Commit graph

7 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
d8e466791c docs(phase-3): split table over all 25 gates, and two corrected premises
Phase 3 starts with a written mapping of the proving consumer's gates to
exactly one of Profile / Guard / Consumer, reviewed before any porting.
Drafted here against claude-code-llm-wiki's validate.py and bundle.py at
their 9ee5a8e, which is their single gate entrypoint, so the enumeration
is exhaustive against that commit and no other.

Reading the validator corrected two things this plan asserted before it
had been read, both of which would have produced a wrong STRICT_V1:

- Required frontmatter keys are FOUR (type, title, description,
  timestamp), not the eight the plan listed. Those eight were a
  truncation of FRONTMATTER_KEY_ORDER, which is an eleven-key allowlist
  doubling as canonical emission order. frontmatter_schema therefore
  needs three fields -- required, allowlisted, ordered -- not one
  required/optional pair.
- Reserved files are THREE basenames, not two: README.md is reserved
  like index.md and log.md but in a third way, present and exempt from
  the document gates while still content-scanned. A two-valued
  required/required-absent policy cannot express it.

Two of the 25 gates bundle checks from different columns
(LLM_OUTPUT_LINT, BUNDLE_URL_ALLOWLIST). They are decomposed per check
rather than assigned wholesale to a dominant column, which would have
moved the residue to the wrong side of the boundary.

Also recorded: index policy is the widest gap between the two profiles
(per-bundle vs per-directory, two link formats, append-if-absent vs
exact match, root index with or without frontmatter), and C4 is
confirmed with the operator -- profiles in code, no config-file loading
in v1.

Four open questions are addressed to the proving consumer in the
artifact; no porting until they and the table come back reviewed.
2026-07-25 12:30:51 +02:00
0b77c58a1c docs(plan): correct the Phase 4 parity oracle and the catalog re-pin premise
Both were wrong, and the convention owner corrected them: this library is not
a marketplace plugin, so there is no catalog ref to re-pin -- the integration
is a registry entry in the catalog's parity gate. And the catalog's vendored
okf-check.mjs is not byte-identical to okr's (~141 differing lines of code, an
intentional layer-1 floor), so it cannot serve as a conformance oracle. Parity
is behavioural over the spec section 3 floor in default read-mode, per file,
measured by that gate over an adversarial corpus.
2026-07-25 07:35:54 +02:00
241e00f27a feat(guard): wire Doors B and C to the real guard (Phase 2 step 4)
Adds llm_ingestion_guard>=0.2,<0.3 as this library's first and only runtime
dependency, and guard_adapter.py -- the one module that imports it. The flows
themselves are unchanged: they still take an injected gate, and importing the
package still does not import the guard, so a Door A consumer is unaffected by
the dependency's state.

Door B screens the exact bytes it persists. The guard's §6 bookends
(prepare_input -> model -> screen_output) assume a model call in between; this
library makes none, and prepare_input returns prompt-shaped text (sanitized
AND spotlight-fenced with a per-call nonce) that must never reach disk. So the
adapter calls screen_output alone, on the extracted text as it stands, and
hands that same text back -- the verdict is then a statement about the bytes
actually written. This supersedes the plan's "bookends" wording, recorded
there under "Settled during implementation (step 4)".

It follows that the gate refuses rather than repairs: a file carrying an
invisible carrier is rejected, not stripped and persisted. Sanitizing first
would write a document differing invisibly from the operator's file while
source_sha256 still points at the original bytes. Operator decision; the
policy is PRESET_USER_UPLOAD, so any finding at all is held back.

Door C hands the bundle over whole to okf.import_bundle, which resolves the
cross-link graph across concepts. Per-concept reasons are derived from the
scan findings (severity:label) because stamp_concept keeps the disposition and
drops the reason strings behind it.

Assumption B1 closes as a signature smoke test over what the adapters actually
call -- screen_output and okf.import_bundle signatures, the Disposition values
both doors compare by value, the Origin/Channel vocabularies Door C validates,
the result fields read, and the upload preset's shape. prepare_input is not
pinned: drift there cannot reach this library. Behaviour is pinned against the
real scanner too, including the persist-gate proof that a fail-secure fixture
leaves the bundle byte-identical.

B2 closes with it: git+https tag install over anonymously readable HTTPS, no
credential. A direct reference is an install-time channel, not the pin -- the
range stays in pyproject, is satisfied by the tag install today, and resolves
normally once the package index exists. A packaging test enforces that the
guard remains the only runtime dependency (verified by hand-mutation).
2026-07-25 07:32:45 +02:00
f10fc60de2 feat(import): Door C flow against an injected import gate (Phase 2 step 5)
Reads an external OKF bundle as {bundle-relative path -> document text},
hands it WHOLE to an injected gate over the guard's okf.import_bundle (a
bundle-level call: it resolves the cross-link graph across concepts), and
merges only concepts clearing the non-blocking floor. Same injection pattern
as Door B, so the core stays dependency-free while the CI channel for the
real guard is settled.

Two constraints shaped the design and are pinned by tests:

- A merged concept is written VERBATIM. Stamping provenance into it would
  require round-tripping its frontmatter through this library's line-oriented
  parser, which cannot represent the block lists the guard's parser accepts --
  silent data loss -- and would persist bytes the guard never screened.
- Ownership is therefore proven by content identity: identical bytes at the
  target name are a no-op re-merge (re-import of an unchanged bundle is
  idempotent), and anything else at the name is refused. Curated content and
  an updated concept are refused alike; refusing is what never destroys.

The floor is fail-closed beyond the plan's "no error" wording: an error, an
unrecognised disposition, and a concept the gate returned no verdict for are
all refusals. quarantine_review stays its own bucket, as at Door B.
origin/channel are validated against the guard's pinned vocabulary -- it
derives trust from origin by enum identity, so an unrecognised string would be
silently downgraded rather than caught.

Three primitives promoted for reuse rather than duplicated:
reduce_to_id_grammar and check_filename_length to materialize.py, and
extract.decode_text. Door C slugs the WHOLE concept path, so tables/users.md
and views/users.md stay distinct. Concept discovery folds case explicitly
rather than globbing *.md, whose case-sensitivity follows the filesystem and
would import the same bundle differently on APFS and ext4.

README's "what is gated today" section corrected: it claimed nothing is gated,
which is no longer true, but the honest statement is narrower than "the doors
are gated" -- the library cannot verify that an injected adapter is a real
guard, and a permissive stub is believed.

405 tests green; ruff, ruff format and mypy --strict clean.
2026-07-25 06:57:25 +02:00
99c899f4ed docs(plan): correct Door C guard call — v0.2 has no allow_reserved kwarg
Stage 0 guard-readiness check (this session) verified the real
`llm-ingestion-guard` v0.2.0 surface against ground truth: the Door C plan
assumed `okf.import_bundle(bundle, origin=…, channel=…, allow_reserved=False)`,
but the shipped signature is `import_bundle(bundle, *, origin, channel)` — no
`allow_reserved` parameter. Reserved-name rejection of `index.md`/`log.md` is
unconditional in the guard (OKFPathError, no toggle), so the intended default
semantics are unchanged; only the documented call was wrong and would have
raised TypeError if written verbatim. Correct the plan line before Phase 2
code is written against it.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HBbjgS5A55RVavoyjJC4FX
2026-07-24 20:10:57 +02:00
0e18a6c0a9 docs(plan): add cross-phase execution ordering
Sequences the remaining roadmap (Stage 0 guard gate -> Phase 2 -> Phase 3
-> Phase 4) with the quality rationale for the order: guard readiness
verified before any Phase 2 code, Phase 2 split guard-independent-first,
Phase 3's configurability extracted only after two concrete consumers
exist, Phase 4 code last on a frozen contract with its coordination
started early. Connective tissue over the four per-phase plans; owns the
order and reasons, not the phase detail.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01HBbjgS5A55RVavoyjJC4FX
2026-07-24 20:01:45 +02:00
b0ad2aedfb docs(plan): add detailed phase 1-4 implementation plans
Phase 1 (Door A): ingest-spec v1 implementation + §11 golden fixtures,
pinned to the current spec revision, with TDD order and byte-exact
verification criteria. Phase 2 (Doors B/C): guard-gated inbox and
external bundle import. Phase 3: configurable bundle contract via a
profile object, default profile locked to the golden suite. Phase 4:
zero-dep Node half, coordination-first with owner sign-offs.

Each plan carries explicit key assumptions with tests and a
verification section.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01QeqhJpYQyghASjiJo5EhGg
2026-07-16 10:58:08 +02:00