537589e6a7
- kei-artifact Rust crate (25th): schema registry + artifact store + SHA-256 id + chain walker - 5 schemas (JSON Schema 2020-12 strict): spec / plan / patch / review / research - Manifest extension: optional produces_artifact + expects_artifact per handoff (non-breaking) - Validator extension: KNOWN_ARTIFACT_SCHEMAS whitelist check + 4 new tests - 3 kei-* manifests updated with typed handoff (architect→code-implementer→critic chain) - compose-solution phase-5 cross-ref to kei-artifact Tests: 189 Rust workspace (was 167, +22 artifact tests) + 24 assembler (was 20, +4 validator tests)
96 lines
4 KiB
Markdown
96 lines
4 KiB
Markdown
# Phase 5 — Architecture proposal (math-first)
|
|
|
|
Compose the architecture by following `_blocks/rule-math-first.md`.
|
|
|
|
## 5a — Expression first
|
|
|
|
One to three lines describing which primitives combine, in which order,
|
|
with which invariants. Use this shape:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
artefact = compose(block_A, block_B, ..., block_N)
|
|
where block_* ∈ {_blocks/, newly drafted, skills/, _manifests/}
|
|
invariant: <one-line, e.g. "every cube <200 LOC, every handoff verified">
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
If the architecture requires parsing binary document formats (PDF / DOCX /
|
|
XLSX / PPTX / CSV), reference the `tomd` primitive
|
|
(`_primitives/tomd.sh`) instead of rolling custom parsing — RULE "reuse
|
|
over rewrite". The PreToolUse(Read) hook `tomd-preread.sh` already redirects
|
|
Claude to the converted markdown transparently.
|
|
|
|
### Pipeline / primitive cross-refs (reuse before rewrite)
|
|
|
|
If the user's task maps onto an existing hub-and-spoke pipeline, recommend
|
|
it instead of composing from scratch. Each pipeline is itself discoverable
|
|
via Phase 3 grep, but surface it explicitly so the user sees the option:
|
|
|
|
- VM / server provisioning → `/vm-provision` + `ssh-check` + `firewall-diff`
|
|
- Database schema design → `/schema-design` + `kei-migrate` (PG/SQLite/MySQL)
|
|
- Metrics + logs observability → `/observability-setup` + `metrics-scrape` + `log-ship`
|
|
- Authentication / session / JWT / OAuth → `/auth-setup`
|
|
- CI/CD workflow scaffolding → `/ci-scaffold` + `kei-ci-lint`
|
|
- REST / GraphQL / gRPC API contract → `/api-design`
|
|
- Doc site + changelog automation → `/docs-scaffold` + `kei-changelog`
|
|
- Test matrix (unit / integration / e2e / visual) → `/test-matrix`
|
|
- Frontend site / UI WYSIWYD loop → `/site-create` + `mock-render` + `visual-diff` + `tokens-sync`
|
|
- Multi-agent project bootstrap → `/new-project` + `kei-ledger` (RULE 0.12 fork tracking)
|
|
- Typed artifact handoff between agents → `kei-artifact` (v0.15: schema-validated spec→plan→patch→review chain instead of prose hints). If your architecture spans multiple agents and the output of one is the input of another, declare `produces_artifact` / `expects_artifact` in the manifest and emit via `kei-artifact emit`.
|
|
|
|
One-line per reference, click-discoverable, no duplication of pipeline logic.
|
|
|
|
## 5b — What is UNNECESSARY?
|
|
|
|
For each block listed, justify why it's in. If a block can be removed
|
|
without losing the user's goal — remove it. Derive-first: explicit claim
|
|
"this is the minimal decomposition, nothing removable". Follow the checklist
|
|
from `_blocks/rule-math-first.md`:
|
|
|
|
- Learned parameters / free knobs? WHY? Determined by input?
|
|
- Separate blocks for similar concerns? WHY? Can a single block cover both?
|
|
- Gate / wrapper layers? WHY? Is a direct reference enough?
|
|
|
|
## 5c — Constructor Pattern check
|
|
|
|
Each output cube must be single-concern, file < 200 LOC, function < 30 LOC.
|
|
If the proposed assembly violates this, split before proceeding.
|
|
|
|
## 5d — Count
|
|
|
|
Show the numbers explicitly in the preview:
|
|
- New files: N
|
|
- Edits to existing files: M
|
|
- Total lines of markdown to be written: L
|
|
|
|
## 5e — Preview + confirm
|
|
|
|
Preview as plain text in chat, then:
|
|
|
|
```json
|
|
{
|
|
"questions": [
|
|
{
|
|
"question": "Architecture OK?",
|
|
"header": "Architecture",
|
|
"multiSelect": false,
|
|
"options": [
|
|
{"label": "Confirm", "description": "Proceed to Phase 6 block augmentation (if any gaps) then Phase 7 assembly"},
|
|
{"label": "Revise component N", "description": "One component's decomposition or reuse choice is wrong — reply with one free-text line"},
|
|
{"label": "Remove something", "description": "You see a block that's not strictly necessary — reply which one"},
|
|
{"label": "Abort", "description": "Stop — nothing gets written"}
|
|
]
|
|
}
|
|
]
|
|
}
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
On `Revise` / `Remove` → ONE free-text prompt, regenerate the architecture,
|
|
re-preview.
|
|
|
|
## Verify-criterion
|
|
|
|
- User clicked Confirm.
|
|
- The expression (5a) is present and < 3 lines.
|
|
- The "what is unnecessary" pass (5b) has been applied and is visible in the
|
|
preview.
|
|
- Constructor Pattern check (5c) passed.
|