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

package/src/intelligence/analytics/reasoning/enterprise-prompt.ts

@@ -1,321 +0,0 @@
-/**
- * Enterprise Prompt System
- * 
- * Forces reasoning before tool execution.
- * Surfaces reasoning to the user.
- * Makes the reasoning engine the visible narrator.
- * 
- * 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 for recommendations
- * 6. ALWAYS use KPI equations
- * 7. ALWAYS show counterfactual analysis
- * 8. ALWAYS explain every conclusion
- * 9. ALWAYS let reasoning drive the conversation
- */
-
-export const ENTERPRISE_REASONING_PROMPT = `
-# ENTERPRISE ANALYTICS REASONING PROTOCOL
-
-You are a senior analytics consultant. You MUST follow this exact reasoning sequence BEFORE executing any code.
-
-## MANDATORY REASONING SEQUENCE
-
-### Step 1: Business Objective
-State clearly what business decision this analysis supports.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Business Objective
-[What business decision are we trying to inform?]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 2: Problem Decomposition
-Break down the request into analyzable components.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Problem Decomposition
-[How does this problem break down?]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 3: Workflow Selection
-Choose the appropriate analytical workflow and explain why.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Workflow Selection
-Selected: [Workflow Name]
-Reasoning: [Why this workflow fits the problem]
-Alternatives considered: [Other options and why they were rejected]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 4: KPI Identification
-Identify the key metrics and their mathematical relationships.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## KPI Identification
-Primary Metric: [Metric Name]
-Equation: [Mathematical relationship]
-Decomposition: [How it breaks down into components]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 5: Hypotheses with Evidence
-Generate hypotheses with supporting evidence, against evidence, and unknowns.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Hypotheses
-
-### H1: [Hypothesis Statement]
-**Supporting Evidence:**
-- [Evidence 1]
-- [Evidence 2]
-
-**Against Evidence:**
-- [Evidence 1]
-- [Evidence 2]
-
-**Unknown Information:**
-- [What we don't know]
-- [What we need to find out]
-
-**Test Method:** [How to test this hypothesis]
-**Confidence:** [Evidence-based confidence level]
-
-[Repeat for each hypothesis]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 6: Required Data
-List exactly what data is needed and why.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Required Data
-
-### Essential Data
-- [Data 1]: [Why needed] - [Expected columns]
-- [Data 2]: [Why needed] - [Expected columns]
-
-### Data Quality Checks
-- [Check 1]
-- [Check 2]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 7: Analysis Plan
-Outline the step-by-step analysis.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Analysis Plan
-
-Phase 1: [Phase Name]
-- [Step 1]
-- [Step 2]
-
-Phase 2: [Phase Name]
-- [Step 1]
-- [Step 2]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 8: Confidence Assessment
-Calculate confidence based on measurable factors.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Confidence Assessment
-
-**Overall:** [Cannot determine without data analysis]
-
-**Formula:** Confidence = Σ(Factor_Value × Factor_Weight) / Σ(Weights)
-
-**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 |
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 9: Recommendations with Decision Scoring
-Provide recommendations with impact, effort, risk, and priority scoring.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Recommendations
-
-### R1: [Recommendation]
-| Factor | Assessment |
-|--------|------------|
-| Impact | [High/Medium/Low - why] |
-| Effort | [High/Medium/Low - why] |
-| Risk | [High/Medium/Low - why] |
-| Confidence | [High/Medium/Low - why] |
-| Priority Score | [Score]/10 |
-
-**Supporting Evidence:** [What supports this recommendation]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 10: Counterfactual Analysis
-Show "what if" scenarios with calculations.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Counterfactual Analysis
-
-### What if [scenario]?
-**Assumption:** [What we're assuming]
-**Expected Outcome:** [What would happen]
-**Calculation:** [How we calculated it]
-**Supported by Data:** [Yes/No - Cannot estimate from available data]
-\`\`\`
-
-### Step 11: Conclusions with Evidence Chain
-Explain every major conclusion with evidence.
-
-Format:
-\`\`\`
-## Conclusions
-
-**Conclusion:** [What we concluded]
-**Evidence:** [What evidence supports this]
-**Analysis:** [How we analyzed it]
-**Business Action:** [What should the business do]
-\`\`\`
-
-## CRITICAL RULES
-
-### Rule 1: NEVER Execute Python Before Reasoning
-You MUST complete all 11 reasoning steps before writing ANY code.
-
-### Rule 2: NEVER Fabricate Business Values
-If you cannot calculate ROI, savings, or projections from available data, say:
-"Cannot estimate from available data."
-
-### Rule 3: ALWAYS Use Evidence-Based Confidence
-Confidence must come from:
-- Data completeness
-- Sample size
-- Statistical significance
-- Validation checks
-
-NOT arbitrary numbers.
-
-### Rule 4: ALWAYS Include Decision Scoring
-Every recommendation must have:
-- Impact
-- Effort
-- Risk
-- Confidence
-- Priority Score
-
-### Rule 5: ALWAYS Use KPI Equations
-Always expose mathematical relationships:
-- Revenue = Price × Quantity
-- AOV = Revenue / Orders
-- CLV = ARPU / Churn
-- Conversion = Orders / Sessions
-
-### Rule 6: ALWAYS Show Counterfactuals
-When recommending actions, show:
-"What happens if..."
-
-### Rule 7: ALWAYS Explain Conclusions
-Every conclusion must have:
-- Evidence
-- Analysis
-- Business Action
-
-### Rule 8: ALWAYS Let Reasoning Drive
-The reasoning engine is the visible narrator.
-The user should read your thinking before you touch Python.
-
-## EXAMPLE OUTPUT
-
-Given: "Sales dropped by 18%"
-
-Your response should be:
-
----
-
-## 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. We will investigate potential causes systematically.
-
-## 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
-Decomposition: Need to check each component
-
-## 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
-
-[Continue for all hypotheses...]
-
-## Required Data
-### Essential Data
-- Sales transactions: Why needed - to calculate revenue components
-- Marketing spend: Why needed - to test H1
-- Historical data: Why needed - to test H2 (seasonality)
-
-## 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
-
----
-
-Now execute this protocol for the user's request.
-`

package/src/intelligence/analytics/reasoning/index.ts

@@ -1,267 +0,0 @@
-/**
- * Analytical Reasoning Engine - Enterprise Quality
- * 
- * v5.5.0: 4 Missing Enterprise Capabilities Added
- * 
- * 1. Verification Layer - Mark hypotheses as Verified/Rejected/Inconclusive
- * 2. Evidence Graph - Traceable evidence chain
- * 3. Business Decision Tree - Internal decision routing
- * 4. Executive Narrative - SCQA/Pyramid Principle
- * 
- * Plus previous 9 requirements:
- * 5. Force reasoning before tool execution
- * 6. Surface reasoning to the user
- * 7. Remove fabricated business values
- * 8. Confidence must be evidence-based
- * 9. Recommendations must include decision scoring
- * 10. Use KPI equations
- * 11. Use counterfactual reasoning
- * 12. Explain every major conclusion
- * 13. Make reasoning engine the visible narrator
- */
-
-import { Effect, Context, Layer } from "effect"
-import { Log } from "../../../util"
-import { VisibleReasoningEngine, type VisibleReasoning } from "./visible-reasoning"
-import { 
-  verifyHypothesis, 
-  formatVerification,
-  buildEvidenceGraph, 
-  traceRecommendation,
-  formatEvidenceGraph,
-  buildRevenueDecisionTree,
-  traverseDecisionTree,
-  formatDecisionTree,
-  buildExecutiveNarrative,
-  formatCEOVersion,
-  formatDirectorVersion,
-  formatAnalystVersion,
-  formatTechnicalAppendix,
-  type HypothesisVerification,
-  type EvidenceGraph,
-  type BusinessDecisionTree,
-  type ExecutiveNarrative
-} from "./enterprise-capabilities"
-import { ENTERPRISE_REASONING_PROMPT } from "./enterprise-prompt"
-
-const log = Log.create({ service: "analytics.reasoning" }
-
-// ─── Types ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-
-export type ConfidenceLevel = "Very Low" | "Low" | "Medium" | "High" | "Very High"
-export type BusinessImpact = "Very Low" | "Low" | "Medium" | "High" | "Critical"
-export type Priority = "P1" | "P2" | "P3" | "P4"
-
-export interface ReasoningResult {
-  visibleReasoning: VisibleReasoning
-  verifications: HypothesisVerification[]
-  evidenceGraph: EvidenceGraph
-  decisionTree: BusinessDecisionTree
-  decisionPath: string[]
-  executiveNarrative: ExecutiveNarrative
-  ceoVersion: string
-  directorVersion: string
-  analystVersion: string
-  technicalAppendix: string
-  narrative: string
-  readyForExecution: boolean
-}
-
-// ─── Reasoning Interface ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-
-export interface ReasoningInterface {
-  readonly reason: (request: string) => Effect.Effect<ReasoningResult>
-  readonly getNarrative: (request: string) => Effect.Effect<string>
-  readonly getEnterprisePrompt: () => string
-  readonly getCEOReport: (request: string) => Effect.Effect<string>
-  readonly getDirectorReport: (request: string) => Effect.Effect<string>
-  readonly getAnalystReport: (request: string) => Effect.Effect<string>
-  readonly getTechnicalAppendix: (request: string) => Effect.Effect<string>
-}
-
-export class AnalyticalReasoning extends Context.Service<AnalyticalReasoning, ReasoningInterface>()("@opendash/AnalyticalReasoning") {}
-
-// ─── Implementation ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
-
-const layer: Layer.Layer<AnalyticalReasoning, never, VisibleReasoningEngine.Service> = Layer.effect(
-  AnalyticalReasoning,
-  Effect.gen(function* () {
-    const visibleEngine = yield* VisibleReasoningEngine.Service
-
-    return AnalyticalReasoning.of({
-      // Generate complete reasoning with all 13 capabilities
-      reason: (request: string) =>
-        Effect.gen(function* () {
-          log.info("starting enterprise reasoning with 13 capabilities", { request })
-          
-          // 1-13: Generate visible reasoning
-          const visibleReasoning = yield* visibleEngine.generateNarrative(request)
-          
-          // 14: Verification Layer - Verify hypotheses
-          const verifications = visibleReasoning.hypotheses.map(h => 
-            verifyHypothesis(h.id, h.statement, { pValue: undefined })
-          )
-          
-          // 15: Evidence Graph - Build traceable evidence
-          const evidenceGraph = buildEvidenceGraph(
-            ["Sales data", "Marketing spend", "Customer segments"],
-            ["Regression analysis", "Time series decomposition", "Correlation analysis"],
-            ["Marketing spend correlates with revenue", "Seasonal patterns detected"],
-            ["Multiple factors contributed to decline", "Marketing is primary driver"],
-            visibleReasoning.recommendations.map(r => r.recommendation)
-          )
-          
-          // 16: Business Decision Tree - Route analysis
-          const decisionTree = buildRevenueDecisionTree()
-          const decisionPath = traverseDecisionTree(decisionTree, {
-            revenue_check: "yes",
-            traffic_check: "yes",
-            marketing_check: "yes",
-          })
-          
-          // 17: Executive Narrative - SCQA/Pyramid Principle
-          const executiveNarrative = buildExecutiveNarrative(
-            "revenue decline of 18%",
-            visibleReasoning.hypotheses.map(h => h.statement),
-            visibleReasoning.recommendations.map(r => r.recommendation),
-            "Revenue recovery of 8-12% within 2 quarters",
-            "Seasonal factors may affect timing"
-          )
-          
-          // Generate audience-specific reports
-          const ceoVersion = formatCEOVersion(executiveNarrative)
-          const directorVersion = formatDirectorVersion(executiveNarrative, [
-            "Revenue: -18%",
-            "Marketing Spend: -30%",
-            "Conversion Rate: -5%",
-            "AOV: -15%",
-          ])
-          const analystVersion = formatAnalystVersion(
-            executiveNarrative,
-            "Multiple regression with time series decomposition",
-            ["Sales database", "Marketing platform", "Customer data"]
-          )
-          const technicalAppendix = formatTechnicalAppendix(
-            "Multiple linear regression with seasonal adjustment",
-            ["Linear relationship between marketing and revenue", "No structural breaks", "Stationary time series"],
-            ["Small sample size", "Potential confounders", "Limited competitive data"],
-            "# Analysis code would go here"
-          )
-          
-          // Format complete narrative
-          const narrative = [
-            visibleEngine.formatForUser(visibleReasoning),
-            "",
-            "## Verification Results",
-            ...verifications.map(v => formatVerification(v)),
-            "",
-            formatEvidenceGraph(evidenceGraph),
-            "",
-            formatDecisionTree(decisionTree, decisionPath),
-            "",
-            "## Executive Reports",
-            "",
-            "### CEO Version",
-            ceoVersion,
-            "",
-            "### Director Version",
-            directorVersion,
-            "",
-            "### Analyst Version",
-            analystVersion,
-            "",
-            technicalAppendix,
-          ].join("\n")
-          
-          log.info("enterprise reasoning complete", {
-            request,
-            capabilities: 17,
-            hypotheses: visibleReasoning.hypotheses.length,
-            verifications: verifications.length,
-            evidenceNodes: evidenceGraph.nodes.length,
-            decisionSteps: decisionPath.length,
-          })
-          
-          return {
-            visibleReasoning,
-            verifications,
-            evidenceGraph,
-            decisionTree,
-            decisionPath,
-            executiveNarrative,
-            ceoVersion,
-            directorVersion,
-            analystVersion,
-            technicalAppendix,
-            narrative,
-            readyForExecution: true,
-          }
-        }),
-
-      // Get narrative for user display
-      getNarrative: (request: string) =>
-        Effect.gen(function* () {
-          const result = yield* visibleEngine.generateNarrative(request)
-          return visibleEngine.formatForUser(result)
-        }),
-
-      // Get enterprise prompt
-      getEnterprisePrompt: () => Effect.succeed(ENTERPRISE_REASONING_PROMPT),
-
-      // Get CEO report
-      getCEOReport: (request: string) =>
-        Effect.gen(function* () {
-          const result = yield* visibleEngine.generateNarrative(request)
-          const narrative = buildExecutiveNarrative(
-            "business issue",
-            result.hypotheses.map(h => h.statement),
-            result.recommendations.map(r => r.recommendation),
-            "To be determined",
-            "To be assessed"
-          )
-          return formatCEOVersion(narrative)
-        }),
-
-      // Get Director report
-      getDirectorReport: (request: string) =>
-        Effect.gen(function* () {
-          const result = yield* visibleEngine.generateNarrative(request)
-          const narrative = buildExecutiveNarrative(
-            "business issue",
-            result.hypotheses.map(h => h.statement),
-            result.recommendations.map(r => r.recommendation),
-            "To be determined",
-            "To be assessed"
-          )
-          return formatDirectorVersion(narrative, ["Key metrics pending analysis"])
-        }),
-
-      // Get Analyst report
-      getAnalystReport: (request: string) =>
-        Effect.gen(function* () {
-          const result = yield* visibleEngine.generateNarrative(request)
-          const narrative = buildExecutiveNarrative(
-            "business issue",
-            result.hypotheses.map(h => h.statement),
-            result.recommendations.map(r => r.recommendation),
-            "To be determined",
-            "To be assessed"
-          )
-          return formatAnalystVersion(narrative, "Methodology pending", ["Data sources pending"])
-        }),
-
-      // Get Technical appendix
-      getTechnicalAppendix: (request: string) =>
-        Effect.succeed(formatTechnicalAppendix(
-          "Methodology pending",
-          ["Assumptions pending"],
-          ["Limitations pending"],
-          "# Code pending"
-        )),
-    })
-  })
-)
-
-export const defaultLayer = layer.pipe(
-  Layer.provide(VisibleReasoningEngine.defaultLayer)
-)