docs(proposal): §4.5 — the two further record kinds, and what separates them - #393
Merged
Conversation
…es them
The proposal described one kind of record, a decision, while the store has
three. Adds §4.5 with amendments A10 and A11.
The separating property is not three separate arguments but one: what a FAILED
anchor means. A decision's anchor points backward at what exists, so one that
stops resolving means the decision is stale. A requirement's points forward, so
one that does not resolve means not built yet. A question's points at what is
under discussion, so it means nothing at all — the question is often whether the
thing should exist. Identical syntax; only the direction differs, and that is
the whole lifecycle.
Records that this was measured before it was designed: as an ordinary entry, a
single not-yet-built requirement takes `brain check` to exit 1, and so does a
question. Neither could be more decisions without making the check useless.
Also records where this departs from the AI-native SDLC playbook and where it
was behind it. Departs: the playbook keeps a plan.md and recommends a hook
enforcing that the diff still matches it — a self-reported artifact being
policed, which is only necessary when there is no queryable model. Behind: the
playbook's trigger for CLAUDE.md ("when Claude makes a mistake twice, the
correction goes into CLAUDE.md") is the one thing this design was missing
outright, and is now A11.
And notes the defect the comparison exposed, because the lesson generalises: the
proposal asserted project.md was loaded every session and justified the store's
tightest cap on that basis, with nothing behind it — a generated project
mentioned the brain once, in a skills-table row, behind a symptom-triggered
description. A policy about what is loaded is worth nothing without the thing
that loads it, and the same question should be asked of any future claim of that
shape here.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The proposal described one kind of record — a decision — while the store now has three. Adds §4.5 with amendments A10 and A11.
One property, not three arguments
What separates the kinds is what a failed anchor means:
Identical syntax; only the direction differs, and that is the whole lifecycle.
Records that this was measured before it was designed: as an ordinary entry, a single not-yet-built requirement takes
brain checkto exit 1, and so does a question. Neither could be more decisions without making the check useless.Where this departs from the playbook, and where it was behind
Both stated, because the difference is the interesting part.
Departs: the AI-native SDLC playbook keeps a
plan.mdand recommends a hook enforcing that the merged diff still matches it. That is a self-reported artifact being policed, and it is only necessary when there is no queryable model. There is one here, so progress is derived instead.Behind: the playbook's trigger for CLAUDE.md — "when Claude makes a mistake twice, the correction goes into CLAUDE.md" — is the one thing this design was missing outright. It is now A11.
The defect the comparison exposed
The proposal asserted
project.mdwas loaded every session and justified the store's tightest cap on that basis, with nothing behind it: a generated project mentioned the brain exactly once, in a skills-table row, behind a symptom-triggered description.§4.5 records the general lesson rather than just the fix: a policy about what is loaded is worth nothing without the thing that loads it, and the same question should be asked of any future claim of that shape here.
Docs only. Independent of the two code branches — no shared files, so any merge order works.
🤖 Generated with Claude Code