The tag was specified to land on 128109b, where the package still declared
0.4.0 in both places a version is written. The pilots install FROM the tag, so
they would have pinned a pre-release that reports the previous release.
Two requirements the "minimally requires" list did not cover, both stated
elsewhere in the plan:
- The CHANGELOG entry is load-bearing, not ceremony: the plan makes the
provisional status real by having the profile docstring AND the entry both
say the surface may change without a deprecation cycle, and name the pilot
repos. The docstring had it (profiles.py:694); the CHANGELOG stopped at
0.4.0.
- pyproject.toml and __init__.py both said 0.4.0.
Nothing in the run path reads __version__, which is why a stale one survives a
green suite. test_the_declared_version_agrees_with_the_packaged_one is the only
machine check on it — written failing first, against a one-sided bump. The tag
NAME remains a human step; no test can catch that one.
README keeps pointing at v0.4.0 on purpose: a pre-release for three named
pilots is not the general install line, and OKF_LATEST does not move until GA.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01CVTup4v7tW9QiVyBENk2LV
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).
Consumers run mypy --strict against the inline annotations; without the
marker every imported symbol degrades to Any.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
