You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: 000-docs/014-DR-GLOS-canonical-glossary.md
+32-3Lines changed: 32 additions & 3 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ This is itself a **NORMATIVE** document binding on the ecosystem under DR-010 §
33
33
34
34
**Reading guide:**
35
35
36
-
-**§ 2 — The 13 canonical entities.** Entity-level concepts from the canonical domain model. One paragraph each; the full 10-attribute schema for each entity lives in Blueprint B § 2.
36
+
-**§ 2 — The 14 canonical entities.** Entity-level concepts from the canonical domain model. One paragraph each; the full 10-attribute schema for each entity lives in Blueprint B § 2.
@@ -47,9 +47,9 @@ When in doubt about which section a term belongs in, prefer the section that cap
47
47
48
48
---
49
49
50
-
## 2. The 13 canonical entities
50
+
## 2. The 14 canonical entities
51
51
52
-
The canonical domain model is the 13-entity directed-acyclic reference graph defined in Blueprint B § 2. Each entity below carries a one-paragraph definition for glossary purposes; the **complete 10-attribute schema** (Purpose · Required fields · UUID strategy · Mutability rules · Retention policy · Replayability guarantees · Provenance requirements · Lifecycle states · Storage recommendations · Audit requirements) lives in Blueprint B § 2.N for each entity N. Cross-references in any normative doc that need the full schema **MUST** link to Blueprint B § 2.N — not redefine the schema here.
52
+
The canonical domain model is the 13-entity directed-acyclic reference graph defined in Blueprint B § 2, plus `SkillVersion` — the **14th** entity, added post-Blueprint-B by DR-028 T1 (the DISCRIMINATOR resolution, ISEDC Session 7). Each entity below carries a one-paragraph definition for glossary purposes; the **complete 10-attribute schema** (Purpose · Required fields · UUID strategy · Mutability rules · Retention policy · Replayability guarantees · Provenance requirements · Lifecycle states · Storage recommendations · Audit requirements) lives in Blueprint B § 2.N for each entity N (SkillVersion's shape is defined by the kernel `schemas/v1/skill-version.schema.json` per DR-028 T1, not Blueprint B). Cross-references in any normative doc that need the full schema **MUST** link to Blueprint B § 2.N — not redefine the schema here.
53
53
54
54
The order below matches Blueprint B's dependency order. A downstream entity may reference an upstream entity; never the reverse. Reference data (EvalSpec, MatcherMap, SkillSnapshot, FailureTaxonomy) never depends on a runtime entity.
55
55
@@ -145,6 +145,13 @@ Canonical failure-shape registry. The FailureTaxonomy table holds the MM-1..MM-6
145
145
-**See Blueprint B § 2.13** for the full attribute schema.
146
146
-**Common cross-references:** § 4 of this glossary for the canonical MM-1..MM-6 definitions; `JudgeDecision` (every FAIL verdict references an MM class); `MatcherMap` (also categorized by `mm_class`); `CONTRIBUTING-failure-shape.md` (the MM-7+ extension path).
147
147
148
+
### 2.14 SkillVersion
149
+
150
+
The kernel's refinement-lineage record for a skill — the entity the Skill Refiner appends to each time it accepts an edit. Added as the **14th canonical entity** by DR-028 T1 (the DISCRIMINATOR resolution, ISEDC Session 7), so it sits outside Blueprint B § 2's original 13. **Distinct from `SkillSnapshot`** (§ 2.9): a SkillSnapshot content-addressed-pins a skill's _source state_; a SkillVersion captures the _refinement lineage_ — `version_kind` (`edit` | `revert` | `restore`, the closed signable discriminator), `parent_version_id` (SkillVersion → SkillVersion lineage, can be null for a root version), and `source_snapshot_hash` (a READ-ONLY content-hash **reference** to a SkillSnapshot, **not** a relational foreign key). It carries `refiner_strategy_id` for signed-manifest mechanism-traceability. Ships minimal per the DR-028 T1 binding-minority constraint: no lifecycle state machine and no status/signing fields (deferred to a v0.4.0 follow-up DR). Shipped in `@intentsolutions/core@0.8.0`.
151
+
152
+
-**See** the kernel `schemas/v1/skill-version.schema.json` + `src/entities/SkillVersion.ts` for the full shape (defined by DR-028 T1, not Blueprint B § 2); **Plan 027** (Skill Refiner, v5; supersedes 025) for design context.
153
+
-**Common cross-references:**`SkillSnapshot` (§ 2.9, the source state a SkillVersion references by hash); **Skill Refiner** (§ 3, the subsystem that produces SkillVersions); `EditProposal` (§ 3, the candidate change a SkillVersion records once accepted); `skill-refiner-pass/v1` (the predicate whose provenance triple references the SkillVersion id).
154
+
148
155
---
149
156
150
157
## 3. Operational terms
@@ -173,6 +180,20 @@ These are the verbs and execution-level nouns the platform's documentation uses
173
180
174
181
**judge.** An LLM-as-judge or deterministic-validator function that emits a `JudgeDecision`. Judges that are deterministic produce verdicts mechanically; LLM-judges produce verdicts probabilistically with a confidence and (usually) a seed. The `verdict_source` field on a JudgeDecision declares which kind — `deterministic`, `llm_with_seed`, `llm_no_seed`, or `hybrid`. The platform discourages `llm_no_seed` because it cannot be replayed beyond statistical reconstruction. Citation: Blueprint B § 2.5.
175
182
183
+
### Skill Refiner subsystem terms
184
+
185
+
The named-product vocabulary of the Skill Refiner (DR-028; Plan 027). Unlike the common-noun operational verbs above, these are product / type proper nouns and are capitalized accordingly (`Skill Refiner` is a named product per DR-028 T4 KEEP-NAMED-PRODUCT).
186
+
187
+
**Skill Refiner.** The eval-guided SKILL.md improvement loop — the second product in the IS agent-rig stack (_J-Rig Skill Binary Eval_ tests, _Skill Refiner_ improves, _Rollout Gate_ ships). It proposes safe, minimal SKILL.md edits and accepts one only on a strict-improvement-on-Pareto-dominant-behavioral-with-non-regressing-others predicate (DR-028 P0-RATIFY-1), recording each accepted edit as a `SkillVersion` (§ 2.14) and emitting a signed evidence report. Ratified at ISEDC Session 7 (DR-028); delivered as a Claude Code plugin with the 3-layer hook architecture. An IS-native concept — prior art in eval-driven optimization is cited for design context only, not borrowed (DR-010 § 13.6). Citation: Plan 027 (v5); DR-028; Blueprint B § 7.
188
+
189
+
**3-layer hooks (sinker / line / hook).** The Skill Refiner plugin's hook architecture — three coordinated Claude Code hooks named, in the fishing metaphor, **sinker** (deepest / setup), **line** (mid), and **hook** (the catch). L3 is a `PreToolUse:Bash` hook (not `PostToolUse:Bash`, per the v4.1 mechanism fix), so the Refiner intercepts before the tool runs. Citation: Plan 027 § 4; DR-028.
190
+
191
+
**EditProposal.** The Skill Refiner's term for a single candidate SKILL.md edit, generated by a RefinerStrategy before acceptance. An EditProposal is the _input_ to the acceptance gate; it becomes durable only if it clears the acceptance predicate, at which point a `SkillVersion` (§ 2.14) records the accepted change. Citation: Plan 027; DR-028 AC-13 (RefinerStrategy interface).
192
+
193
+
**ScoreRecord.** The Skill Refiner's per-attempt behavioral-score record — the measured behavioral delta plus per-named-dimension deltas a candidate `EditProposal` produces on the eval set, i.e., the data the acceptance predicate reads to decide ACCEPT / REJECT. The signed determinants of an accepted record surface in the `skill-refiner-pass/v1` predicate body (Blueprint B § 7). Citation: Plan 027; DR-028 P0-RATIFY-1.
194
+
195
+
**Skill Refiner evidence reports.** The signed, human-readable reports (Markdown + HTML) the Skill Refiner emits for each refinement run — showing the proposed edit, the behavioral deltas, the accept / reject verdict, and the `SkillVersion` lineage. They are the Refiner's analogue to the platform's other signed evidence (the unification thesis — every validator emits Evidence Bundle, DR-010 Q3). Citation: Plan 027; DR-028; Blueprint B § 7.
196
+
176
197
---
177
198
178
199
## 4. Intentional Mapping vocabulary (MM-1..MM-6)
@@ -251,6 +272,8 @@ MM-7 admission is gated. Per DR-004 S1Q3 binding (reaffirmed at DR-010 § 10 reo
251
272
252
273
**Phase A-conditional predicate types (per DR-010 Q3).**`validation-result/v1`, `eval-verdict/v1`, `cost-attribution/v1` are **conditionally approved** — they enter the predicate URI namespace as legitimate types but production-Rekor signing for each is gated on that predicate's SPEC.md normative section landing first. Until then, attestations carrying these URIs run in `sigstore_staging` mode. Citation: DR-010 § 7 Q3.
253
274
275
+
**Refiner predicate types (DR-082, staging).**`skill-refiner-pass/v1` — the Skill Refiner's accept attestation (§ 3) — was minted staging-first by Class-1 ADR DR-082. It is in the predicate URI namespace and runs in `sigstore_staging`; production-Rekor signing is gated on its SPEC.md normative section landing **plus** the four DR-082 Q3 triggers (SPEC.md; DNSSEC + CAA on `evals.intentsolutions.io`; the authoring chamber's separate signing trust root; and ≥ 1 real `SkillVersion` clearing a frozen, signed eval-set). Host is `evals.intentsolutions.io` only — never `labs.` (CISO binding, § 8). Citation: DR-082; Blueprint B § 7.
276
+
254
277
**Deferred predicate types (Phase B+).**`harness-experiment/v1` and `cache-decision/v1` are deferred for future Phase B+ admission. Their use cases are recognized but not yet ready for namespace reservation. Citation: DR-010 § 7 Q3.
255
278
256
279
**Research-stage proposed predicate types (NOT reserved, NOT declared).**`prompt-eval/v1` and `context-eval/v1` are **proposed** by the prompt+context-eval landscape RFC (`043-DR-RFC-intent-eval-target-generalization-2026-06-06.md`) as the eventual signed-evidence surface for the proposed `prompt` / `context-template` eval targets (see § 10). They are in the same "recognized but not yet reserved" status as the Deferred entries above — but a step earlier: their use case is _proposed_, not yet accepted. **Reservation itself is a Class-1 ISEDC act** ("new predicate URI subtype reservation," DR-010 § 7 Q6), so naming them here does **not** reserve them, declare a normative SPEC, or emit any `predicateType`. Host, if ever admitted, is `evals.intentsolutions.io` only — never `labs.` (CISO binding, § 8). Citation: 043-DR-RFC § 6; DR-010 § 7 Q3 + Q6.
@@ -307,6 +330,7 @@ This index points each term to its primary section in this glossary and to the 2
0 commit comments