core/docs/handoff/ARC-CLOSE-TEMPLATE.md
Claude 71bf04fb44
feat(provenance,teaching): close the lateral gaps the assessment actually found
Squashes the arc's work into one commit; the workflow-file edit it originally
carried is excluded (see the end of this message).

## Lane 1 — Workbench recorded a proved answer as ungrounded

With deduction_serving_enabled ratified ON (ADR-0256), workbench/api.py's live
chat route builds a bare ChatRuntime(), so the deduction composer decides
Workbench turns and stamps grounding_source="deduction" — but
_coerce_grounding_source carried a hand-copied whitelist of the six pre-arc
labels and silently rewrote anything else to "none". The runtime comment
reasoned this was inert because "REPL turns do not flow through Workbench's
CognitivePipelineRecord path". True, and irrelevant: the traffic flows the
other way. Stale since 2026-07-24.

Scope is one field. workbench/api.py:818 prefers TurnEvent.epistemic_state,
which read epistemic_state_needed — honest. So the UNregistered path degraded
honestly while the hand-copied whitelist asserted a falsehood; a second copy of
a closed enum was worse than no copy. Hence registration AND derivation:
GROUNDING_SOURCES exposes the Literal's members, and the coercion reads it.
workbench-ui badges/tokens/snapshot follow; enumCoverage.test.ts forces atomicity.

## Lane 2 — the ratification ceremony

The discovery loop was instrumented but not closed. teaching/ratification.py
turns a reviewed decision into a chain record, a corpus commit, and a receipt.

Its design turns on one observation: _ratified_rows DROPS unadmissible rows
silently — correct when serving, a trap when ratifying, because the file grows,
the commit lands, and the band count does not move. So the ceremony refuses to
call an append a ratification until it has re-read the curriculum through the
real loader and seen the chain arrive; a non-admitted append is rolled back.
Validation is a pre-flight courtesy, admission is the proof.

Arena queue entry and ledger reseal are deliberately NOT performed (bridge rule
1); the receipt names them. Front door: `core proposal-queue ratify`, a sibling
of `review` rather than a flag on it.

## Lane 3 — structural closures

- ADR-0263 gains rule 5: absence policy is DECLARED in CAPABILITY_LEDGERS, not
  passed at the call site. An AST-matched test fails if a serving path passes
  missing_ok again.
- Deductive suite added WHOLE to the pre-push gate: 285 tests in 29s against
  smoke's 216 in 62s, so no coverage trade was needed.
- Smoke/CI parity assertion made bidirectional. It was one-directional, and had
  drifted.
- test_prior_surface_deduction_binding.py pins correction binding on the
  deduction path. The review's diagnosis did NOT reproduce — hash_surface moves
  in lockstep — so it pins what is there. Mutation-checked.
- Domain-keyed ADR index over 312 flat-numbered files, explicitly partial.
- Arc-close brief template, plus this arc's own brief filled in against it.

## Lanes 4 and 5 — two premises falsified by measurement, one of them mine

Math 4.2: baseline reproduced (correct=5 wrong=0 refused=495); all four named
cases traced to one seam with each gap isolated by one-variable probes. Then the
number that changes the recommendation: the gap blocking case 0000 affects 1
case in 500, the 'than' gap blocking 0001 affects 2. ADR-0251's prohibition on
per-case growth now rests on a count. No reader change made.

CGA: versor_condition is 0.22% of a turn, not the "~10x proof latency" I claimed
— that multiplied an isolated microbenchmark by a call count and compared it to
a single verdict's latency. The real cost is geometric_product at 33,986
calls/turn (~73%) via cga_inner in search paths. The obvious closed form is NOT
bit-exact (954/4000 in f32); backend.vault_recall's serial fold IS (3000/3000,
worst-rel 0) and is the correct target. cargo test could not run —
static.crates.io is denied by the sandbox network policy — so the Rust parity
question stays open and the typestate lane is carried forward, not shipped
uncompiled.

## Not landed: three lines owed to .github/workflows/smoke.yml

The CI smoke gate is narrower than the local one —
test_pack_draft_serve_boundary.py (ADR-0253 INV-33) has been local-only, unseen
because the parity pin checked one direction. The edit was authored and rejected
at push for lacking the `workflow` OAuth scope, so it is recorded as a named,
dated PENDING_IN_CI exception rather than dropped: the assertion still fires on
any new divergence, and a second guard fires once the three land.

[Verification]: pre-push gates all green — smoke 236 passed, warmed_session 10
passed, deductive 285 passed. Ratification 14, ADR index 5, CLI suites 10.
Grounding/epistemic sweep 741 passed 1 skipped. workbench-ui 598 passed across
73 files, tsc -b clean. capability index 11 passed, digest unchanged. Math
holdout correct=5 wrong=0 refused=495. Committed chain corpora byte-unchanged
after the tests that write to them.
Environment caveat: the repo pins requires-python ==3.12.13, which uv cannot
fetch for linux-x86_64, so `uv sync --locked` fails. All Python runs used a
scratch venv on 3.12.11 with declared deps — not the locked universe, not the
full ~12k suite. The pin was left untouched. Re-run on a 3.12.13 host before
treating this as merge evidence.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01FduW6Krm3PPQv3P5iwBYtx
2026-07-25 04:51:15 +00:00

107 lines
4 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

# Arc-Close Brief — TEMPLATE
> Copy to `docs/handoff/<arc-slug>/BRIEF-CLOSE-<arc-slug>.md` when an arc ends.
> Delete every instruction block (`>`) as you fill it in.
## Why this template exists
The handoff system is mature in one direction only. `BRIEF-O` / `BRIEF-S` are
**downward** briefs: a planning tier telling an execution tier what to build.
Nothing goes back **up**. When an arc closes, the tier that actually executed it
holds the corrected ground truth — which assumptions were falsified, what the
flag state now is, which "next steps" the measurements killed — and that
knowledge currently survives only as commit messages and research docs, which
the next arc's opener must reconstruct by re-reading every ADR from the arc's
first number onward.
The generalization arc minted eight ADRs in roughly 48 hours. That is the
cadence this template is sized for: an opener should be able to start scoping
from **this one file** and reach for ADRs on demand, not as a prerequisite.
The single most important section is **Falsified assumptions**. A downward brief
states a plan; an arc-close brief states which parts of that plan turned out to
be wrong. That is the part which cannot be recovered from the diff.
---
# Arc-Close Brief — <arc name>
**Arc:** <slug> · **Closed:** <YYYY-MM-DD> · **Closing tier:** <Fable/Opus/Sonnet + risk tier>
**Plan of record:** `docs/plans/<plan>.md`
**ADRs minted:** <ADR-NNNN ADR-NNNN>
## 1. What shipped
> One line per landed capability, each naming its enforcement site. Not commit
> messages — capabilities. A reader should be able to tell what the system can
> now do that it could not before.
| Capability | ADR | Enforcement site | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| | | | |
## 2. Flag state at close
> The single highest-value table here. Every flag the arc touched, its default
> **now**, and what ratified it. A flag flipped ON is a live capability whose
> test suite is a regression suite — say so.
| Flag | Default at close | Ratified by | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| | | | |
## 3. Falsified assumptions
> **Do not skip this section.** For each: what the plan assumed, what the
> measurement showed, and where the evidence lives. An assumption that was
> merely *not reached* is not falsified — say "untested" and mean it.
| Plan assumed | Measurement showed | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| | | |
## 4. Binding constraint going into the next arc
> One paragraph. Not a list. If the next arc has one thing standing between it
> and progress, name it and quantify it. "Curriculum volume: every band is
> 24×73× short of the entailed-bucket floor" is a binding constraint;
> "we should improve coverage" is not.
## 5. Trigger state
> For any phase the plan declared trigger-gated: is the trigger now met? Cite
> what met it. If met, say what the next tier must design **before** writing
> code — the design work that should land in a higher tier than the
> implementation.
## 6. What is NOT next, and why
> The most expensive thing an opener can do is resume a thread the closing tier
> already killed. List the plausible-looking next steps that the arc's own
> evidence rules out, each with its reason. Be specific enough that someone
> cannot re-propose them without engaging the evidence.
## 7. Open items carried forward
| Item | Kind | Where it is recorded |
|---|---|---|
| | deferred / blocked / untested | |
## 8. Gates and their state at close
> Local-first is the merge bar (`AGENTS.md`), so record what was actually run,
> with counts. "Green" without a count is not evidence.
| Gate | Command | Result at close |
|---|---|---|
| smoke | `uv run core test --suite smoke -q` | |
| deductive | `uv run core test --suite deductive -q` | |
| lane pins | | |
## 9. Ground truth corrections for the next opener
> Free text. The things you would say out loud if you could brief the next
> session in person — including anything in the plan of record that is now
> stale. If a comment in the code reasons from a premise that has since
> changed, name the file and line: that is exactly the class of staleness
> nobody greps for.