@sabaiway/agent-workflow-memory 1.4.0 → 1.5.0

package/CHANGELOG.md

@@ -4,6 +4,22 @@ All notable changes to the memory substrate. Versions are this **package's** npm
 they are distinct from the **deployment-lineage** stamp written into a project's
 `docs/ai/.memory-version` (which tracks the shared `agent-workflow` lineage, head `1.3.0`).
 
+## 1.5.0 — §2.6 carries the planning/review/process-fidelity invariants (memory)
+
+A **feature** release. The `agent_rules.md` substrate **§2.6** is generalized from *Right-altitude &
+code-grounded* to **Planning, review & process-fidelity invariants** — the always-loaded,
+read-before-any-code-change lens now carries all **seven** methodology invariants: fold by code, right
+altitude, no code-mechanics, test-as-spec, characterize-first, heavy review at the diff, the convergence
+bar (0 blockers + 0 majors), recipe fidelity, and ExitPlanMode ≠ execute. Wording stays **path-neutral**
+(the substrate "knows nobody"). The deployment-lineage head stays **`1.3.0`** (no `docs/ai` structural
+change, no migration); the npm package version is a separate axis.
+
+- **Seed-or-preserve only (unchanged contract).** A NEW deployment gets the §2.6 lens from the seed;
+  refreshing an already-deployed file is the composition root's job.
+- **Template parity preserved** — the §2.6 block body stays byte-identical to the kit fallback template
+  (only the heading number differs), pinned by the kit's cross-package `lens-mirror.test.mjs` (now over
+  two scoped, non-vacuous token sets).
+
 ## 1.4.0 — §2.6 right-altitude & code-grounded lens (memory)
 
 A **feature** release. The `agent_rules.md` substrate gains a **§2.6 Right-altitude & code-grounded

package/SKILL.md

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ name: agent-workflow-memory
 description: Deploy or upgrade a portable AI-agent memory substrate in any project — an entry-point `AGENTS.md` (+ `CLAUDE.md` alias) and a structured `docs/ai/` context store with cap/archive/index enforcement. Use when the user wants to bootstrap `docs/ai/`, set up the Memory Map and session protocols, install the docs-rotation pre-commit hook, or run `/agent-workflow-memory` / `/agent-workflow-memory upgrade`. Triggers on "set up the memory system", "deploy the AI memory here", "bootstrap docs/ai", "upgrade the memory substrate". This is the substrate only — the workflow methodology (plan→execute→review, queue, Cleanup) is owned elsewhere and injected into AGENTS.md by the family composition root.
 disable-model-invocation: true
 metadata:
-  version: '1.4.0'
+  version: '1.5.0'
 ---
 
 # agent-workflow-memory

package/capability.json

@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
   "schema": 1,
   "name": "agent-workflow-memory",
   "kind": "memory-substrate",
-  "version": "1.4.0",
+  "version": "1.5.0",
   "provides": ["context"],
   "roles": {},
   "detect": {

package/package.json

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 {
   "name": "@sabaiway/agent-workflow-memory",
-  "version": "1.4.0",
+  "version": "1.5.0",
   "description": "Portable, cross-agent memory substrate for AI coding agents — an AGENTS.md entry point + docs/ai context with cap/archive/index enforcement, deployable standalone or as part of the agent-workflow family. The memory layer of the agent-workflow family.",
   "keywords": [
     "ai-agents",

package/references/templates/agent_rules.md

@@ -70,10 +70,17 @@ Apply this as part of §2 before any user-facing summary:
 - **No condescension, no filler.** Own a miss plainly and fix it in the same message.
 - **Large artifact (≈>100 lines):** deliver a real summary or the key excerpt inline **and** link the file — never flood the reader with a 2000-line paste, never hide the answer behind a bare pointer.
 
-### 2.6. Right-altitude & code-grounded (planning + review)
+### 2.6. Planning, review & process-fidelity invariants
+Apply these when authoring a plan, reviewing, folding a finding, or editing code — the layer read **before any code change**. (Full canon: the project's planning / workflow-methodology + orchestration canon.)
 - **Fold by code, not prose.** Before folding a code-touching finding into a plan or change, read the cited `file:line` and cite it — a prose fold drifts from the code and seeds the next bug.
 - **Right altitude.** Pin intent + invariants + acceptance criteria (named tests); leave fine code-mechanics to Execute, where prose cannot diverge from reality.
-- **Convergence heuristic.** When a review round keeps finding mechanism issues on a stable architecture, stop refining prose — raise the altitude or hand it to Execute. (Full canon: the project's planning methodology / workflow-methodology canon.)
+- **No code-mechanics in the plan.** A Step still carries its exact paths + commands (the plan-structure / self-review canon); the ceiling is on *fold-bred* detail — a review fold must not push fine code-mechanics (`cd`, an env default, a flag) into prose. A fold that needs a mechanic is the trigger to write the test instead.
+- **Test-as-spec.** Fold a code-touching finding into a red→green TEST, not a prose paragraph — the gate is the only deterministic checker; a paragraph cannot self-check.
+- **Characterize-first.** Before editing UNCOVERED code, pin its current behavior in a green test, then edit — any unintended change goes red. Never edit what has no checker; first give it one. Keep edits atomic/reversible; prefer SUBTRACTIVE folds.
+- **Heavy review at the diff.** Plan-review settles architecture only (≤2 rounds, stop at the pre-existing→fold-induced crossover); the exhaustive per-Step review runs against real compiling code + the full suite, where a regression fails a gate immediately.
+- **Convergence bar.** A review loop is CLEAN only when one round returns **0 blockers + 0 majors** from EVERY backend the recipe names (nits + a ship verdict is the stop). Folding ≠ convergence — re-review after folding.
+- **Recipe fidelity.** Council runs every backend the recipe names, **every round**; silently dropping a ready backend for quota/convenience is a forbidden downgrade — an unavailable backend is a LOUD, stated degrade, never a quiet drop.
+- **ExitPlanMode ≠ execute.** A harness "approved — start coding" prompt authorizes the PLAN only; this methodology overrides it. Continue into execution only as a DELIBERATE transition after the plan + cold-start prompt exist, never an implicit slide.
 
 ---