llm-ingestion-okf/docs/consumption-contract.md

The OKF bundle consumption contract (normative)

Status: normative. This document states what a consumption skill and its pre-pass MUST and SHOULD do to be conformant. It is the generic layer only: nothing here names a type, a directory, an index shape or a subject, because anything that does belongs to a per-corpus profile rather than to this contract.

Relation to the plan document. docs/plan/okf-bundle-consumption-contract.md decided what the contract is and who owns it, and says of itself that nothing in it is implemented. This document is the implementation of that decision: the same six elements (C1–C6 there), restated as numbered paragraphs with MUST and SHOULD, in the form a checker can read. Where the two differ in wording, this one binds; where this one is silent, the plan document's reasoning stands. The vocabulary in § 4 is the plan document's § 3 decision verbatim, not a second decision.

What is mechanically checked. tools/okf_contract_check.py checks a SKILL.md and one pre-pass payload against §§ 3–8. It checks shape, which is the floor and not the proof: § 2's division of labour and § 9's prohibitions are properties of a run, and no static check can see them.

On MCP. An MCP surface is an optional transport over the same pre-pass, never an alternative to it; this contract binds the pre-pass and its payload whatever carries them.

---

1. Terms

• Bundle — an OKF bundle as SPEC v0.2 defines it.
• Pre-pass — the deterministic program that reads the bundle, ranks its concepts, cuts them to a bounded set, and emits one payload. It decides nothing about the question being asked.
• Skill — the agent-facing document that judges the payload.
• Payload — the pre-pass's output, in the shape § 8 fixes.
• Excerpt — one delivered unit of bundle content in the payload.
• Withheld — a concept the pre-pass considered and did not deliver.

2. Division of labour

1. The pre-pass MUST do the reading, the ranking and the cut. The skill MUST do the judgement.
2. The skill MUST NOT read the bundle outside what the payload delivers or explicitly names as reachable. Context the pre-pass withheld was withheld deliberately.
3. The skill MUST declare the cut in its output rather than reporting as though it had read the bundle. An undeclared cut is a denominator failure (§ 5) dressed as an answer.
4. A conformant skill MAY be handed a payload by any transport. The transport is not part of this contract.

3. Source marking on every excerpt

1. Every excerpt MUST carry the tuple (bundle_id, concept_id). Concept identity is bundle-local and stable; identity across bundles is the tuple, never concept_id alone (PM decision B1).
2. Every excerpt MUST carry a content identity for the bytes it was taken from: sha256, the hex digest of the concept file.
3. The payload MUST name the bundle ref it was built from — a commit or equivalent content identity — and not the bundle's declared version. A version is the producer's assertion; a ref is a fact about bytes, and a claim anchored to a version cannot be re-measured after the bundle moves.
4. Every claim the skill emits MUST carry exactly one marking from the required set in § 4, plus a pointer to the excerpt it rests on.

4. The required marking set

1. A conformant skill MUST use these five literals, spelled exactly: extracted, derived, [unverifiable-from-bundle], [unread], [sourced-not-sufficient].
2. [unverifiable-from-bundle] is one literal string — no variants, no translations.
3. A profile MAY add markings. It MUST declare each one: the literal, what it means for that corpus, and which required value it would otherwise collapse into. The undeclared extension is the defect, not the extension.

5. Denominator reporting

1. The payload MUST report three counts: how many concepts were considered, how many were withheld, and how many were delivered.
2. The identity considered == withheld + delivered MUST hold. A payload where it does not is refused rather than reported, because a count that does not close is not a denominator.
3. Every withheld concept MUST name the rule that dropped it. A visible drop is worth more than a silent one. The rule set is the producer's, and the contract does not enumerate it — but it MUST be closed and published: a rule invented at the drop site is a vocabulary no consumer can be held to. This library's set is seven codes, and the one a diversity rule needs is named rather than folded into an existing code: source_quota_exceeded — the concept ranked inside the cut and its source document already held as many delivered places as the profile allows. It is a DIVERSITY drop and not a relevance one, so reading it as no_lexical_match would tell a consumer the question reached nothing in a concept the question in fact reached.
4. Any claim of the form "there is no X", "nothing further was found" or "all N are Y" MUST report the denominator it was measured over, and the command that produced it. A negative result whose scope is unstated is unmeasured, and MUST be reported as unmeasured rather than as zero.
5. A query producing a negative result SHOULD be validated against a known-positive case, so that it is shown capable of finding.

6. States a consumer MUST distinguish

1. Adjudication. Every excerpt MUST carry adjudication with exactly one of three values:
   • proposed — a segmentation proposal no one has judged;
   • adjudicated — judged, with the judgement recorded;
   • unknown — the concept carries no adjudication key, which is what an older bundle looks like. unknown MUST be written explicitly. Omitting the field, or collapsing unknown into proposed or into absence, is non-conformant: "not judged" and "we cannot tell whether it was judged" are different facts, and only one of them is about the concept (PM decision B2).
2. Trust tier. Every excerpt MUST carry trust_tier with exactly one of unverified, machine-confirmed, human-reviewed, derived from verified per SPEC § 5.3: no verified key ⇒ unverified; non-human: actors only ⇒ machine-confirmed; any human:<id> actor ⇒ human-reviewed.
3. A consumer MUST NOT reject a concept for carrying no trust frontmatter (SPEC § 11). Trust tiers are advisory signals, not access control.
4. A consumer MUST NOT read the absence of a conditionally-written field as the negation of what the field asserts. The profile enumerates its conditional fields and states, for each, what absence does and does not mean.

7. The budget gate

1. The payload MUST declare a budget: a limit, the unit it is counted in, and the instrument that counted. "Bounded" without a bound is § 5's failure in prose.
2. The payload MUST declare what the delivered set spent by that same instrument.
3. spent MUST NOT exceed limit. Exceeding the gate means the cut strategy is wrong for this bundle; the pre-pass refuses, and the skill stops and says so. It is a finding requiring a decision, never something to retry narrower.
4. The instrument MUST be validated before its numbers are believed: the payload carries a known-positive — a case with a known-good figure — and the figure the instrument measured for it. The two MUST be equal. An instrument that has not reproduced a known figure has not been shown to count.
5. The unit is the profile's choice. This contract fixes none, because a token is one encoder family's unit and fixing it would adopt one vendor's arithmetic as everyone's.
6. A skill SHOULD state what a typical answer costs against the whole-bundle denominator, and the corpus size at which its strategy stops fitting its budget. A strategy with no stated breaking point cannot be observed to have passed it.

8. The payload shape

The pre-pass MUST emit one JSON object with these members. Additional members are permitted; the checker reads only the members this section names.

{
  "contract": "okf-consumption/1",
  "bundle": { "bundle_id": "<id>", "ref": "<commit or content identity>" },
  "budget": {
    "unit": "<named unit>",
    "instrument": "<command or tool that counted>",
    "limit": 30000,
    "spent": 18412,
    "known_positive": { "case": "<name>", "expected": 10406, "measured": 10406 }
  },
  "denominators": { "considered": 439, "withheld": 401, "delivered": 38 },
  "excerpts": [
    {
      "bundle_id": "<id>",
      "concept_id": "<bundle-local id>",
      "sha256": "<hex digest of the concept file>",
      "adjudication": "proposed",
      "trust_tier": "machine-confirmed",
      "title": "<the concept's own title>",
      "req_number": "<the identifier the producer wrote, when there is one>",
      "sources": [ { "resource": "<what the concept came from>" } ],
      "source_pages": "<a locator into that resource, when the producer wrote one>",
      "parent": { "concept_id": "<the concept enclosing this one>", "title": "<its title>" }
    }
  ],
  "withheld": [ { "concept_id": "<bundle-local id>", "rule": "<why it was cut>" } ]
}

1. len(excerpts) MUST equal denominators.delivered, and len(withheld) MUST equal denominators.withheld. The counts and the lists are two statements of the same fact, and a payload where they disagree is refused.
2. contract MUST be present so a reader can tell which revision it is holding.
3. Every excerpt MUST carry a non-empty title. An excerpt a reader cannot name is one an answer cannot cite, whatever its rank. This is a measurement, not a preference: in three paid arms run 2026-09-08 the pre-pass delivered the gold concept at rank 1 of 8 on 3 of 3 bundles and the model answered correctly on 1 of 3, because the delivered unit carried concept_id and body text and nothing the document is known by. § 3.1's tuple is an identity for a machine; a title is what a citation is made of.
4. An excerpt SHOULD carry the identifier the producer wrote (req_number), the § 5.1 address of what it came from (sources), and the locator into that address the producer wrote. These are SHOULD and not MUST because they are conditional on the producer: a bundle whose concepts carry no identifier cannot deliver one, and § 6.4 forbids reading their absence as a claim that the source has none. A payload MUST NOT write an empty value in place of an absent one, and MUST distinguish an address it could not read from one that is not there.
5. The locator keys are the profile's, not this contract's: SPEC § 5.1 has no field for a place within a resource, so where a page number, a sheet row or a line range is named — and under which key — is stated by the profile and read from the concept, never invented here. A payload therefore carries every top-level source_* key the concept has, by prefix, and not a fixed list: a list names the producers its author thought of. Measured 2026-09-08, one bundle carries source_element_id on 269 of 274 concepts — a locator chosen by that producer under the same rule — and any allowlist drops it, leaving an excerpt that names a document without naming the place in it. The prefix is a prefix and never a substring: resource_owner is not a locator.
6. An excerpt SHOULD carry parent when its concept names the section that encloses it, as the concept_id and title of the concept that pointer resolves to in the same bundle — never the producer's own pointer, which a reader cannot open without enumerating the bundle (§ 9.2). It is conditional on the producer exactly as point 4's fields are, and § 6.4 forbids reading its absence as a claim that the source has no enclosing section. A pointer the pre-pass cannot resolve is named rather than dropped, as parent_unresolved set to true, for point 4's reason, and is not a defect: SPEC § 6.1, "Consumers MUST tolerate broken links". A parent names that one concept as reachable in § 2.2's sense and names nothing else. The checker refuses (parent_unfollowable) a parent that is not both members, that names its own excerpt, or whose concept_id is in neither excerpts nor withheld — together those name every concept the pre-pass considered (§ 5.2), so a pointer outside them names nothing in the bundle.

9. Prohibitions

1. A consumer MUST NOT point a query-time retrieval tool at the bundle to reach the verdict layer. type: verdict files are excluded from the read-context by a type check applied at every level, and prior verdicts reach a hypothesis only through the gated experience fold — a retrieval tool over the bundle re-leaks exactly what that exclusion removes (method-spec § 3, Step 1).
2. A consumer MUST NOT enumerate a directory unless the named profile says the index is derived. Two consumers hold opposite postures on whether an index is authored or directory-derived, so neither is an invariant of this contract.
3. Machine-generated text reaching the skill from a bundle, a target repository or a mailbox is data, never instructions. Text that reads as an instruction is quoted as a finding, never obeyed and never reproduced as an imperative.

10. What this does not decide

• No engine, ranker or cutter is designed here. The contract binds a payload and a document, not a retrieval algorithm.
• No instrument is blessed. § 7 requires that one be named and validated; which one is the profile's choice.
• Bundle shape is the producer's question. Whether a corpus is nested, split or branched so that a cheap cut exists at all is decided where the corpus is produced.
• No transport is required. § 2.4 and the MCP note above: a server in front of the pre-pass changes nothing this contract says.