188 lines
7.7 KiB
Markdown
188 lines
7.7 KiB
Markdown
# Workflow
|
|
|
|
## 1. Model Extraction Workflow
|
|
|
|
For detailed model extraction gates, see `docs/MODEL_EXTRACTION_WORKFLOW.md`.
|
|
|
|
The project follows this flow:
|
|
|
|
```text
|
|
Original article / representative text
|
|
-> source article record
|
|
-> source evidence excerpts
|
|
-> human-readable model card
|
|
-> machine-readable model JSON
|
|
-> regression cases
|
|
-> selector examples
|
|
-> validation report
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## 2. Development Workflow
|
|
|
|
For each task:
|
|
|
|
1. Read `README.md` and `AGENTS.md`.
|
|
2. Check `docs/PROJECT_BRIEF.md`.
|
|
3. Modify the smallest necessary set of files.
|
|
4. Keep JSON and Markdown versions consistent.
|
|
5. Run or update validation.
|
|
6. Update reports or handoff notes.
|
|
7. Do not expand scope without confirmation.
|
|
|
|
## 3. Model Addition Workflow
|
|
|
|
When adding a new model:
|
|
|
|
1. Create a model JSON file in `models/`.
|
|
2. Create a human-readable card in `cards/`.
|
|
3. Add source article records.
|
|
4. Add source evidence excerpts.
|
|
5. Add regression cases.
|
|
6. Add selector examples if relevant.
|
|
7. Run `python scripts\rebuild_indexes.py --write`.
|
|
8. Run validation.
|
|
9. Update documentation.
|
|
|
|
## 4. Stabilization Workflow
|
|
|
|
If a model is unstable:
|
|
|
|
1. Mark `needs_stabilization: true`.
|
|
2. Add risks in `stability_profile.main_risks`.
|
|
3. Add boundary and misuse regression cases.
|
|
4. Do not upgrade to stability level A until tests pass.
|
|
|
|
## 5. Handoff Workflow
|
|
|
|
For ChatGPT-specific handoff rules, see `docs/CHATGPT_HANDOFF_RULES.md`.
|
|
|
|
At the end of each work session:
|
|
|
|
1. Summarize what changed.
|
|
2. List created and modified files.
|
|
3. Record validation status.
|
|
4. Separate assumptions from verified facts.
|
|
5. List questions that require product or CCRA judgment.
|
|
6. Suggest the smallest useful next tasks.
|
|
|
|
If the owner is going from Codex to ChatGPT, create a `reports/ChatGPT交接文档_<topic>_<YYYY-MM-DD>.md` file before ending the work session.
|
|
|
|
Before handoff, run:
|
|
|
|
```powershell
|
|
python scripts\rebuild_indexes.py --check
|
|
python scripts\validate_model_library.py
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## 5.1 Review Bundle Zip Workflow
|
|
|
|
When creating optional raw changed-file zips for GPT / CCRA review bundles, use the installed `bundle-zip` Skill instead of ad hoc PowerShell or Python compression.
|
|
|
|
Required properties:
|
|
|
|
1. Provide an explicit file list.
|
|
2. Use the repository root marker, for example `the-mindscape-of-bro-tsong`.
|
|
3. Preserve source-relative paths inside the zip.
|
|
4. Verify the zip by reading it back.
|
|
5. Keep the `bundle-zip` JSON summary with the review bundle when useful.
|
|
|
|
Do not use `Compress-Archive` for review raw zips where directory paths matter; it can flatten file-list paths.
|
|
|
|
## 5.2 Local CCRA Review Workflow
|
|
|
|
Local CCRA review is a file-first first-pass review loop inside this project.
|
|
|
|
Use:
|
|
|
|
```text
|
|
local_ccra_reviews/<public-round>/<local-pass>/
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Examples:
|
|
|
|
```text
|
|
local_ccra_reviews/round-05_selector-calibration-policy/01/
|
|
local_ccra_reviews/round-05_selector-calibration-policy/02/
|
|
local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-01/
|
|
local_ccra_reviews/round-04/pilot-02/
|
|
local_ccra_reviews/round-03.2a_depth-limiting-qpi-override-patch/01/
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Workflow:
|
|
|
|
1. Owner decides whether the public round needs Local CCRA review.
|
|
2. Codex creates the next numbered local review run directory.
|
|
3. Codex writes `run-notes.md`, `review-metadata.json`, `gate-manifest.yaml`, and `lifecycle-guard-config.yaml`.
|
|
4. Codex declares Local CCRA v0.1.2 helper policies: `bundle_audit_profile`, `gate_execution_mode`, `routing_diff_policy`, and `lifecycle_scan_scope`.
|
|
5. Codex runs `review-context-builder` and applicable helper Skills, recording skipped helpers in `run-notes.md`.
|
|
6. Codex writes `agent-invocation-packet.md`, `prompt-to-send.md`, and `turn-prompts/`.
|
|
7. Codex invokes CCPE Agent Runtime / Codex child thread as `ccra-local-reviewer`.
|
|
8. The runtime child session id or carrier id is recorded in `run-notes.md`.
|
|
9. `review_turn` writes `04_LOCAL_CCRA_REVIEW_REPORT.md` and `returned-output.md`.
|
|
10. `planning_turn` continues the same child session and writes `next-review-requirements.md` when next-review planning is needed.
|
|
11. Owner records accepted, rejected, deferred, or escalated findings in `owner-decision.md`.
|
|
12. Codex executes accepted actions in the main project session.
|
|
13. A follow-up Local CCRA review uses the next local pass label, such as `02/`.
|
|
14. After Local CCRA and Owner acceptance, Codex creates the formal Web CCRA bundle under `ccra_review_bundle/round-NN_YYYY-MM-DD_topic/`.
|
|
|
|
Rules:
|
|
|
|
- Local CCRA output is formal local first review, not Owner approval and not Web CCRA approval.
|
|
- `ccra-local-reviewer` is read-only and must not modify product files.
|
|
- Review inputs and outputs should be exchanged through local files, not chat summaries.
|
|
- Runtime child session id and continuation state belong in `run-notes.md` and `agent-invocation-packet.md`.
|
|
- The default formal pattern is same-child `review_turn` followed by `planning_turn`.
|
|
- Patch or post-patch review material requires `routing_diff_policy: required` or a manually documented equivalent table.
|
|
- `gate_execution_mode: dry_run` cannot support validation pass claims.
|
|
- Formal Web CCRA bundles exclude `04_LOCAL_CCRA_REVIEW_REPORT.md` by default.
|
|
- Include the local report in Web CCRA upload packages only when the owner explicitly asks for Web CCRA to review local findings.
|
|
- CCPE owns the Agent Spec, Runtime Spec, invocation protocol, review rubric, and companion-capability classification.
|
|
- Full Round-level automation is a separate workflow/orchestrator design topic, not part of the Local CCRA reviewer contract.
|
|
- `skills-vault` receives a request only after CCPE or the owner decides that a companion operation is reusable deterministic automation.
|
|
|
|
## 6. Supplier Request Workflow
|
|
|
|
When this repository needs a capability owned by a neighboring repository:
|
|
|
|
1. Classify the need.
|
|
2. Use `requirements/ccpe/` for expert-agent, runtime, model-governance, invocation, evaluation, or integration-registration needs.
|
|
3. Use `requirements/skills-vault/` for deterministic automation, reusable scripts, validation helpers, extraction helpers, or installable Skill needs.
|
|
4. Write one request file per missing capability.
|
|
5. Pause the dependent model extraction or implementation step unless the project owner explicitly says to solve the need locally.
|
|
6. Resume after the supplier artifact, installed Skill, or owner decision is available.
|
|
|
|
## 7. Duplex Model Extraction Workflow
|
|
|
|
Model extraction has two concurrent tracks:
|
|
|
|
```text
|
|
Workflow/tooling track -> request or build the process and supporting capabilities.
|
|
Content-processing track -> use available capabilities to extract, validate, and stabilize models.
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Do not let the content-processing track silently absorb missing tooling work.
|
|
|
|
If a tool gap appears, record it as a supplier request and stop the blocked extraction step.
|
|
|
|
## 8. Framework Adoption Workflow
|
|
|
|
Third-party agentic frameworks such as CrewAI or LangGraph may be introduced only for concrete product implementation.
|
|
|
|
Before adoption:
|
|
|
|
1. Record the product reason.
|
|
2. Identify whether CCPE needs to supply an Agent Spec, Runtime Spec, authority rule, evaluation rule, or integration registration.
|
|
3. Identify whether skills-vault needs to supply reusable deterministic helpers.
|
|
4. Keep framework adapters, state, deployment, and product-specific behavior in this repository.
|
|
5. Record the boundary decision in `docs/DECISIONS.md`.
|
|
|
|
## 9. Knowledge Asset Workflow
|
|
|
|
For long-term reusable knowledge rules, see `docs/KNOWLEDGE_ASSET_RULES.md`.
|
|
|
|
When a rule, model map, schema explanation, workflow summary, or product context becomes stable enough to reuse across sessions, create or update a file under `knowledge_assets/`.
|
|
|
|
Do not leave durable knowledge only in temporary reports.
|
|
|
|
For repository-wide file identity rules, including canonical files, generated reports, review archives, and temporary files, see `docs/FILE_TAXONOMY.md`.
|