@thanh01.pmt/curriculum-kit 1.4.47 → 1.4.49

package/dist/pipeline/index.cjs

@@ -2357,7 +2357,25 @@ var PlanningNodeSchema = zod.z.object({
     file: zod.z.string(),
     evidence: zod.z.string().default("")
   })).default([]),
-  phase_id: zod.z.string().default("")
+  phase_id: zod.z.string().default(""),
+  // P52/T2.1: tangible user-visible outcome projected from the graph step
+  // (checkpoint candidate for session cutting). Empty = not a checkpoint.
+  user_visible_deliverable: zod.z.string().default(""),
+  // P52/T3.1 — depth-reconcile inputs (mirrored from the feed; optional so
+  // raw graphs without variants keep planning unchanged):
+  // • depth_variants: minutes to teach this node at each depth level (ULO ≤
+  //   CIO ≤ SIO) — the reconciler's price list for downgrades.
+  // • depth_scaffold_candidates: parallel to scaffold_candidates but acting
+  //   on DEPTH (SIO→CIO, CIO→ULO) instead of lesson time.
+  // • is_core: Master-Tree core concept — never downgraded; escalate instead.
+  depth_variants: zod.z.object({ ulo: zod.z.number().int().nonnegative(), cio: zod.z.number().int().nonnegative(), sio: zod.z.number().int().nonnegative() }).optional(),
+  depth_scaffold_candidates: zod.z.array(zod.z.object({
+    from_depth: DepthLevelSchema,
+    to_depth: DepthLevelSchema,
+    minutes_saved: zod.z.number().int().nonnegative(),
+    reason: zod.z.string().default("")
+  })).optional(),
+  is_core: zod.z.boolean().default(false)
 });
 var DependencyEdgeSchema = zod.z.object({
   from: zod.z.string(),
@@ -3140,9 +3158,9 @@ Evaluate the candidate artifact across these 6 dimensions:
    - 0 pts: Missing critical sections.
 
 5. **Technical & Conceptual Accuracy (15 pts):**
-   - 15 pts: Code snippets, logic flows, architectural descriptions, and Mermaid diagrams are conceptually sound and valid. If \`canonicalExposition\` or \`[KNOWLEDGE_EXPOSITION]\` is provided, content strictly adheres to canonical concepts without contradicting definitions or examples.
+   - 15 pts: Code snippets, logic flows, architectural descriptions, and Mermaid diagrams are conceptually sound and valid. Every code identifier uses the REAL standard-library/API spelling of the declared stack (grounded in REFERENCE_PACK / canonical LESSON) \u2014 internal consistency with a glossary term name is NOT evidence of correctness. If \`canonicalExposition\` or \`[KNOWLEDGE_EXPOSITION]\` is provided, content strictly adheres to canonical concepts without contradicting definitions or examples.
    - 8 pts: Minor syntax inaccuracies or unidiomatic code that does not break core concepts.
-   - 0 pts: Severe technical hallucinations, broken logic, invalid diagrams, or direct contradiction of canonical exposition knowledge.
+   - 0 pts: Severe technical hallucinations, broken logic, invalid diagrams, invented casing/spelling rules for standard-library identifiers, or direct contradiction of canonical exposition knowledge.
 
 6. **Contract Consistency & Zero-Drift (10 pts):**
    - 10 pts: Satellite artifact strictly adheres to the scope, tech stack, and objectives of Lesson ${lessonId} without introducing unrelated topics. If \`canonicalLessonExcerpt\` is present in candidate JSON, all satellite phases/activities strictly operationalize the master Lesson Flow and Activity Sequence without inventing divergent timelines.