative whose policy utility is exactly zero. A growth request does not imply that any growth must be admitted. ### 6.10 Paired branches differ only in the intervention diff --git a/docs/design/04-architecture.md b/docs/design/04-architecture.md index 49b6aeb..b499b1c 100644 --- a/docs/design/04-architecture.md +++ b/docs/design/04-architecture.md @@ -193,27 +193,9 @@ Jin-Gitaxias and Isperia are independent of this command hierarchy. Jin-Gitaxias Emrakul's post-commit actions execute Isperia `MaintenanceDecision` verdicts; the vocabularies map one-to-one: `RETAIN` → `HOLD` (no physical transition), `RETEST` → `REQUEST_REVIEW` (schedule maintenance QA), and `SEDATE`/`DECAY`/`LYSE` execute directly under the maintenance warrant. Verdicts are Isperia records; actions are Emrakul executions of them. -### 7.6 The newsroom authority model +### 7.6 Hearing an authority leak -The newsroom analogy provides an explanatory overlay, not a second architecture: - -```text -Nissa reports source material -Ugin funds the desk -Aurelia commissions the assignment -Momir authors the candidate -Elesh applies standards and canonical form -Urabrask produces the executable edition -Jin-Gitaxias fact-checks and proof-tests it in Tolaria -Isperia publishes, returns, defers, or spikes it -Wrenn integrates it into the live edition -Emrakul corrects, withdraws, or retires it later -Urborg preserves the complete archive -Tamiyo presents the account -Leyline supplies the editorial constitution -``` - -The analogy is useful because it makes an authority leak audible. “The assignments editor rewrote the source notes before the writer saw them” is the same defect as Aurelia mediating Nissa's evidence. Appendix E provides the full mapping and review prompts. +The codename grammar is the operating frame for authority, and its sentence test (`02-constitution.md`) makes a leak audible in one line: "Aurelia rewrote the observation before Momir saw it" sounds wrong before any code is read. For readers to whom the codenames do not speak, Appendix E retells the same authority model as a newsroom — an explanatory rendering kept in lockstep with this chapter (ADR-0009), never a second architecture. ## 8. Subsystem Map @@ -512,4 +494,4 @@ Urborg stores: - determinism manifests; - and terminal outcomes. -Tamiyo presents the same causal chain to operators. It may show the newsroom view—source, assignment, draft, standards, production, fact check, publication decision, placement, correction and archive—but it remains read-only. +Tamiyo presents the same causal chain to operators. It may offer the newsroom projection (Appendix E) as one presentation of that chain, but it remains read-only. diff --git a/docs/design/appendices/good-bad-sentences.md b/docs/design/appendices/good-bad-sentences.md index 63fd073..dfa4c97 100644 --- a/docs/design/appendices/good-bad-sentences.md +++ b/docs/design/appendices/good-bad-sentences.md @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ Leyline imported Aurelia to decide what WAIT means today. ### Review prompt -When a proposed change is difficult to place, write it as a sentence using the subsystem names and, if useful, translate it into the newsroom analogy. +When a proposed change is difficult to place, write it as a sentence using the subsystem names and, if useful, translate it into the newsroom rendering (Appendix E). Ask: diff --git a/docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md b/docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md index f660204..444b336 100644 --- a/docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md +++ b/docs/design/appendices/newsroom.md @@ -2,15 +2,15 @@ [← HLD index](../00-INDEX.md) -## Appendix E — The Newsroom Principle +## Appendix E — The Newsroom Rendering -### E.1 Purpose of the analogy +### E.1 Why this appendix exists -The newsroom model is useful because this architecture is fundamentally concerned with **epistemic separation**: who may observe, who may commission work, who may author a solution, who may verify it, who may judge it, who may integrate it, and who may later correct or withdraw it. +The design speaks one language. The Namespec 2.0 codename grammar — the canonical sentence, the invariants, the sentence lint of `../02-constitution.md` — is the operating frame for every authority question, and nothing in this appendix competes with it. What this appendix offers is the same authority model told a second way, for readers to whom the codenames do not speak: not everyone wants to learn a mythology before they can ask who is allowed to see what. -A single controller that observes the host, diagnoses the deficit, selects a topology, generates parameters, evaluates itself, approves deployment and decides retention is equivalent to a newsroom in which one person assigns the story, rewrites the notes, authors the conclusion, fact-checks it, publishes it and destroys the corrections file. It may be fast, but neither evidence nor failure attribution remains trustworthy. +The retelling works because the architecture is fundamentally concerned with **epistemic separation** — who may observe, who may commission work, who may author a solution, who may verify it, who may judge it, who may integrate it, and who may later correct or withdraw it — and institutions that live or die by the integrity of their evidence converged on the same separations long ago. A newsroom is the one most readers already know. A single controller that observes the host, diagnoses the deficit, selects a topology, generates parameters, evaluates itself, approves deployment and decides retention is a newsroom in which one person assigns the story, rewrites the notes, authors the conclusion, fact-checks it, publishes it and destroys the corrections file. It may be fast, but neither evidence nor failure attribution survives it. -The newsroom analogy therefore explains why the architecture contains more roles than a minimal implementation apparently requires. It is not bureaucracy for its own sake; it is a defence against authority collapse. +Read this appendix when the role count looks like bureaucracy: the roles are a defence against authority collapse, and the newsroom shows why without asking you to learn a single new name. Nothing here is normative, and everything here is maintained in lockstep with the constitution (ADR-0009) — if this rendering and an invariant ever disagree, the invariant wins and this appendix has a defect. ### E.2 Role mapping @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ free-form message to the designer Aurelia may see Nissa's evidence because it must decide whether to commission work. It must not become the channel through which Momir sees that evidence. The assignments desk is allowed to say “investigate Region A under this scope.” It is not allowed to say “write a story proving rank collapse and conclude that attention is the answer.” -### E.4 The source-routing rule +### E.4 The source-routing rule (INV-07, INV-09) ```text Nissa observes host state S diff --git a/docs/design/assets/model.dsl b/docs/design/assets/model.dsl index 7605f87..7c25541 100644 --- a/docs/design/assets/model.dsl +++ b/docs/design/assets/model.dsl @@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ workspace "Simic" "Counterfactual Generative Morphogenesis — the fourteen-doma tolaria -> wrenn "Executes host forward/backward passes and optimiser steps" wrenn -> nissa "Exposes host state for canonical ablated diagnostic observation" - // Direct evidence publication (the newsroom rule) + // Direct evidence publication (INV-07) nissa -> ugin "Permitted coarse summary" nissa -> aurelia "TelemetryEnvelope O (same observation identity)" nissa -> momir "TelemetryEnvelope O (same observation identity)" diff --git a/docs/design/ops/migration.md b/docs/design/ops/migration.md index 5acd376..29ec2d7 100644 --- a/docs/design/ops/migration.md +++ b/docs/design/ops/migration.md @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ The change is constitutional: - Urborg records whether ancestry was supplied, withdrawn, or used only as a blinded control. - Existing telemetry backends remain **Nissa**, with direct publication to Momir added as a locked route. - Existing operator surfaces migrate under **Tamiyo**. -- Tamiyo gains a newsroom projection showing source observation, assignment, draft, standards, production, QA, judgement, placement, correction and archive. +- Tamiyo gains a newsroom projection (the Appendix E rendering) showing source observation, assignment, draft, standards, production, QA, judgement, placement, correction and archive. - Event schemas remain in Leyline and training remains independent of Tamiyo availability. ### 23.8 Namespec migration diff --git a/docs/design/ops/repo-structure.md b/docs/design/ops/repo-structure.md index ea7f2ea..42945da 100644 --- a/docs/design/ops/repo-structure.md +++ b/docs/design/ops/repo-structure.md @@ -267,7 +267,7 @@ Integration occurs through Leyline records and protocols, not circular implement ## 30. Repository Handoff and Custody -This document is the authoritative target HLD for repository implementation. Namespec 2.0 (ADR-0008), the authority boundaries, the newsroom routing rule, the no-op requirement, and the Scaffold Withdrawal Principle are constitutional constraints. They may be changed only through an architecture decision record that names the displaced invariant and its replacement. +This document is the authoritative target HLD for repository implementation. Namespec 2.0 (ADR-0008), the authority boundaries, the evidence-routing rule (INV-07/INV-09), the no-op requirement, and the Scaffold Withdrawal Principle are constitutional constraints. They may be changed only through an architecture decision record that names the displaced invariant and its replacement. Codex or any other implementation agent may stage, simplify or defer unbuilt capabilities, but it must not represent a target capability as implemented, collapse two named authorities for convenience without an explicit adapter boundary, or silently turn an Academy scaffold into a permanent production assumption. diff --git a/docs/product/vision.md b/docs/product/vision.md index 37cba32..6240d64 100644 --- a/docs/product/vision.md +++ b/docs/product/vision.md @@ -85,6 +85,7 @@ Escalate BEFORE acting — the agent MUST get owner sign-off for: git without permission. Repo discipline (restates HLD §30; owner-confirmed 2026-08-08): HLD constitutional constraints (Namespec 2.0, the §18 invariants, the - authority boundaries, the newsroom rule, the no-op requirement, scaffold - withdrawal) change only through an ADR naming the displaced invariant. + authority boundaries, the evidence-routing rule (INV-07/INV-09), the no-op + requirement, scaffold withdrawal) change only through an ADR naming the + displaced invariant. (Taxonomy + rationale: product-ownership-operating-model.md.) diff --git a/site/404.html b/site/404.html index fd8ada5..0bc8449 100644 --- a/site/404.html +++ b/site/404.html @@ -51,7 +51,7 @@

Overview →

  • Architecture →

    -

    Fourteen bounded domains, the canonical sentence, and the newsroom routing rule.

    +

    Fourteen bounded domains, the canonical sentence, and the evidence-routing rule.
  • diff --git a/site/architecture.html b/site/architecture.html index 804336f..fa65733 100644 --- a/site/architecture.html +++ b/site/architecture.html @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@ Architecture — Simic - + @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ - + @@ -182,62 +182,41 @@

    Architectural planesThe newsroom principle#

    +

    The evidence-routing rule#

    - The resemblance to a newsroom is structural rather than decorative. A - newsroom separates source observation, assignment, authorship, standards - review, production, fact-checking, publication judgement, correction, - archive and presentation because allowing one desk to control the complete - chain corrupts both evidence and accountability. + One routing rule is load-bearing enough to state on its own. Nissa + publishes one canonical observation identity independently to Aurelia and + Momir (INV-07). Aurelia commissions work from that evidence but is never + the channel through which the designer receives it (INV-09):

    -
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    The analogy, desk by desk
    DomainNewsroom desk
    NissaReporting, photography and data — publishes what was observed
    UginEditor-in-chief — allocates desks, time and strategic resources
    AureliaAssignments editor — is there a story, which beat, what scope and deadline
    MomirWriter — determines the substantive answer from evidence and commission
    EleshCopy and standards desk — house form, without deciding whether the story is valuable
    UrabraskProduction — turns canonical copy into an executable edition without changing meaning
    Jin-GitaxiasFact-checking and QA — establishes what the finished artefact actually does
    IsperiaPublishing editor — run, return, defer, or spike
    WrennIntegrates accepted material into the live edition
    EmrakulCorrection, withdrawal and retirement after publication
    UrborgMorgue and archive — including corrections, failed investigations, abandoned drafts
    TamiyoPresentation — front page, dashboards, the public account
    LeylineStylebook, editorial constitution and record format
    TolariaProduction environment, CMS, presses and test editions
    -
    -

    - Aurelia does not send the photograph. Nissa sends the photograph - directly to Momir. Aurelia sends only the assignment brief. + Nissa sends the evidence directly to Momir. Aurelia sends only + the assignment brief. Momir never receives reality through Aurelia’s + caption.

    That rule turns into a concrete code-review question: does this field - belong in an assignment brief, or does it impose an editorial angle? + specify the assignment, or does it smuggle a conclusion? Scope, region, resource class, deadline, maturity mode and assurance class are assignment fields. A deficit diagnosis, topology preference, ancestor - choice, expected mechanism or proposed solution is an editorial angle, and - is schema-invalid in Aurelia's channel. + choice, expected mechanism or proposed solution does the designer’s job + for it, and is schema-invalid in Aurelia’s channel.

    - The metaphor is never the enforcement mechanism. Enforcement is contractual: + Enforcement is contractual, never metaphorical: direct evidence publication, a narrow GrowthIntent, deterministic request resolution, immutable provenance, and tests that - reject diagnostic or structural hints in Aurelia's channel. + reject diagnostic or structural hints in Aurelia’s channel. And if the + codenames aren’t carrying the authority model for you, the design docs + retell it, desk by desk, as a newsroom — + the newsroom + rendering — same separations, no new vocabulary.

    The loops#

    diff --git a/site/index.html b/site/index.html index 974d31e..2fcae4f 100644 --- a/site/index.html +++ b/site/index.html @@ -211,15 +211,14 @@

    Fourteen domains, one sentence

    - The architecture deliberately resembles a newsroom, because both must keep - observation, assignment, authorship, standards, production, fact-checking, - publication judgement and archive on separate desks. The load-bearing - routing rule: + Observation, commissioning, authorship, standards, production, + fact-checking, judgement and archive are held apart on purpose — and one + routing rule is load-bearing:

    - Nissa sends the photograph directly to the designer. Aurelia sends + Nissa sends the evidence directly to the designer. Aurelia sends only the assignment brief.

    diff --git a/site/lineage.html b/site/lineage.html index 049a233..c80b3a7 100644 --- a/site/lineage.html +++ b/site/lineage.html @@ -300,7 +300,7 @@

    Two standing obligations

    The architecture →

    -

    Fourteen bounded domains, the canonical sentence, the newsroom routing rule, and the sentence test used as a lint.

    +

    Fourteen bounded domains, the canonical sentence, the evidence-routing rule, and the sentence test used as a lint.

  • diff --git a/tools/pdf/chapters.txt b/tools/pdf/chapters.txt index 3812d09..0322349 100644 --- a/tools/pdf/chapters.txt +++ b/tools/pdf/chapters.txt @@ -51,6 +51,6 @@ programme/risks-and-open-decisions.md # §26–§27 risks, open decisions appendices/good-bad-sentences.md # App C good/bad sentences appendices/glossary.md # App D plain-English glossary -appendices/newsroom.md # App E newsroom principle +appendices/newsroom.md # App E newsroom rendering (ADR-0009) appendices/scaffold-pattern.md # App F scaffold withdrawal pattern appendices/caveman-mode.md # App G caveman mode (non-normative, post-monolith) From 9eccf960b253098afc37ff67e9fb91a652a1980b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John Morrissey <544926+tachyon-beep@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 15:16:05 +1000 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] =?UTF-8?q?design:=20emergency=20containment=20gets=20?= =?UTF-8?q?a=20named=20owner=20=E2=80=94=20rollbacks=20are=20Isperia's=20a?= =?UTF-8?q?ccountability=20(ADR-0010)?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Wave:1 closure (peer review §24, simic-d6ea02f9a9). INV-28 amended "containment distinction" → "containment accountability": Tolaria detects and contains mechanically (neutrality preserved, INV-03); Isperia owns the accountability — every containment adjudicates back to the admitting warrant, the adjudication_policy_version in force, and the specific checks that passed and should not have. Blame attaches to the policy version, not the component; the fix is an ADR and a version bump, and retrospective re-adjudication (simic-43f5e2264a) becomes a regression test for judgement. - 02-constitution: INV-28 amended (ADR-0010 marker, section amendment note) - domains/isperia: containment-accountability subsection, responsibility, invariant, third smell (containment filed as integration shock) - domains/tolaria: detect-and-contain-only invariant - domains/urborg §15.3: CONTAINMENT_CATASTROPHE added; never shares a code with INTEGRATION_SHOCK (cost vs veto failure) - 06-growth-model §12.2: containment rule names both the code and the route - domains/wrenn: removal exception cites the split - ContainmentEvent record shape deferred to the §9 Warrant definitions (simic-0bf2c40dec); near-miss recording stays with the tail-veto issue Gates: wiki strict build green (56 pages, 4187 links). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_012qVBdHQtjsNsUbfMHSdyeF --- docs/adr/0010-containment-accountability.md | 97 +++++++++++++++++++++ docs/design/02-constitution.md | 4 +- docs/design/06-growth-model.md | 2 +- docs/design/domains/isperia.md | 14 ++- docs/design/domains/tolaria.md | 3 +- docs/design/domains/urborg.md | 3 + docs/design/domains/wrenn.md | 2 +- 7 files changed, 119 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) create mode 100644 docs/adr/0010-containment-accountability.md diff --git a/docs/adr/0010-containment-accountability.md b/docs/adr/0010-containment-accountability.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..c3f880f --- /dev/null +++ b/docs/adr/0010-containment-accountability.md @@ -0,0 +1,97 @@ +# ADR-0010 — Name the owner of emergency containment: rollbacks are Isperia's accountability + +Date: 2026-08-09 · Status: accepted +Deciders: John (wave:1 resume, product session 11) · Tracker: simic-d6ea02f9a9 +Source: peer review §24 +(`../concept/reviews/2026-08-08-esper-pivot-peer-review.md`) + +## Context + +INV-28 records emergency containment as distinct from economic judgement but +gives it no owner: "logged and reviewed" with no named authority means in +practice nobody owns it — a real hole in a constitution built on named +authorities. A rollback is evidence that a warrant was issued wrongly, and +warrants are Isperia's sole output (INV-26, INV-27); nothing else in the +system could have prevented the admission. Aurelia answers only "is there a +problem"; Momir only "here, try this". + +## Decision + +Emergency containment gets a named owner and a route back to the decision. + +1. **Detection and the rollback stay mechanical, in Tolaria.** Waiting for + adjudication while the host produces NaNs would be absurd. On a declared + safety-invariant breach Tolaria contains immediately, then reports. + Detect-and-contain is mechanical; accountability is judicial. The report + is an account of the breach, never an opinion about the candidate — + Tolaria's neutrality (INV-03) is preserved, which matters because + "Tolaria decides when to roll back on safety grounds" is a shorter step + to "Tolaria has opinions about candidates" than it looks. +2. **Accountability is Isperia's.** Every containment event routes back to + the decision, not just to the log. `AdmissionDecision` already carries + `evidence_digest`, `selected_semantic_hash`, + `adjudication_policy_version` and the per-candidate eligibility and veto + results, so the containment record names the warrant that authorised the + growth, the policy version in force, and the specific checks that passed + and should not have. A containment is thereby a defect report against a + policy — actionable in a way "candidate X was bad" is not. +3. **Blame attaches to the policy version, never to + Isperia-the-component.** With the initial rule-driven adjudicator this is + literally true: a rollback means the declared thresholds were wrong, and + the fix is an ADR and a version bump. Retrospective re-adjudication can + then ask directly: *under the revised policy, would this warrant have + issued?* — a regression test for judgement (first-class capability + tracked as simic-43f5e2264a). +4. **Cost and veto failure never share a code.** The §15.3 failure taxonomy + (`../design/domains/urborg.md`) gains `CONTAINMENT_CATASTROPHE`, + distinct from `INTEGRATION_SHOCK`: one is a cost, the other is a veto + failure. + +## Displaced constraints + +INV-28 amended. + +- Old: "**Containment distinction:** emergency safety reduction is recorded + as containment, not disguised as economic judgement." +- New: "**Containment accountability:** emergency safety reduction is + recorded as containment, never disguised as economic judgement; Tolaria + detects and contains mechanically, and every containment is adjudicated by + Isperia back to the admitting warrant and the `adjudication_policy_version` + in force — a rollback is a defect report against that policy version. + (ADR-0010)" + +No other invariant changes. INV-03 (Tolaria neutrality), INV-26/27 +(warrants), and INV-29 (authority separation) are load-bearing context and +unchanged. + +## Options considered + +- **No named owner (status quo).** Rejected: an unowned review is no + review; the constitution names authorities everywhere else. +- **Tolaria owns accountability.** Rejected: collapses detection into + judgement and erodes INV-03 — the substrate acquires opinions about + candidates. +- **Aurelia owns it (it commissioned the growth).** Rejected: Aurelia's + authority is pre-commit only (INV-29) and its question is "is there a + problem", not "should this have been admitted"; the preventable act was + the warrant. +- **Emrakul owns it (it removes structure).** Rejected: Emrakul executes + maintenance verdicts post-commit; containment is precisely the case that + bypasses ordinary maintenance adjudication, and the accountability + question concerns the admission, not the removal. + +## Consequences + +Isperia's chapter carries the accountability subsection and invariant; +Tolaria's chapter pins the detect-and-contain boundary; the growth-model +transition rules and Wrenn's removal exception cite the split; the Urborg +taxonomy gains `CONTAINMENT_CATASTROPHE` with an explicit never-share-a-code +note. The `ContainmentEvent` record shape lands with the §9 Warrant record +definitions (simic-0bf2c40dec), binding warrant id, policy version and the +passed-check list. Rollbacks are rare by construction, so this channel alone +under-feeds the veto; near-miss recording is tracked separately (the +tail-veto training-signal wave:1 issue). + +Reversal trigger: if the rule-driven adjudicator is replaced by a learned +one such that "the declared thresholds were wrong" stops being literally +true, revisit where policy-defect blame attaches — by ADR, never silently. diff --git a/docs/design/02-constitution.md b/docs/design/02-constitution.md index 66d388f..b8795c0 100644 --- a/docs/design/02-constitution.md +++ b/docs/design/02-constitution.md @@ -187,7 +187,7 @@ Changing a codename or moving an authority between names requires an architectur --- - + ## 18. Safety, Correctness and Constitutional Invariants The following are blocking invariants. @@ -219,7 +219,7 @@ The following are blocking invariants. 25. **Reversible influence:** every non-merged growth can be brought to zero influence without an uncontrolled discontinuity. 26. **Isperia admission warrant:** Wrenn cannot raise a newborn growth above zero influence without a valid warrant. 27. **Isperia maintenance warrant:** ordinary post-commit decay or lysis requires a valid maintenance decision. -28. **Containment distinction:** emergency safety reduction is recorded as containment, not disguised as economic judgement. +28. **Containment accountability:** emergency safety reduction is recorded as containment, never disguised as economic judgement; Tolaria detects and contains mechanically, and every containment is adjudicated by Isperia back to the admitting warrant and the `adjudication_policy_version` in force — a rollback is a defect report against that policy version. (ADR-0010) 29. **Authority enforcement:** Aurelia cannot manage post-commit structure; Emrakul cannot manage unborn structure; Ugin cannot issue local transitions. 30. **Grace-period protection:** contribution-based removal cannot fire before declared blend and holding windows complete. 31. **Complete negative retention:** structural rejects, compilation failures, QA failures, adjudication rejects, no-op decisions and abstentions are stored. diff --git a/docs/design/06-growth-model.md b/docs/design/06-growth-model.md index 4765b88..936a017 100644 --- a/docs/design/06-growth-model.md +++ b/docs/design/06-growth-model.md @@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ Wrenn is the sole executor of growth-state transitions and enforces these rules: - Tolaria executes optimisation and tests, never lifecycle preferences. - A transition that raises influence requires a valid Isperia warrant. - A transition that removes influence for ordinary economic reasons requires the appropriate authority and, post-commit, an Isperia maintenance warrant. -- Emergency containment may reduce influence without prior economic adjudication only when a declared safety invariant is breached; it must be logged as containment and reviewed. +- Emergency containment may reduce influence without prior economic adjudication only when a declared safety invariant is breached; Tolaria detects and contains mechanically, the event is recorded as containment (`CONTAINMENT_CATASTROPHE`, never `INTEGRATION_SHOCK`), and Isperia adjudicates it back to the admitting warrant and policy version (INV-28, ADR-0010). ### 12.3 Commitment handoff diff --git a/docs/design/domains/isperia.md b/docs/design/domains/isperia.md index dd1dee1..0d8aa3f 100644 --- a/docs/design/domains/isperia.md +++ b/docs/design/domains/isperia.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ [← HLD index](../00-INDEX.md) - + ### 13.11 Isperia — Independent Judge #### Responsibilities @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@ - adjudicate continued tenancy of committed structures; - issue maintenance warrants; - calibrate thresholds on validation trajectories only; +- own containment accountability: adjudicate every emergency containment back to the warrant and policy version that admitted the growth (ADR-0010); - and emit explicit decision reasons and policy versions. #### Lexicographic admission order (ADR-0004) @@ -112,6 +113,14 @@ Admission and retention thresholds form a Schmitt trigger: admission requires th The hysteresis band \(\Delta\) is an explicit, versioned Isperia policy parameter, carried by `adjudication_policy_version`, and its width is measured against observed execution noise \(\sigma_{\mathrm{exec}}\) — sized so noise-driven estimate movement cannot cross both thresholds — never picked by feel. Cooldowns are a frequency limiter for pathological cases, not the stability mechanism: they are a time-domain patch and do not remove a threshold-domain instability. +#### Containment accountability (ADR-0010) + +A rollback is evidence that a warrant was issued wrongly, and warrants are Isperia's sole output — nothing else in the system could have prevented the admission. Tolaria owns detection and the rollback itself: waiting for adjudication while the host produces NaNs would be absurd. Tolaria acts, then reports. Detect-and-contain is mechanical; accountability is judicial. + +Every containment event therefore routes back to the decision, not just to the log. `AdmissionDecision` already carries `evidence_digest`, `selected_semantic_hash`, `adjudication_policy_version` and the per-candidate eligibility and veto results, so the containment record names the warrant that authorised the growth, the policy version in force, and the specific checks that passed and should not have. That is a defect report against a policy, actionable in a way "candidate X was bad" is not. + +Blame attaches to the policy version, never to Isperia-the-component. With the initial rule-driven adjudicator this is literally true: a rollback means the declared thresholds were wrong, and the fix is an ADR and a version bump. Retrospective re-adjudication then asks directly: *under the revised policy, would this warrant have issued?* — a regression test for judgement. Containment catastrophes carry their own failure code (`CONTAINMENT_CATASTROPHE`, `urborg.md`); they are never booked as integration shock, because one is a cost and the other is a veto failure. + #### Invariants - Isperia does not execute tests, alter data, call kernels or rerun a branch. @@ -122,9 +131,12 @@ The hysteresis band \(\Delta\) is an explicit, versioned Isperia policy paramete - Every veto, and every thin-margin pass, is recorded per candidate in `tail_veto_results` (INV-31). - Decision thresholds are frozen before confirmatory runs. - Every warrant is bound to a specific evidence digest, semantic hash, envelope and policy version. +- Every containment event is adjudicated back to its admitting warrant and `adjudication_policy_version`; the containment defect attaches to the policy version (INV-28). #### Smell > If Isperia asks for a more favourable minibatch after seeing the evidence, the judge has tampered with the case. > If a candidate's measured benefit is cited as a reason to soften the veto, the judge has repriced catastrophe. + +> If a containment is filed as integration shock, a veto failure has been repriced as a cost. diff --git a/docs/design/domains/tolaria.md b/docs/design/domains/tolaria.md index ccf2257..19d5d94 100644 --- a/docs/design/domains/tolaria.md +++ b/docs/design/domains/tolaria.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ [← HLD index](../00-INDEX.md) - + ### 13.2 Tolaria — Training and Execution Infrastructure #### Responsibilities @@ -51,6 +51,7 @@ All modes and regimes use the same host-runtime interface and, wherever possible - A branch-matured candidate is deployed only by adopting the branch or replaying it under the declared validated deployment protocol from the common snapshot. - Ambiguous or low-margin Field cases can be escalated to Academy-exact execution. - Execution failures are reported, not interpreted as policy decisions. +- Emergency containment is detect-and-contain only: on a declared safety-invariant breach Tolaria reduces influence mechanically and reports to Isperia; the report is an account of the breach, never an opinion about the candidate (INV-28, ADR-0010). #### Smell diff --git a/docs/design/domains/urborg.md b/docs/design/domains/urborg.md index 05fe9cd..30a65b5 100644 --- a/docs/design/domains/urborg.md +++ b/docs/design/domains/urborg.md @@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ ADJUDICATION_RISK_REJECT ADJUDICATION_UNCERTAINTY_RETEST MATURED_STALE INTEGRATION_SHOCK +CONTAINMENT_CATASTROPHE HOLDING_FAILURE CONTINUED_TENANCY_FAILURE HOST_DEPENDENCE_ONLY @@ -121,6 +122,8 @@ BUDGET_OVERRUN BRANCH_TRANSPLANT_VIOLATION ``` +`INTEGRATION_SHOCK` and `CONTAINMENT_CATASTROPHE` never share a code: one is a cost, the other is a veto failure (INV-28, ADR-0010). + #### 15.4 Reference ancestry and scaffold status diff --git a/docs/design/domains/wrenn.md b/docs/design/domains/wrenn.md index d0cde12..035a5c7 100644 --- a/docs/design/domains/wrenn.md +++ b/docs/design/domains/wrenn.md @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ - Region contracts describe attachment legality and tensor shape, not a suggested phenotype. - It will not raise influence without a valid Isperia admission warrant. - The embodied canonical semantic hash matches Isperia’s selected hash and Jin-Gitaxias’s tested hash. -- Removal uses gradual blend-out except for declared emergency containment. +- Removal uses gradual blend-out except for declared emergency containment (Tolaria detects and contains; Isperia adjudicates the containment back to the admitting warrant — INV-28, ADR-0010). - Occupant-specific economy state resets on slot recycling. #### Smell From 6259f551e067cb381fe45e95abe4005b9283d0cc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: John Morrissey <544926+tachyon-beep@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2026 15:20:17 +1000 Subject: [PATCH 3/3] =?UTF-8?q?product:=20grant=20review=202026-08-09=20?= =?UTF-8?q?=E2=80=94=20ratify=20the=20two=20mechanical=20citation=20rename?= =?UTF-8?q?s,=20scope=20unchanged?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Owner re-confirmed the authority grant (session 11) and ratified the repo-discipline line's citation updates: Namespec 2.0 (PDR-0020) and the newsroom rule renamed to the evidence-routing rule INV-07/INV-09 (ADR-0009). Last-reviewed stamp advanced; no scope change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_012qVBdHQtjsNsUbfMHSdyeF --- docs/product/vision.md | 8 ++++++-- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/product/vision.md b/docs/product/vision.md index 6240d64..b6f0995 100644 --- a/docs/product/vision.md +++ b/docs/product/vision.md @@ -53,10 +53,14 @@ over-provisioning. No Legacy Code policy). ## Authority grant -Granted by: john (GitHub: tachyon-beep) Last reviewed: 2026-08-08 +Granted by: john (GitHub: tachyon-beep) Last reviewed: 2026-08-09 Review cadence: on any vision change, or monthly — whichever first. Status: CONFIRMED — owner directed carryover of the esper-lite grant -(~/esper-lite/docs/product/vision.md) adapted to Simic, 2026-08-08. +(~/esper-lite/docs/product/vision.md) adapted to Simic, 2026-08-08; +re-confirmed 2026-08-09 (session 11), ratifying the two mechanical +citation renames in the repo-discipline line below (Namespec 2.0 — +PDR-0020; evidence-routing rule INV-07/INV-09 — ADR-0009). Scope +unchanged. Autonomous within strategy — the agent MAY, without asking: prioritize the backlog, write specs/PRDs, dispatch delivery, **launch/kill