Claude/fix acronym search b la lh

public/_compiled/index/docs.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "version": "1.1",
-  "generated_at": "2026-02-06T04:11:51.663Z",
+  "generated_at": "2026-02-06T04:33:07.370Z",
   "description": "Fast-lookup index for Librarian retrieval. Per docs/agents/librarian/contract.md",
   "schema_notes": {
     "authority_band": "Resolved authority (frontmatter override > inferred from root)",

public/content/canon/README.md

@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ The Canon exists so that reasoning does not have to be repeated.
 |------|-------|---------|---------|
 | `epistemic-obligation-and-document-tiers.md` | Epistemic Obligation and Document Tiers | Tiers define epistemic obligation (foundational, shared, awareness), not importance. Orthogonal to folders. | How much must I internalize this? |
 | `constraints.md` | Constraints | Baseline assumptions and non-negotiables that shape every decision. | What must be true for this work to make sense? |
+| `methods/README.md` | Methods | Durable application patterns that help humans and agents apply principles and satisfy constraints without re-deriving safe practice each time. | How do I apply ODD safely in practice? |
 | `decision-rules.md` | Decision Rules | Default heuristics used when multiple valid options exist. | How do choices tend to be made? |
 | `definition-of-done.md` | Definition of Done | What qualifies as completed work and what evidence is required. | When can work honestly be called done? |
 | `self-audit.md` | Self-Audit Checklist | Review checklist before declaring completion. | What should be reviewed before claiming success? |
@@ -45,6 +46,8 @@ The Canon exists so that reasoning does not have to be repeated.
 
 | Folder | Purpose |
 |--------|---------|
+| `definitions/` | Shared vocabulary — formal definitions of load-bearing concepts (e.g., CST). |
+| `methods/` | Durable application patterns for applying constraints and principles in practice. |
 | `principles/` | Canon-level principle articulations grounded in lived evidence. |
 | `decisions/` | Canon-level decision records (governance, model boundaries). |
 | `resonance/` | External works that converge with ODD — and where ODD explicitly diverges. |

public/content/canon/constraints.md

@@ -32,6 +32,10 @@ Constraints define the baseline assumptions and design defaults applied to most
 - Ephemeral Artifacts Are Acceptable
 - Explicit Tradeoffs
 - Lane Self-Containment
+- [Single-Agent Integrity Precedes Collaboration](/canon/constraints/single-agent-integrity-precedes-collaboration.md)
+- [Encode Epistemic Decisions](/canon/constraints/encode-epistemic-decisions.md)
+- [Boundary Transitions Require Deceleration](/canon/constraints/boundary-transitions-require-deceleration.md)
+- [ODD Is an Epistemic OS, Not a Value System](/canon/constraints/odd-is-epistemic-os-not-values.md)
 
 ---
 
@@ -43,6 +47,10 @@ Constraints define the baseline assumptions and design defaults applied to most
 - MUST keep lane artifacts self-contained within `products/<lane>/`; no cross-directory dependencies
 - MUST make tradeoffs explicit and visible; every decision excludes alternatives
 - MUST assume systems will outlive original creators and change hands
+- MUST establish single-agent integrity before scaling collaboration; integrity precedes participation
+- MUST encode epistemic decisions so settled ground stays settled and reasoning compounds
+- MUST decelerate at boundary transitions; speed inside a boundary does not justify speed across boundaries
+- MUST NOT use ODD as a value system, moral authority, or ideological enforcement mechanism
 
 ---
 

public/content/canon/constraints/boundary-transitions-require-deceleration.md

@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+---
+uri: klappy://canon/constraints/boundary-transitions-require-deceleration
+title: "Boundary Transitions Require Deceleration"
+audience: canon
+exposure: nav
+tier: 1
+voice: first_person
+stability: stable
+tags: ["canon", "constraints", "boundaries", "deceleration"]
+relevance: decision
+execution_posture: governing
+---
+
+# Boundary Transitions Require Deceleration
+
+> Speed is allowed inside a boundary. Transitions require slowing down.
+
+## Description
+
+When moving between epistemic boundaries (exploration → decision, draft → commit, plan → execution), ODD requires intentional deceleration. This is where failures become expensive: assumptions leak, closures get skipped, and momentum gets mistaken for truth.
+
+A boundary transition is not a moment. It is a **review-and-prepare step** with two halves: exit and entry.
+
+## Outline
+
+- Boundary Exit
+- Boundary Entry
+- What This Forces
+- What This Forbids
+- See Also
+
+---
+
+## Content
+
+**Canon v0.1**
+
+### Boundary Exit (Closure)
+
+Before leaving a boundary, I must:
+
+- confirm what was decided (or that nothing was decided)
+- encode closures so they don't get re-opened by default
+- capture evidence, warnings, and refusal conditions
+
+### Boundary Entry (Preparation)
+
+Before entering a boundary, I must:
+
+- review the last settled ground that applies
+- identify which constraints are active
+- decide what evidence or consultation is required before continuing
+
+This is where handbooks, skeptics, feedback loops, and process checks belong—not as ceremony, but as boundary discipline.
+
+### What This Forces
+
+- "confirmation before moving on"
+- explicit transitions rather than silent drift
+- preparedness checks that prevent expensive momentum
+
+### What This Forbids
+
+- blowing through known failure modes because "we're on a roll"
+- smuggling new assumptions across boundaries
+- treating acceleration as a substitute for review
+
+---
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Definition of Done](/canon/definition-of-done.md)
+- [Epistemic Hygiene](/canon/epistemic-hygiene.md)
+- [Epistemic Modes](/canon/epistemic-modes.md)
+- [Self-Audit](/canon/self-audit.md)

public/content/canon/constraints/encode-epistemic-decisions.md

@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@
+---
+uri: klappy://canon/constraints/encode-epistemic-decisions
+title: "Encode Epistemic Decisions"
+audience: canon
+exposure: nav
+tier: 1
+voice: first_person
+stability: stable
+tags: ["canon", "constraints", "durability", "decisions"]
+relevance: decision
+execution_posture: governing
+---
+
+# Encode Epistemic Decisions
+
+> If a decision matters, it must become durable and inspectable.
+
+## Description
+
+If epistemic decisions are not encoded, they will be re-litigated. Humans do this slowly; agents do it instantly. The problem is the same: settled ground doesn't stay settled unless it is made durable.
+
+ODD exists to encode decisions once so reasoning compounds instead of resetting.
+
+## Outline
+
+- What Counts as "Epistemic"
+- What This Forces
+- What This Forbids
+- Evidence Requirements
+- See Also
+
+---
+
+## Content
+
+**Canon v0.1**
+
+### What Counts as "Epistemic"
+
+- scope closures
+- boundary definitions
+- refusal conditions
+- default assumptions
+- what "done" means
+- what qualifies as evidence
+
+### What This Forces
+
+- record decisions at the moment of closure
+- make decisions inspectable by others (including agents)
+- prefer stable language over improvisation
+
+### What This Forbids
+
+- relying on memory, vibes, or "we talked about it"
+- repeated arbitration of settled ground
+- treating "agreement" as a durable artifact
+
+### Evidence Requirements
+
+A decision record must include at least:
+
+- what was decided
+- what was rejected (and why)
+- what evidence supported the decision (or that it remains a hypothesis)
+
+---
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Decision Record Standard](/canon/decisions/decision-record-standard.md)
+- [Definition of Done](/canon/definition-of-done.md)
+- [Epistemic Modes](/canon/epistemic-modes.md)
+- [Verification and Evidence](/canon/verification-and-evidence.md)

public/content/canon/constraints/odd-is-epistemic-os-not-values.md

@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+---
+uri: klappy://canon/constraints/odd-is-epistemic-os-not-values
+title: "ODD Is an Epistemic OS, Not a Value System"
+audience: canon
+exposure: nav
+tier: 1
+voice: first_person
+stability: stable
+tags: ["canon", "constraints", "odd", "authority", "values"]
+relevance: decision
+execution_posture: governing
+---
+
+# ODD Is an Epistemic OS, Not a Value System
+
+> ODD constrains reasoning and integrity. It does not define truth, morality, or authority.
+
+## Description
+
+ODD is an epistemic operating system: it shapes decision posture, refusal conditions, boundary discipline, and evidence requirements.
+
+It is not a value system. It must not be used to launder moral authority, enforce ideology, or create "agentic churches." Values belong to people and communities. ODD belongs to integrity.
+
+## Outline
+
+- What ODD Governs
+- What ODD Does Not Govern
+- What This Forces
+- What This Forbids
+- See Also
+
+---
+
+## Content
+
+**Canon v0.1**
+
+### What ODD Governs
+
+- how claims are formed and tested
+- how decisions are recorded and closed
+- how boundaries are entered and exited
+- what gets refused when integrity is at risk
+
+### What ODD Does Not Govern
+
+- what outcomes are morally good
+- what worldview is correct
+- what a community must value
+- who is "in charge"
+
+### What This Forces
+
+- separation between epistemic constraints and value commitments
+- explicit labeling when a choice is value-driven vs evidence-driven
+- refusal to treat "the system says so" as authority
+
+### What This Forbids
+
+- using ODD language to enforce ideology
+- treating epistemic posture as spiritual or moral superiority
+- encoding governance/enforcement as if it were epistemic necessity
+
+---
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Epistemic Posture](/canon/defaults/epistemic-posture.md)
+- [Models Do Not Mutate Canon](/canon/decisions/models-do-not-mutate-canon.md)
+- [Epistemic Hygiene](/canon/epistemic-hygiene.md)
+- [Weighted Relevance and Arbitration](/canon/weighted-relevance-and-arbitration.md)

public/content/canon/constraints/single-agent-integrity-precedes-collaboration.md

@@ -0,0 +1,70 @@
+---
+uri: klappy://canon/constraints/single-agent-integrity-precedes-collaboration
+title: "Single-Agent Integrity Precedes Collaboration"
+audience: canon
+exposure: nav
+tier: 1
+voice: first_person
+stability: stable
+tags: ["canon", "constraints", "integrity", "collaboration"]
+relevance: decision
+execution_posture: governing
+---
+
+# Single-Agent Integrity Precedes Collaboration
+
+> Collaboration is only constructive when integrity exists first.
+
+## Description
+
+I treat **single-agent integrity** as the minimum viable unit of epistemic accountability. If integrity is not established, adding more people or agents does not create clarity—it amplifies unresolved assumptions, accelerates drift, and produces false consensus.
+
+This is not anti-collaboration. It is the prerequisite for collaboration that is real instead of performative.
+
+## Outline
+
+- What I Mean by Integrity
+- What This Forces
+- What This Forbids
+- When It Doesn't Apply
+- See Also
+
+---
+
+## Content
+
+**Canon v0.1**
+
+### What I Mean by Integrity
+
+Integrity means:
+
+- decisions are explicit (not implied)
+- constraints are applied (not merely referenced)
+- claims are backed by evidence or labeled as hypotheses
+- closures are recorded so they don't get re-litigated by default
+
+### What This Forces
+
+- establish a single accountable decision loop before scaling participants
+- encode settled ground before "bringing in helpers"
+- treat additional agents as amplifiers, not solvers
+
+### What This Forbids
+
+- adding agents to "figure it out faster" when the ground is not encoded
+- using group agreement as evidence
+- treating speed of convergence as correctness
+
+### When It Doesn't Apply
+
+- it still applies; what changes is *how long the integrity step takes*, not whether it exists
+
+---
+
+## See Also
+
+- [Constraints](/canon/constraints.md)
+- [Epistemic Hygiene](/canon/epistemic-hygiene.md)
+- [Verification and Evidence](/canon/verification-and-evidence.md)
+- [Epistemic Challenge](/canon/epistemic-challenge.md)