@opendash-ai/cli 0.1.0-beta.1 → 0.1.0-beta.3

package/src/intelligence/ENTERPRISE-CAPABILITIES.md

@@ -1,317 +0,0 @@
-# 4 Missing Enterprise Capabilities - Complete
-
-## Missing #1: Verification Layer ✅
-
-**What it does**: Mark hypotheses as Verified/Rejected/Inconclusive before recommendations.
-
-**Before**:
-```
-Hypothesis
-    ↓
-Python
-    ↓
-Result
-    ↓
-Report
-```
-
-**After**:
-```
-Hypothesis
-    ↓
-Statistical Test
-    ↓
-Verification (Verified/Rejected/Inconclusive)
-    ↓
-Move to next hypothesis or proceed
-    ↓
-Recommendations (only after verification)
-```
-
-**Example Output**:
-```
-### H1: Marketing spend reduction caused the decline
-**Status:** ✓ Verified
-**Conclusion:** Statistically significant (p=0.03)
-**p-value:** 0.03
-**Confidence Interval:** [0.15, 0.85]
-**Test Used:** Multiple regression
-**Next Action:** Accept hypothesis and proceed to recommendations
-
-### H2: Seasonal factors contributed
-**Status:** ? Inconclusive
-**Conclusion:** Marginally significant (p=0.08)
-**Next Action:** Collect more data or consider alternative explanations
-
-### H3: Competitive pressure affected market share
-**Status:** ✗ Rejected
-**Conclusion:** Not statistically significant (p=0.42)
-**Next Action:** Reject hypothesis and move to next
-```
-
----
-
-## Missing #2: Evidence Graph ✅
-
-**What it does**: Build traceable evidence chain from data to recommendations.
-
-**Before**:
-```
-Conclusion
-    ↓
-Evidence
-```
-
-**After**:
-```
-Data Point A → Analysis B → Observation C → Conclusion D → Recommendation E
-
-Click on Recommendation E and see:
-- Supported by: Column A, Column B
-- Analysis: Regression, Correlation
-- Observation: Trend detected
-- Data: Sales transactions
-```
-
-**Example Output**:
-```
-## Evidence Graph
-
-### Data Points
-- Sales transactions
-- Marketing spend
-- Customer segments
-
-### Analyses Performed
-- Regression analysis
-- Time series decomposition
-- Correlation analysis
-
-### Key Observations
-- Marketing spend correlates with revenue
-- Seasonal patterns detected
-
-### Insights & Conclusions
-- Multiple factors contributed to decline
-- Marketing is primary driver
-
-### Evidence Flow
-Data → Analysis → Observation → Conclusion → Recommendation
-
-### Traceability
-Recommendation 1 is supported by:
-  [data] Sales transactions
-  [analysis] Regression analysis
-  [observation] Marketing spend correlates with revenue
-  [insight] Marketing is primary driver
-```
-
----
-
-## Missing #3: Business Decision Tree ✅
-
-**What it does**: Internal decision routing like McKinsey consultants.
-
-**Before**:
-```
-It reasons.
-Good.
-```
-
-**After**:
-```
-Revenue down
-    ↓
-Traffic down?
-    ↓ YES
-Marketing reduced?
-    ↓ YES
-Restore marketing
-    ↓ NO
-Marketing efficiency?
-    ...
-```
-
-**Example Output**:
-```
-## Revenue Decline Decision Tree
-
-### Decision Path
-Is revenue declining?
-Is traffic declining?
-Is marketing spend reduced?
-Conclusion: Marketing reduction is primary cause
-Action: Restore marketing budget
-
-### Full Tree
-revenue_check: Is revenue declining?
-  YES → traffic_check
-  NO → growth_analysis
-traffic_check: Is traffic declining?
-  YES → marketing_check
-  NO → conversion_check
-marketing_check: Is marketing spend reduced?
-  YES → restore_marketing
-  NO → marketing_efficiency
-restore_marketing: Marketing reduction is primary cause
-```
-
----
-
-## Missing #4: Executive Narrative (SCQA/Pyramid Principle) ✅
-
-**What it does**: Produce CEO, Director, Analyst, and Technical versions from same analysis.
-
-**Before**:
-```
-Analytical report
-```
-
-**After**:
-```
-CEO Version (1 page):
-  Situation → Complication → Question → Answer → Recommendation → Impact → Risk → Decision
-
-Director Version (3-5 pages):
-  Business Context → Key Metrics → Root Cause → Actions → Timeline
-
-Analyst Version (10-20 pages):
-  Methodology → Data Sources → Findings → Statistical Results → Recommendations
-
-Technical Appendix:
-  Methodology → Assumptions → Limitations → Code
-```
-
-**CEO Version**:
-```
-## Executive Summary
-
-**Situation:** The business is experiencing revenue decline of 18%
-
-**Complication:** This requires immediate attention to prevent further impact
-
-**Key Question:** What is causing this and what should we do?
-
-**Answer:** Multiple factors contributed, marketing is primary driver
-
-**Recommendations:**
-- Restore marketing budget
-- Analyze seasonal patterns
-- Monitor competitive landscape
-
-**Expected Impact:** Revenue recovery of 8-12% within 2 quarters
-
-**Risks:** Seasonal factors may affect timing
-
-**Decision Needed:** Restore marketing budget
-```
-
-**Director Version**:
-```
-## Director Report
-
-### Business Context
-Revenue decline of 18%
-
-### Key Metrics
-- Revenue: -18%
-- Marketing Spend: -30%
-- Conversion Rate: -5%
-- AOV: -15%
-
-### Root Cause
-Marketing reduction is primary driver
-
-### Actions Required
-- Restore marketing budget
-- Analyze seasonal patterns
-- Monitor competitive landscape
-
-### Timeline & Resources
-Revenue recovery of 8-12% within 2 quarters
-```
-
-**Analyst Version**:
-```
-## Analyst Report
-
-### Methodology
-Multiple regression with time series decomposition
-
-### Data Sources
-- Sales database
-- Marketing platform
-- Customer data
-
-### Findings
-Multiple factors contributed to decline
-
-### Statistical Results
-[Detailed statistical results]
-
-### Recommendations
-- Restore marketing budget
-- Analyze seasonal patterns
-- Monitor competitive landscape
-```
-
-**Technical Appendix**:
-```
-## Technical Appendix
-
-### Methodology
-Multiple linear regression with seasonal adjustment
-
-### Assumptions
-- Linear relationship between marketing and revenue
-- No structural breaks
-- Stationary time series
-
-### Limitations
-- Small sample size
-- Potential confounders
-- Limited competitive data
-
-### Code & Reproducibility
-# Analysis code would go here
-```
-
----
-
-## All 13 Capabilities Now Complete
-
-| # | Capability | Status |
-|---|------------|--------|
-| 1 | Force reasoning before tool execution | ✅ |
-| 2 | Surface reasoning to the user | ✅ |
-| 3 | Remove fabricated business values | ✅ |
-| 4 | Confidence must be evidence-based | ✅ |
-| 5 | Recommendations must include decision scoring | ✅ |
-| 6 | Use KPI equations | ✅ |
-| 7 | Use counterfactual reasoning | ✅ |
-| 8 | Explain every major conclusion | ✅ |
-| 9 | Make reasoning engine the visible narrator | ✅ |
-| 10 | Verification Layer | ✅ |
-| 11 | Evidence Graph | ✅ |
-| 12 | Business Decision Tree | ✅ |
-| 13 | Executive Narrative (SCQA) | ✅ |
-
----
-
-## The Shift
-
-**Before**: Analytical output
-**After**: Enterprise analytics operating system
-
-**Before**: One report format
-**After**: CEO, Director, Analyst, Technical versions
-
-**Before**: Hypothesis → Report
-**After**: Hypothesis → Verify → Evidence Graph → Decision Tree → Executive Narrative
-
----
-
-## Version
-
-- Data OS: 5.5.0
-- Status: 13/13 Enterprise Capabilities Complete

package/src/intelligence/ENTERPRISE-REVIEW.md

@@ -1,284 +0,0 @@
-# Enterprise Review Implementation - Complete
-
-## 9 Requirements Implemented
-
-### 1. Force Reasoning Before Tool Execution ✅
-**What changed**: The system now completes all 11 reasoning steps before writing ANY code.
-
-**Before**: User asks → Python executes
-**After**: User asks → 11-step reasoning → THEN Python
-
-**Visible Order**:
-1. Business Objective
-2. Problem Decomposition
-3. Workflow Selection
-4. KPI Identification
-5. Hypotheses with Evidence
-6. Required Data
-7. Analysis Plan
-8. Confidence Assessment
-9. Recommendations with Decision Scoring
-10. Counterfactual Analysis
-11. Conclusions with Evidence Chain
-
----
-
-### 2. Surface Reasoning to the User ✅
-**What changed**: The reasoning engine is now the VISIBLE NARRATOR.
-
-**Before**: Internal metadata, hidden from user
-**After**: User sees everything the system is thinking
-
-**User Now Sees**:
-- Workflow selected and why
-- Hypotheses with supporting/against evidence
-- Unknown information
-- Confidence reasoning
-- Assumptions
-- Counterfactual analysis
-
----
-
-### 3. Remove Fabricated Business Values ✅
-**What changed**: Never generate ROI, savings, or projections unless calculated from data.
-
-**Before**: "ROI is 2.5x"
-**After**: "Cannot estimate from available data"
-
-**Rules**:
-- If data supports calculation → Show calculation
-- If data doesn't support → Say "Cannot estimate from available data"
-- Never fabricate numbers
-
----
-
-### 4. Confidence Must Be Evidence-Based ✅
-**What changed**: Confidence comes from measurable inputs, not arbitrary numbers.
-
-**Before**: "Confidence: 72%"
-**After**: Evidence-based assessment
-
-**Confidence Formula**:
-```
-Confidence = Σ(Factor_Value × Factor_Weight) / Σ(Weights)
-
-Factors:
-- Data Completeness (weight: 0.3)
-- Sample Size (weight: 0.2)
-- Statistical Significance (weight: 0.3)
-- Validation Checks (weight: 0.2)
-```
-
-**Example Output**:
-```
-Overall: Cannot determine without data analysis
-
-Factors:
-| Factor | Value | Weight | Contribution |
-|--------|-------|--------|--------------|
-| Data Completeness | Unknown | 0.3 | Requires assessment |
-| Sample Size | Unknown | 0.2 | Requires count |
-| Statistical Significance | Unknown | 0.3 | Requires testing |
-| Validation Checks | Unknown | 0.2 | Requires validation |
-```
-
----
-
-### 5. Recommendations Must Include Decision Scoring ✅
-**What changed**: Every recommendation has Impact, Effort, Risk, Confidence, Priority Score.
-
-**Before**: "Priority 1"
-**After**: Full decision scoring
-
-**Example Output**:
-```
-### R1: Investigate marketing spend impact
-| Factor | Assessment |
-|--------|------------|
-| Impact | High - Marketing often drives 30-50% of revenue |
-| Effort | Medium - Requires marketing data analysis |
-| Risk | Low - Reversible decision |
-| Confidence | Medium - Depends on data availability |
-| Priority Score | 8.5/10 |
-
-Supporting Evidence: Historical correlation between marketing spend and revenue
-```
-
----
-
-### 6. Use KPI Equations ✅
-**What changed**: Always expose mathematical relationships.
-
-**Before**: "Revenue is the metric"
-**After**: "Revenue = Traffic × Conversion × AOV"
-
-**Equations Always Shown**:
-- Revenue = Price × Quantity
-- AOV = Revenue / Orders
-- CLV = ARPU / Churn
-- Conversion = Orders / Sessions
-- Churn Rate = Customers Lost / Customers at Start
-
----
-
-### 7. Use Counterfactual Reasoning ✅
-**What changed**: When recommending actions, show "What happens if..."
-
-**Before**: "Restore marketing spend"
-**After**: "If we restore marketing spend, what happens?"
-
-**Example Output**:
-```
-### What if marketing spend had remained constant?
-**Assumption:** Marketing has a causal effect on revenue
-**Expected Outcome:** Revenue would have declined less
-**Calculation:** Cannot estimate from available data
-**Supported by Data:** No
-```
-
-**Rules**:
-- Show the scenario
-- State the assumption
-- Show expected outcome
-- Show calculation (if available)
-- State if supported by data
-
----
-
-### 8. Explain Every Major Conclusion ✅
-**What changed**: Every conclusion has Evidence → Analysis → Business Action.
-
-**Before**: "Marketing is the cause"
-**After**: Full evidence chain
-
-**Example Output**:
-```
-**Conclusion:** Multiple factors likely contributed to the revenue decline
-**Evidence:** Historical patterns, marketing changes, competitive dynamics
-**Analysis:** Requires comprehensive data analysis to isolate primary drivers
-**Business Action:** Conduct detailed analysis before making strategic changes
-```
-
----
-
-### 9. Make Reasoning Engine the Visible Narrator ✅
-**What changed**: The system reads like a senior consultant thinking aloud.
-
-**Before**: Silent metadata generation
-**After**: User reads the thinking process
-
-**The system now**:
-1. States the business objective
-2. Decomposes the problem
-3. Selects workflow with reasoning
-4. Identifies KPIs with equations
-5. Generates hypotheses with evidence
-6. Lists required data
-7. Creates analysis plan
-8. Assesses confidence (evidence-based)
-9. Provides recommendations with scoring
-10. Shows counterfactual analysis
-11. Explains conclusions with evidence
-
----
-
-## Enterprise Prompt System
-
-**File**: `reasoning/enterprise-prompt.ts`
-
-Forces the system to follow the 11-step reasoning sequence before any code execution.
-
-**Key Rules**:
-1. NEVER execute Python before completing reasoning
-2. ALWAYS show the user what you're thinking
-3. NEVER fabricate business values
-4. ALWAYS use evidence-based confidence
-5. ALWAYS include decision scoring
-6. ALWAYS use KPI equations
-7. ALWAYS show counterfactuals
-8. ALWAYS explain conclusions
-9. ALWAYS let reasoning drive the conversation
-
----
-
-## Example Output
-
-Given: "Sales dropped by 18%"
-
-```
-## Business Objective
-Identify why sales declined and recommend actions to address the 18% drop.
-
-## Problem Decomposition
-This is a diagnostic problem: something happened (sales dropped) and we need to understand why.
-
-## Workflow Selection
-Selected: Root Cause Analysis
-Reasoning: Problem is diagnostic - investigating why something happened
-Alternatives considered: EDA (too broad), Forecasting (not predictive)
-
-## KPI Identification
-Primary Metric: Revenue
-Equation: Revenue = Traffic × Conversion Rate × Average Order Value
-
-## Hypotheses
-
-### H1: Marketing spend reduction caused the decline
-**Supporting Evidence:**
-- Historical data shows marketing-revenue correlation
-- Marketing budget was reduced in the period
-
-**Against Evidence:**
-- Organic traffic remained stable
-- Brand search volume unchanged
-
-**Unknown Information:**
-- Competitor marketing spend
-- Market-wide advertising trends
-
-**Test Method:** Regression analysis with marketing spend as predictor
-**Confidence:** Medium - requires marketing spend data to verify
-
-## Required Data
-### Essential Data
-- Sales transactions: Why needed - to calculate revenue components
-- Marketing spend: Why needed - to test H1
-
-## Confidence Assessment
-**Overall:** Cannot determine without data analysis
-**Formula:** Confidence = Σ(Factor_Value × Factor_Weight) / Σ(Weights)
-
-## Recommendations
-
-### R1: Investigate marketing spend impact
-| Factor | Assessment |
-|--------|------------|
-| Impact | High - Marketing often drives 30-50% of revenue |
-| Effort | Medium - Requires marketing data analysis |
-| Risk | Low - Reversible decision |
-| Confidence | Medium - Depends on data availability |
-| Priority Score | 8.5/10 |
-
-## Counterfactual Analysis
-
-### What if marketing spend had remained constant?
-**Assumption:** Marketing has a causal effect on revenue
-**Expected Outcome:** Revenue would have declined less
-**Calculation:** Cannot estimate from available data
-**Supported by Data:** No
-
-## Conclusions
-
-**Conclusion:** Multiple factors likely contributed to the revenue decline
-**Evidence:** Historical patterns, marketing changes, competitive dynamics
-**Analysis:** Requires comprehensive data analysis to isolate primary drivers
-**Business Action:** Conduct detailed analysis before making strategic changes
-```
-
----
-
-## Version
-
-- Data OS: 5.4.0
-- Phase: Enterprise Review Implementation
-- Status: Complete