Split the requirements package by audience - #25
Open
patelanil wants to merge 4 commits into
Open
Conversation
…12.0 Returns/refunds record-bound engagement (2026-07-23, sponsor-approved harvest). Round 7 log added to ba-skill-spec with the two new rules, five keeper patterns (incl. [SPONSOR]/[KB] provenance grades), and a fixture-hygiene finding (EC2/EC3 canonical inputs not stored). Both rules folded into the agent definition's Rules section. Regression replay on the upgraded definition: EC1 PASS - both traps avoided (sync requirement survived the design cut per B1a; 'nightly' demoted to hint, freshness became the open question). EC2/EC3 not replayed: no stored canonical input (finding recorded); EC4/EC5 full-engagement fixtures deferred - the delta is two additive rules touching neither elicitation nor gap/overlap behavior.
moqui-coding-assistant stays domain-neutral: business-domain information (client, feature domain, artifact names) moved out of the round log to the coach repo's private fixtures, which the log now points to. The two rules, keeper patterns, and fixture-hygiene finding are unchanged - they were always craft, not domain.
Sponsor-approved rules from coaching rounds 5 to 8, dated 2026-07-24. Architect: native graph I/O and MDM placed in the native-first ladder; entity masters for a whole graph; a revision sweep discipline. Business analyst: superseding a recorded Expert-User answer requires a read-back. A ruling can redirect delivery. It cannot retroactively change what the Expert User said. QA technician: the declared scope is itself a claim. Certify the boundary before certifying the content. New skill: moqui-master-entity, with its asset. Version to 0.13.0. Committed by Claude on the sponsor's instruction. The work is the sponsor's; it was uncommitted in the working tree.
The BA produces a record. Every sentence carries its source, its weight and an identifier. That is right for provenance and unreadable for a person who has to build from it. The package now splits: docs/<feature>/README.md one page, says what to read docs/<feature>/developer-guide.md plain English, for the builder docs/<feature>/record/ every artifact the BA produces The guide is written before the engagement is called finished, not when someone asks for it. QA's story gate gains a reader check. A package that passes provenance, lint, completeness and question quality, and that nobody can read, has not been handed over. That is a finding. This came out of a live engagement. The sponsor read a thirteen-file package and said it felt technical and cryptic, like a research paper. Only one file was for them, and it did not exist until they asked.
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.
Two commits. Please read the note on the first one.
Commit 1: coaching harvest rounds 5 to 8
This work is the sponsor's, not mine. It was sitting uncommitted in the
working tree. The sponsor confirmed it was theirs and safe to build on, so it
is committed here as its own commit rather than being buried under my change.
Architect rules on native graph I/O, MDM in the native-first ladder, entity
masters for a whole graph, and a revision sweep discipline. A business analyst
rule that superseding a recorded Expert-User answer requires a read-back. A QA
rule that the declared scope is itself a claim. Plus the new
moqui-master-entityskill and a version bump to 0.13.0.If any of that is not ready to merge, split this branch.
Commit 2: the audience split
The BA produces a record. Every sentence carries its source, its weight and
an identifier. That is right for provenance and unreadable for a person who
has to build from it.
The package now splits:
The guide is written before the engagement is called finished, not when
someone asks for it.
QA's story gate gains a reader check. A package that passes provenance, lint,
completeness and question quality, and that nobody can read, has not been
handed over. That is a finding, not a nicety.
Why
A live engagement produced a thirteen-file requirements package. The sponsor
read it and said it felt technical and cryptic, like a research paper.
Only one of the thirteen was for them. It did not exist until they asked for
it, near the end. Every other file had passed the story gate.
Related