Generic, open framework on Microsoft Agent Framework (MAF): multi-agent cost-saving proposals gated by a mandatory deterministic validator, with HITL learning.
Find a file
Kjell Tore Guttormsen 873f5fa272 test(portfolio): gate the wave handler's catch width and the failed-project ledger (v/t/s)
Three items on one seam — what a FAILED project does to the wave loop — plus the
snapshot copy they sit next to.

(v) The catch is BaseException, not Exception, and that width was ungated. The
existing collect-and-continue test raises RuntimeError, so it stays green when
the handler is narrowed: measured, the whole of test_portfolio_concurrent_
loadbearing.py (13 tests) passes under the narrowing. asyncio.CancelledError is
the one realistic vector that separates the two — probed first, gather(
return_exceptions=True) COLLECTS it, while KeyboardInterrupt propagates
regardless and could never be helped by a wider catch. Narrowed, a cancelled
member is cast into runs as a fake RunResult and the pass dies in _aggregate,
pointing away from its cause. RED measured.

(t) sum_token_usage excludes a failed project's spend, and that is the honest
answer, not a bug: a run that died before producing a stamp has no provenance,
and inventing one is the fabrication RunFailure exists to avoid. What needed
gating is that those tokens still reach the ledger the global cap is enforced
against — otherwise a repeatedly-failing project burns budget while the meter
reads clean. Pins meter.spent as the pass's real cost, sum_token_usage as the
completed-run subtotal, and their difference as exactly the failed spend. RED
measured against the likely "fix" (sourcing sum_token_usage from the meter),
which is wrong because a seeded meter also carries EARLIER passes' spend; 21
existing budget/portfolio tests stay green under it.

(s) _wave_snapshot uses dataclasses.replace, so a field added later is carried
without touching the function. Not cosmetic: measured, dropping retriever by
hand-enumerating left all 585 tests green — the Step-2 coverage its docstring
credited no longer existed, so the S3.1 retriever seam could be downgraded
mid-pass in silence. Now gated by a property test derived from
dataclasses.fields (not a field count, the shape rejected earlier). The explicit
verdicts copy is retained and separately gated: replace(store) alone shares the
caller's list and takes the byte-identical determinism test RED.

strict=True on the zip is documented as deliberately untested — measured green
when dropped, since gather is built from exactly snapshots, so a test could only
go red by manufacturing a mismatch and would exercise zip rather than this pass.

The new double is registered in the S2.5 consolidation guard's delegating-
overrides list rather than the guard being weakened; it already delegates via
super()._inner_get_response, which test_delegating_overrides_call_super now
enforces on it.

583 -> 586 tests.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01MbgTCEZma764i1rHTrzceU
2026-08-03 16:09:12 +02:00
.claude/projects docs(i7): trekbrief + trekplan for program-avslutning — execute parked (fresh session) 2026-07-04 20:41:02 +02:00
docs feat(ingest): bound the default http transport in time, in front of the pinned library (S2.4) 2026-08-03 14:54:04 +02:00
examples Squashed 'shared/' changes from 7aa53fc..a2b57d2 2026-07-31 18:37:48 +02:00
shared Merge commit '8a86f2ab6d' 2026-07-31 18:37:48 +02:00
spikes fix(fase1): spike B fan-out measures real conversation bleed, not a counter 2026-06-24 11:09:55 +02:00
src/portfolio_optimiser test(portfolio): gate the wave handler's catch width and the failed-project ledger (v/t/s) 2026-08-03 16:09:12 +02:00
tests test(portfolio): gate the wave handler's catch width and the failed-project ledger (v/t/s) 2026-08-03 16:09:12 +02:00
.gitignore Squashed 'shared/' changes from 7aa53fc..a2b57d2 2026-07-31 18:37:48 +02:00
.python-version feat: initial scaffold (Python framework on Microsoft Agent Framework) 2026-06-23 22:01:22 +02:00
CHANGELOG.md docs(s31): close the review's honesty gap — narrow semantic claims to the shipped mechanism 2026-07-25 13:00:13 +02:00
CLAUDE.md feat(budget): enforce a global portfolio token cap before the call, not after it (S3.4/F10) 2026-07-31 21:34:48 +02:00
CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md chore(release): MIT license + CONTRIBUTING/SECURITY/CODE_OF_CONDUCT + README badges (S12) 2026-07-05 08:10:09 +02:00
CONTRIBUTING.md chore(release): MIT license + CONTRIBUTING/SECURITY/CODE_OF_CONDUCT + README badges (S12) 2026-07-05 08:10:09 +02:00
env.template docs(fase2): add env.template documenting both profiles + no-egress notes 2026-06-26 00:43:26 +02:00
LICENSE chore(release): MIT license + CONTRIBUTING/SECURITY/CODE_OF_CONDUCT + README badges (S12) 2026-07-05 08:10:09 +02:00
pyproject.toml fix(s31): pin numpy <2.3 — >=2.3 breaks the >=3.10 floor and mypy stub parsing 2026-07-25 06:12:56 +02:00
README.md feat(budget): enforce a global portfolio token cap before the call, not after it (S3.4/F10) 2026-07-31 21:34:48 +02:00
SECURITY.md chore(release): MIT license + CONTRIBUTING/SECURITY/CODE_OF_CONDUCT + README badges (S12) 2026-07-05 08:10:09 +02:00
uv.lock fix(s31): pin numpy <2.3 — >=2.3 breaks the >=3.10 floor and mypy stub parsing 2026-07-25 06:12:56 +02:00

portfolio-optimiser

License: MIT Python Built on Microsoft Agent Framework

A generic, open framework — built on Microsoft Agent Framework (MAF) — that finds cost savings inside each project of a portfolio of independent projects. A swarm of agents generates candidate measures; a mandatory deterministic validator (solver + Monte Carlo) decides the numbers; domain experts judge the outcomes (human-in-the-loop); and the system learns from their verdicts across runs.

Status: the full 8-step agentic loop is wired and proven with load-bearing tests, and the end-to-end proof is an offline simulation with a scripted stand-in client — no live-model run yet. The ingest layer (real data sources) is implemented — file/CSV and SQL on both stacks with bit-identical golden extractions from the shared spec, plus HTTP as a MAF-only demonstrated extension point against a local mock — but exercised only against committed fixtures: no bundle has yet been materialized from a live source. A sibling implementation of the same method on the Claude Agents SDK is built in parallel from the same shared spec.

Disclaimer — technical framework only. Deploying organizations own their processing purposes and assessments (DPIA, risk/ROS, security review). The framework ships the technical prerequisites — local-only mode, provenance, no silent data egress — but makes no compliance guarantees.

Built on an LLM wiki: Karpathy's idea, Google's format

The knowledge architecture is the heart of the project, and it is deliberately not ours:

  • The idea is Andrej Karpathy's "LLM wiki": instead of pointing a model at documents written for people, you curate a small, versioned body of knowledge written for the model to read — concept files, explicit structure, explicit links.
  • The format is Google Cloud's Open Knowledge Format (OKF) (open spec, v0.1), which formalizes that pattern: a knowledge bundle is a directory of markdown files with YAML frontmatter (one required field, type), a reserved index.md entry point, and intra-bundle cross-links forming an emergent graph. Custom frontmatter fields are allowed and must be preserved — which is exactly where this project's own layers (expert verdicts, ingest provenance) live.

Because OKF is open and vendor-neutral, the same bundles are consumed unchanged by both reference implementations (MAF and the Claude Agents SDK sibling) — the knowledge outlives any particular agent stack.

Not RAG. Agents read a bundle by navigating it — index.md first, then its cross-links, with progressive disclosure — never by keyword retrieval or stuffing the whole bundle into a prompt. Query-time retrieval against the bundle is explicitly forbidden by the method spec: it would leak the verdict layer around the learning gate.

AI-first, humans on top

A traditional wiki is built for people — optimized for humans finding and reading information, with machine access bolted on afterwards. This project inverts that order, and is a concrete example of what that looks like:

  • The wiki (the OKF bundle) is written for the model: it is the agent's working memory and the substrate the learning loop reads from and promotes into.
  • The human affordances are layers on top: experts judge outcomes by dropping a plain JSON verdict file in an inbox folder; an explicit, fail-closed promotion gate is the only path by which an approved verdict becomes wiki knowledge; reports and reviews are rendered from the machine-readable layers.

Humans stay decisive — nothing enters the wiki without an approval — but the primary reader of every file is the model, not a person browsing.

How it works

One run, one project, eight steps — with the learning loop closing across runs:

  1. Understand — navigate the project's OKF bundle; fold the candidate's prior expert verdicts into the hypothesis prompt (ExpeL-style, retrieved structurally, never by text).
  2. Hypothesise — one typed candidate measure (strict IR, fail-fast schema).
  3. Debate — a maker-checker pair argues the reasoning (round-capped).
  4. Validate — two falsifiers on the same candidate: the deterministic validator gates the numbers (blocking, never optional) and the checker gates the reasoning.
  5. Refine — a rejected attempt retries informed by the rejection reason, under hard attempt and token caps. Unbounded loops are forbidden everywhere.
  6. Propose or discard — a validated proposal with risk percentiles, or a typed rejection.
  7. Expert feedback — days later, an expert drops a verdict file in an inbox folder; a later run picks it up. Fully resumable; no live session assumed.
  8. Promote — an approved verdict is lifted into the wiki as a type: verdict concept file, navigable by the next run. The gate is fail-closed: raw agent output never self-promotes.

Every proposal carries provenance (citations into the bundle, model, validator decision, token usage). Every seam above is protected by a load-bearing test — a test designed to fail when the seam is detached, so the loop cannot silently degrade into theater.

How it is set up

  • One shared, framework-neutral core (shared/, a git subtree of portfolio-optimiser-commons): the business concept, the normative method spec and ingest spec, the expert-reviewer persona as an Agent Skill, and an example bundle with a golden suite as the only ground truth. Both stacks implement from the spec alone.

  • Per project: one OKF bundle — the bundled examples are hand-curated; the ingest layer that materializes a bundle from a source (file catalogues/CSV + SQL, HTTP as a MAF-only demonstrated extension point) via a deterministic, schema-validated manifest that runs before the loop is implemented and exercised against committed fixtures — no bundle has yet been materialized from a live source.

  • Run: the run.py CLI has three modes — a documented partition, since one invocation cannot exercise every flag:

    • Single-projectPROJECT_ID --docs-dir <dir>, plus optional --bundle-dir, --verdict-dir, --outbox-dir (which requires --run-id), --dimension-config, --semantic-retrieval, --decision/--rationale, and --live-dry-run.
    • Portfolio--portfolio, plus optional --goals, --ledger, --dimension-config, --semantic-retrieval; it stops early and prints a goal reached: … line when the accumulated ledger meets a goal.
    • Value report (S5.4, read-only)--report --ledger <file> rolls up the ledger's realized savings to stdout: per-project totals, the portfolio total, flagged cross-dimension overlaps (each counted once), and per-entry provenance. Add --json for deterministic JSON instead of the human table. It makes no model calls and is mode-exclusive — only --ledger/--json are permitted alongside --report; --report requires --ledger, and a stray --json without --report is refused (rc 1, never silently ignored).
    # Single-project, offline drill (builds contracts + clients, stops before the first model call):
    uv run python -m portfolio_optimiser.run FV42-GSV-E1 --docs-dir <docs> --bundle-dir <bundle> --live-dry-run
    # Portfolio run with a savings goal checked against an accumulated ledger:
    uv run python -m portfolio_optimiser.run --portfolio --goals goals.json --ledger ledger.json
    # Read-only value report over an accumulated ledger (human table; add --json for JSON):
    uv run python -m portfolio_optimiser.run --report --ledger ledger.json
    

    --semantic-retrieval (S3.1) is an opt-in ranking change, off by default. Off, prior verdicts are ranked exactly as before: a structural score over the affected cost-code set, measure type and magnitude bucket, with surface text deliberately excluded. On, that score is blended with a cosine term over the same structural triple, which lets a prior verdict on a different cost-code set outrank one that ties structurally.

    What this ships is the seam, not better retrieval. The bundled FakeEmbedder is a deterministic sha256 projection carrying no semantics, so over a structural tie the resulting order is deterministic but arbitrary. Retrieval quality depends entirely on injecting a real embedder — --embedder-config selects one from a closed registry (never an import path; a config file can never name arbitrary code to load), and docs/extending.md documents the Embedder protocol. The embedding excludes description, matching the structural score and the verdict-id hash, so a flag-on run reads no surface text either.

    The flag is accepted in both run modes, but in single-project mode it requires --bundle-dir and --verdict-dir: without them it cannot take effect, and the run is refused rather than silently ignoring the flag. Nothing about a flag-off run changes, and no savings claim depends on it.

    The prior-verdict fold — the learning step — happens only on the --bundle-dir path; a plain --docs-dir-only run is single-shot (no fold). --decision/--rationale apply to the single-project path only and are inert in portfolio mode. --outbox-dir must differ from --verdict-dir: writing the raw outbox into a folder later read as an inbox would re-ingest raw agent output past the promotion gate (self-contamination) — documented here, deliberately not CLI-enforced. Stop criteria and budget caps are required at startup. Try the offline end-to-end proof (no model, no network): uv run python -m portfolio_optimiser.simulation.

  • A global token cap across the whole portfolio, enforced before the call. Per-run caps alone let N projects cost N times that with no ceiling over the pass. Pass a PortfolioMeter(PortfolioBudget(max_total_tokens=…, max_tokens_per_run=…)) to run_portfolio and one ledger bounds the entire pass — and, seeded from budget.read_spend, a series of passes. It bites in three places: a remainder that cannot fund one run refuses the pass at startup (BudgetRefused); a project that cannot be funded is never started, stopping the pass structurally (budget_stop, completed runs preserved); and a chat call the remainder cannot pay for is refused rather than made (the post-charge check remains, since real usage is only knowable after the response). Spend persists via budget.write_spend, which takes an explicit stamp and no wall-clock default, so the file is byte-deterministic. Python API only — not yet exposed on the CLI.

What this enables

The reference case is portfolio cost review (the example bundle is a building-energy measure), but the architecture is designed to generalize to any setting with the same shape — candidate measures inside independent projects, numbers a deterministic tool can check, and judgement only an expert has:

  • Portfolio reviews — cost savings, energy efficiency, maintenance and procurement measures, proposed per project and validated against the project's own data.
  • Compounding organizational memory — approved expert verdicts become navigable knowledge; the next run's hypotheses start from what experts actually decided, including realization gaps no solver can compute.
  • Auditable AI — an unbroken provenance chain from expert decision back through proposal, bundle file and text span, and (with ingest) to the source system, query, and timestamp.
  • Vendor-neutral knowledge — the same bundles drive two different agent stacks; switching frameworks does not orphan the organization's curated knowledge.

Docs

Stack & develop

Python ≥3.10 · MAF via the split GA packages (see pyproject.toml) · uv. Backend profiles: Azure/Foundry (full) + local (fallback).

uv sync
uv run pytest
uv run ruff check .