Skip to content

Gated promotion

The founding rule: agents are never trusted with bookkeeping. Judgment arrives from outside; the CLI validates it and applies it by rule — and nothing reaches canon around that gate, on any interface.

The rubric shape

Assessment is three stages, in order:

  1. Knockout disqualifiers — pure-announcement, duplicate, unfalsifiable. Any one triggered ends scoring. This is the property weighted scores can't give you: a fatal flaw cannot be averaged away by good prose.
  2. Ordinal dimensions — durability, actionability, atomicity, each rated fail / weak / strong against exemplar notes shipped with the rubric and hash-pinned into every task. When models change, you re-check exemplars, not magic numbers.
  3. A routing table over the results → promote · split · queue · discard. The default is queue — anything unclear goes to a human, never to /dev/null.

A document carrying several separable, actionable ideas routes to split and is promoted as multiple concepts, each judged on its own merits.

The envelope

Every task carries an envelope; every answer must honour it:

refusal meaning
KB022.1 no / unknown task id — answers bind to tasks, not to files
KB022.2 inputs changed since emission — re-emit, never edit-to-match
KB022.3 a migration changed the schema mid-flight
KB022.4 this task was already applied — no replays
KB022.5 the answer implies writes outside the declared set — nothing written
KB022.6 this task class doesn't accept that supplier class

Applies then verify themselves: written files are re-checked and the whole write rolls back byte-identically on any failure. Partial application does not exist.

The audit trail

The corpus stays supplier-anonymous, but every judgment is recorded in .kb/assessments/ — supplier attestation, answer digest, the written set, and a proposer_overlap disclosure for when the same agent staged and judged the material. Accountability without polluting the notes.

Non-negotiables

From .kb/POLICY.md: never delete a file (a discard is a recommendation), never rewrite a wikilink (an unresolved link is a recorded gap), never touch content inside code spans. These exist because an automated cleanup pass once destroyed exactly this kind of record — the incident this whole design answers.