@inneranimalmedia/agentsam-sdk 2.6.11 → 2.6.12

package/docs/prd/PRD-agentsam-browser.md

@@ -0,0 +1,177 @@
+# AgentSam Browser
+## Product Requirements Document
+
+**Status:** Experimental
+**Portfolio:** AgentSam
+**Primary package/app composition:** see Package composition below
+
+## Product vision
+
+A dual-mode Explore/Build browser where users can navigate the web, inspect sources, and generate or refine web experiences in a sandboxed, agent-assisted surface.
+
+## Target users
+
+- builders
+- designers
+- researchers
+- users exploring/generated web experiences
+
+## Core jobs to be done
+
+- browse and research
+- open generated previews safely
+- switch from exploration to building
+- preserve deterministic history
+- use provider-agnostic generative navigation
+
+## Product promise
+
+> A dual-mode Explore/Build browser where users can navigate the web, inspect sources, and generate or refine web experiences in a sandboxed, agent-assisted surface.
+
+## Why this should exist as a real offer
+
+- one Browse/Build mental model
+- portable browser surface
+- sandboxed previews
+- reusable generated-site workflow
+
+The offer is only valuable if users can complete these jobs end to end. Package publication, a demo screen, or an isolated API is not sufficient evidence of product value.
+
+## What this product is not
+
+- a Chrome replacement
+- an unsafe arbitrary remote-code runner
+- a single-model browser
+
+## Package composition
+
+```text
+agentsam-abs
+agentsam-browser-surface
+agentsam-sections
+apps/agentsam-browser-site
+```
+
+Packages are implementation ingredients. The product boundary is the user outcome described in this PRD.
+
+## Product principles
+
+1. Prefer user-recognizable operations over infrastructure-shaped APIs.
+2. Preserve provider neutrality unless a provider-specific choice is the user's explicit goal.
+3. Distinguish observed facts, inferred judgments, proposed actions, and executed changes.
+4. Missing evidence reduces confidence instead of creating fabricated facts.
+5. Writes to external systems require clear authorization and bounded scope.
+6. The core workflow should remain usable without unnecessary custom UI.
+7. Local and hosted forms should share domain contracts where practical.
+8. Errors should preserve partial usefulness and explain recovery paths.
+
+## Initial user workflow
+
+```text
+intent
+  |
+  v
+context / evidence
+  |
+  v
+plan or draft
+  |
+  v
+inspect / evaluate
+  |
+  v
+user decision or approval
+  |
+  v
+optional action
+  |
+  v
+receipt / artifact / learning
+```
+
+The exact steps vary by product, but the workflow should remain explicit and inspectable.
+
+## Data and authority
+
+This product must document:
+
+- which records it owns;
+- which external systems remain authoritative;
+- provenance of consumed evidence;
+- freshness/staleness behavior;
+- authorization for writes;
+- how local and hosted state reconcile, where applicable.
+
+No product should silently claim authority over data owned by another domain.
+
+## Distribution
+
+- Local Studio browser
+- standalone Browser Shell
+- public promo/site
+- SDK package
+
+Distribution may evolve, but every form should preserve the same core product promise.
+
+## Packaging / monetization hypotheses
+
+Potential real-world packaging may include:
+
+- free core package or local capability;
+- paid hosted convenience or managed runtime;
+- paid team/collaboration features;
+- premium packaged application;
+- domain plugin/app distribution;
+- support, implementation, or commercial deployment services;
+- usage-based infrastructure only where the underlying cost scales with usage.
+
+The final commercial model should follow observed adoption and cost structure rather than force every package into a subscription.
+
+## Definition of v1
+
+- stable Browse/Build modes
+- provider registry
+- sandboxed preview contract
+- history/session model
+- host integration
+- polished browser shell
+
+## Acceptance suite
+
+A v1 candidate should pass:
+
+### Direct
+A user explicitly asks for the product's primary job and reaches a useful outcome.
+
+### Indirect
+A user describes the underlying problem without using the product name; the workflow still activates appropriately.
+
+### Sparse context
+The product remains useful with minimal evidence and clearly states limitations.
+
+### Rich context
+Additional authorized evidence materially improves the result.
+
+### Failure
+A provider, source, or action fails and the product returns structured, recoverable behavior where possible.
+
+### Authorization
+A requested write exceeds current authority and is not silently executed.
+
+### Out of scope
+The product refuses or delegates work that belongs to another AgentSam domain instead of absorbing it.
+
+## Success signals
+
+Product quality should be measured by outcomes such as:
+
+- successful completion of the core workflow;
+- lower time/effort to reach the intended outcome;
+- repeat use for the same job;
+- successful recovery from missing data or provider failure;
+- low rate of unauthorized or incorrect actions;
+- evidence that users prefer the integrated offer over manually combining generic tools.
+
+## Graduation rule
+
+This product should not be called v1 until it satisfies `ADR-0005-offer-graduation-standard.md`.

package/docs/prd/PRD-agentsam-cad-studio.md

@@ -0,0 +1,177 @@
+# AgentSam CAD Studio
+## Product Requirements Document
+
+**Status:** Experimental
+**Portfolio:** AgentSam
+**Primary package/app composition:** see Package composition below
+
+## Product vision
+
+An AgentSam-assisted spatial design and CAD workspace for creating, inspecting, iterating, and validating structured design artifacts across product, fabrication, robotics, and spatial workflows.
+
+## Target users
+
+- makers
+- designers
+- technical creators
+- robotics/spatial builders
+
+## Core jobs to be done
+
+- create a structured design from intent
+- inspect geometry and constraints
+- iterate with an assistant
+- validate outputs before fabrication or simulation
+- preserve design provenance
+
+## Product promise
+
+> An AgentSam-assisted spatial design and CAD workspace for creating, inspecting, iterating, and validating structured design artifacts across product, fabrication, robotics, and spatial workflows.
+
+## Why this should exist as a real offer
+
+- lower barrier to structured design
+- assistant-guided iteration
+- portable artifact/evidence model
+- path from intent to inspectable geometry
+
+The offer is only valuable if users can complete these jobs end to end. Package publication, a demo screen, or an isolated API is not sufficient evidence of product value.
+
+## What this product is not
+
+- a toy image generator for CAD-looking pictures
+- a replacement for engineering validation
+- an autonomous fabrication controller
+
+## Package composition
+
+```text
+apps/agentsam-cad-creator
+agentsam-workbench
+agentsam-errors
+agentsam-scoring
+```
+
+Packages are implementation ingredients. The product boundary is the user outcome described in this PRD.
+
+## Product principles
+
+1. Prefer user-recognizable operations over infrastructure-shaped APIs.
+2. Preserve provider neutrality unless a provider-specific choice is the user's explicit goal.
+3. Distinguish observed facts, inferred judgments, proposed actions, and executed changes.
+4. Missing evidence reduces confidence instead of creating fabricated facts.
+5. Writes to external systems require clear authorization and bounded scope.
+6. The core workflow should remain usable without unnecessary custom UI.
+7. Local and hosted forms should share domain contracts where practical.
+8. Errors should preserve partial usefulness and explain recovery paths.
+
+## Initial user workflow
+
+```text
+intent
+  |
+  v
+context / evidence
+  |
+  v
+plan or draft
+  |
+  v
+inspect / evaluate
+  |
+  v
+user decision or approval
+  |
+  v
+optional action
+  |
+  v
+receipt / artifact / learning
+```
+
+The exact steps vary by product, but the workflow should remain explicit and inspectable.
+
+## Data and authority
+
+This product must document:
+
+- which records it owns;
+- which external systems remain authoritative;
+- provenance of consumed evidence;
+- freshness/staleness behavior;
+- authorization for writes;
+- how local and hosted state reconcile, where applicable.
+
+No product should silently claim authority over data owned by another domain.
+
+## Distribution
+
+- packaged app
+- Local Studio app
+- future plugin
+- SDK capability
+
+Distribution may evolve, but every form should preserve the same core product promise.
+
+## Packaging / monetization hypotheses
+
+Potential real-world packaging may include:
+
+- free core package or local capability;
+- paid hosted convenience or managed runtime;
+- paid team/collaboration features;
+- premium packaged application;
+- domain plugin/app distribution;
+- support, implementation, or commercial deployment services;
+- usage-based infrastructure only where the underlying cost scales with usage.
+
+The final commercial model should follow observed adoption and cost structure rather than force every package into a subscription.
+
+## Definition of v1
+
+- stable design document contract
+- create/edit/inspect loop
+- constraints/errors
+- export/import
+- artifact provenance
+- acceptance examples
+
+## Acceptance suite
+
+A v1 candidate should pass:
+
+### Direct
+A user explicitly asks for the product's primary job and reaches a useful outcome.
+
+### Indirect
+A user describes the underlying problem without using the product name; the workflow still activates appropriately.
+
+### Sparse context
+The product remains useful with minimal evidence and clearly states limitations.
+
+### Rich context
+Additional authorized evidence materially improves the result.
+
+### Failure
+A provider, source, or action fails and the product returns structured, recoverable behavior where possible.
+
+### Authorization
+A requested write exceeds current authority and is not silently executed.
+
+### Out of scope
+The product refuses or delegates work that belongs to another AgentSam domain instead of absorbing it.
+
+## Success signals
+
+Product quality should be measured by outcomes such as:
+
+- successful completion of the core workflow;
+- lower time/effort to reach the intended outcome;
+- repeat use for the same job;
+- successful recovery from missing data or provider failure;
+- low rate of unauthorized or incorrect actions;
+- evidence that users prefer the integrated offer over manually combining generic tools.
+
+## Graduation rule
+
+This product should not be called v1 until it satisfies `ADR-0005-offer-graduation-standard.md`.