onto-mcp 0.3.2 → 0.4.1

package/.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-execution-ux-contract.md

@@ -7,8 +7,8 @@
 ## 1. Position
 
 `reconstruct` can take a long time because the host LLM must read source
-observations, run reconstruct lens judgments, choose the next unjudged source
-frontier, propose Seed meaning, assess competency questions, and explain
+observations, run reconstruct lens judgments, choose the next unjudged
+source frontier, propose seed meaning, assess competency questions, and explain
 unresolved gaps. The user-facing experience must therefore expose new
 information as it is discovered, not only meta status such as "still running".
 
@@ -34,18 +34,18 @@ The brief must include:
   test/fixture-only profile if a non-product harness is running, with the
   completion claim allowed for that profile
 - model/provider: provider family or realization label without secrets
-- domain: selected domain, no-domain mode, or pending domain-context selection
+- domain: selected domain, no-domain mode, or pending domain competency admission
 - material: `target_material_kind`, target input kind, and unsupported-material
   status if known
 - exploration loop: initial source frontier, round budget if any, and frontier
   validation policy
 - reconstruction direction: what the reconstruct run will try to explain, and
   what it will treat as out of scope
-- ownership boundary: runtime observes and validates; reconstruct lenses judge
-  meaning and source gaps; the user or host confirmation controls Seed
+- ownership boundary: runtime observes and validates; reconstruct lens judgments judge
+  meaning and source gaps; the user or host confirmation controls seed
   acceptance
 - skipped or deferred stages that already narrow downstream authority, such as
-  live lens judgment, source-frontier exploration, domain-context selection,
+  live lens judgment, source-frontier exploration, domain competency admission,
   user confirmation, or competency-question assessment
 
 The opening brief should be declarative. It should not ask the user to approve
@@ -78,9 +78,12 @@ Progress updates should prefer facts such as:
 - per-lens judgment status and newly named semantic gaps
 - source frontier refs requested, accepted, rejected, already observed,
   unsupported, or out of bounds
-- domain context refs and snapshot id
-- Seed claim count by entity, relation, action, property, and rule
-- claim realization stance counts
+- domain competency admission refs and governing snapshot id
+- seed layer count by object, actor, action, workflow, permission, and data
+  binding
+- candidate disposition count by disposition
+- ontology-facing handoff readiness, canonical readiness projection, or
+  limitation count
 - confirmation state counts
 - competency question count and assessment status counts
 - failure classification counts
@@ -89,9 +92,10 @@ Progress updates should prefer facts such as:
 - current halt reason and reusable artifact refs when halted
 - skipped/deferred stage reason and downstream authority impact
 
-Progress updates should avoid pretending that intermediate semantic claims are
-final. Before Seed confirmation, claims are candidates. Before competency
-question assessment, quality statements are preliminary.
+Progress updates should avoid pretending that intermediate semantic content is
+final. Before seed confirmation, seed content is candidate content. Before
+competency-question assessment and handoff validation, quality statements are
+preliminary.
 
 ## 4. Decision Points
 
@@ -104,9 +108,8 @@ Decision points:
 - material kind is unsupported or mixed in a way that changes adapter behavior
 - source frontier expansion would exceed the declared boundary, adapter support,
   or round/cost budget
-- domain context selection changes the interpretation standard
-- Seed claim confirmation requires accepted, rejected, partial, or deferred
-  state
+- domain competency admission changes the interpretation standard
+- seed confirmation requires accepted, rejected, partial, or deferred state
 - unresolved material questions require a final direction: continue, defer, or
   accept with disclosed limits
 
@@ -118,7 +121,7 @@ The host should phrase choices by outcome, not internal jargon.
 separate:
 
 - confirmed Seed content
-- claim realization summary
+- candidate disposition summary
 - competency question assessment summary
 - material failures and unsafe-to-trust gaps
 - revision proposals and action candidates
@@ -132,9 +135,10 @@ of `reconstruct-record.yaml`, `reconstruct-run-manifest.yaml`, and the
 stage-owned artifacts.
 
 Full integral exploration wording is allowed only when the run manifest records
-the full profile and the required exploration, domain-context, Seed,
-confirmation, competency-question, assessment, failure, revision, metrics, stop,
-and final-output stages are trusted or explicitly skipped with trusted reasons.
+the full profile and the required exploration, domain competency admission, Seed,
+confirmation, competency-question, assessment, failure, revision, metrics,
+handoff-validation, and final-output stages are trusted or explicitly skipped
+with trusted reasons.
 
 ## 6. Halted Or Partial Runs
 
@@ -151,9 +155,9 @@ If a run halts, the output should still be useful:
   trusted artifacts
 
 A halted run may provide candidate Seed content only if the corresponding
-artifact and validation refs exist. It may not imply Seed confirmation, CQ
-assessment, failure classification, revision proposal, stop decision, or final
-ontology direction unless those artifacts exist.
+artifact and validation refs exist. It may not imply seed confirmation, CQ
+assessment, failure classification, revision proposal, terminal handoff readiness, or
+final ontology direction unless those artifacts exist.
 
 ## 7. Runtime Payload Expectations
 

package/.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profile-contract.md

@@ -1,6 +1,7 @@
 # Reconstruct Source Profile Contract
 
-> Status: design contract, partially wired runtime.
+> Contract status: active.
+> Runtime support status authority: `reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml#source_profile_records`.
 > Purpose: define target-material observation contracts for `reconstruct`.
 
 ## 1. Canonical Seat
@@ -11,14 +12,14 @@ Source profiles live under:
 .onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/
 ```
 
-The historical `explorers/` folder is archived and must not be revived as an
-active runtime path. `SourceProfile` is the current name because the file guides
-runtime observation. It is not an autonomous semantic explorer.
+`SourceProfileDefinition` is the contract-owned source profile file. A
+`SelectedSourceProfile` is the runtime-owned selection recorded after material
+classification. Neither concept owns semantic interpretation.
 
-In the integral exploration design, source profiles still belong to the runtime
-observation side. Reconstruct lenses may ask for additional source refs through
-a validated source frontier, but the profile itself does not decide which source
-is semantically important.
+In the integral exploration design, source profiles belong to the runtime
+observation side. Reconstruct lens judgments may ask for additional
+source refs through a validated source frontier, but the profile itself does not
+decide which source is semantically important.
 
 Source profiles are keyed by `target_material_kind`, the shared runtime axis
 defined in `.onto/authority/core-lexicon.yaml`. They must not use `source_kind`
@@ -29,16 +30,25 @@ to mean code, spreadsheet, document, or database because review already uses
 The cross-process goal and validation rules for this axis are defined in
 `.onto/processes/shared/target-material-kind-contract.md`.
 
-Current source profiles:
-
-| Target material kind | Profile |
-|---|---|
-| `code` | `.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/code.md` |
-| `spreadsheet` | `.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/spreadsheet.md` |
-| `database` | `.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/database.md` |
-| `document` | `.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/document.md` |
-| `mixed` | no standalone parser profile; requires per-member profiles or explicit unsupported/halt behavior |
-| `unknown` | no profile; runtime must halt or ask for clarification |
+The current profile record set is owned by
+`.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml#source_profile_records`.
+That registry is the executable authority for profile ids, definition refs,
+definition hashes, contract status, runtime implementation status, schema
+version, profile version, and migration status. This source-profile contract
+defines what a profile means; it does not independently publish current support
+status.
+
+Profile migration continuity is also registry-owned. `source_profile_records`
+must record `supersedes`, `replaced_by`, `split_from`, `split_into`,
+`merged_from`, and `merged_into` so old profile snapshots can be replayed,
+compared, or migrated without guessing how a previous profile id maps to the
+current registry.
+
+`contract_status` means whether a profile definition or public material-kind
+contract is authoritative. `runtime_implementation_status` means whether the
+current runtime can execute that profile. A profile can be contract-active while
+its runtime adapter is still planned or unsupported, but that status must be read
+from `source_profile_records`.
 
 ## 2. Profile Responsibility
 
@@ -52,11 +62,15 @@ A source profile may define:
 - scan targets
 - safe frontier-ref shapes for this material kind
 - correct and incorrect observation examples
-- current support status and explicit unsupported cases
+- profile-specific unsupported cases that do not claim current runtime status
+- profile-specific `candidate_subkind` and `disposition_detail` qualifiers
 
 A source profile must not define rules that convert source structure into
 ontology concepts or rules that choose the next source based on ontology
-meaning.
+meaning. A source profile must not define or override `contract_status`,
+`runtime_implementation_status`, `schema_version`, `profile_version`, or
+`migration_status`; those values and source-profile migration mapping fields
+belong to `source_profile_records`.
 
 Examples:
 
@@ -75,7 +89,7 @@ profile may guide observation scope, but the adapter schema is the runtime
 contract that fixes returned fields and observation ids.
 
 When a source adapter is invoked after the first round, it consumes only
-runtime-validated source frontier refs. It must not accept lens prose or
+runtime-validated source frontier refs. It must not accept lens-judgment prose or
 semantic labels as source locations.
 
 The future adapter contract must fail explicitly when:
@@ -117,13 +131,25 @@ validates it before any additional observation occurs.
 Adding a new target material kind requires:
 
 1. A new source profile under `.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/`.
-2. Runtime adapter support or an explicit unsupported status.
+2. A `source_profile_records` entry that declares profile id, definition ref or
+   explicit null-ref behavior, definition hash, contract status, runtime
+   implementation status, schema version, profile version, migration status,
+   and source-profile migration mapping fields.
 3. Tests for target material detection, observation shape, source frontier
    validation, unsupported inputs, and directive evidence-ref validation.
-4. MCP schema updates only after the runtime contract is implemented.
+4. `reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml` updates when artifact authority,
+   validation gates, root candidate kinds, root dispositions, material kinds,
+   source profile records, source profile definition refs, runtime
+   implementation status values, or support-status migration behavior change.
+5. MCP schema updates only after the runtime contract is implemented.
 
 The source profile alone does not make a target material kind supported.
 
+Profile-specific refinements must use qualifiers. A source profile may introduce
+`candidate_subkind` or `disposition_detail` values for its material kind. It may
+not introduce a new root candidate kind, root disposition, or material kind
+without a contract and registry change.
+
 ## 6. Mixed Material Rule
 
 `mixed` is a public `TargetMaterialKind` value, but it is not a material parser.

package/.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/code.md

@@ -2,9 +2,12 @@
 
 > Target material kind: `code`
 
-## Support Status
+## Registry Record
 
-Design profile only. Runtime adapter support is not wired in the current repo.
+Current profile id, contract status, runtime implementation status, schema
+version, profile version, migration status, and definition hash are owned by
+`.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml#source_profile_records`.
+This file defines code observation semantics only.
 
 ## Target Material Identification Hints
 
@@ -59,7 +62,7 @@ status field definition -- src/payment.ts:14
 - What user-visible workflow does this code support?
 - Is this code a service, library, script, UI, integration, or test harness?
 - Are there related repositories or documents that define the domain language?
-- Is there a legacy migration or compatibility constraint?
+- Is there a compatibility or migration constraint?
 
 ## Scan Targets
 

package/.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/database.md

@@ -2,9 +2,12 @@
 
 > Target material kind: `database`
 
-## Support Status
+## Registry Record
 
-Design profile only. Runtime adapter support is not wired in the current repo.
+Current profile id, contract status, runtime implementation status, schema
+version, profile version, migration status, and definition hash are owned by
+`.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml#source_profile_records`.
+This file defines database observation semantics only.
 
 ## Target Material Identification Hints
 

package/.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/document.md

@@ -2,9 +2,12 @@
 
 > Target material kind: `document`
 
-## Support Status
+## Registry Record
 
-Design profile only. Runtime adapter support is not wired in the current repo.
+Current profile id, contract status, runtime implementation status, schema
+version, profile version, migration status, and definition hash are owned by
+`.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml#source_profile_records`.
+This file defines document observation semantics only.
 
 ## Target Material Identification Hints
 

package/.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/spreadsheet.md

@@ -2,11 +2,12 @@
 
 > Target material kind: `spreadsheet`
 
-## Support Status
+## Registry Record
 
-Design profile only. Planned first runtime support should cover `.xlsx` and
-`.csv`. Other spreadsheet formats such as `.xls` and `.ods` must fail explicitly
-until adapter support is implemented.
+Current profile id, contract status, runtime implementation status, schema
+version, profile version, migration status, and definition hash are owned by
+`.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml#source_profile_records`.
+This file defines spreadsheet observation semantics only.
 
 ## Target Material Identification Hints
 

package/.onto/processes/review/review-execution-ux-contract.md

@@ -185,6 +185,46 @@ If a user later chooses `accept_risk`, that accepted disposition belongs in a
 separate decision/closure record or future workflow surface. Review presentation
 may show the candidate; it must not present the candidate as already accepted.
 
+### 5.1 Patch-Loop Eligibility Judgement
+
+When a material issue appears and the host is considering patch-and-rerun, the
+host LLM should make a short patch-loop eligibility judgement before continuing.
+
+This is an operational judgement, not a runtime artifact, schema field, enum, or
+deterministic gate. Runtime remains responsible for preserving snapshot and
+artifact truth; the LLM explains whether repeating the review is still a
+bounded closure loop.
+
+The judgement should answer four questions:
+
+1. Is the principal target artifact or design surface materially the same?
+2. Is the review intent still the same closure problem?
+3. Is the evidence boundary unchanged?
+4. Is there patch lineage from the prior issue to the current change?
+
+For the first review in a possible loop, the LLM can only classify an
+`initial_loop_candidate`. Trend judgement requires at least a second review in
+the same series.
+
+From the second review onward, compare the current issue artifacts with the
+prior review result:
+
+| Pattern | Meaning | Loop disposition |
+|---|---|---|
+| `closed` | Prior root issue disappeared. | Continue only if new local residue remains. |
+| `narrowed` | Same root issue remains with smaller scope or weaker severity. | Continue if patch scope stays local. |
+| `new-local` | New issue is a local consequence of the closure patch. | Continue if severity and scope are bounded. |
+| `new-structural` | Issue requires a new authority seat, concept, lifecycle, or ownership split. | Stop and ask. |
+| `boundary-expanding` | Review must expand to runtime, schema, tests, docs, or another material kind. | Stop and treat as a new review. |
+| `reopened` | A supposedly closed root issue reappears. | Stop unless the user explicitly chooses another loop. |
+| `plateau` | Material issue count, severity, or root risk does not decrease across repeated runs. | Stop and ask. |
+
+Automatic patch looping is appropriate only for `closed`, `narrowed`, or
+bounded `new-local` patterns, and only when the user has authorized that
+operating mode. `new-structural`, `boundary-expanding`, `reopened`, and
+`plateau` patterns must not be hidden behind `continue_review`; they require a
+user-facing decision or a new review boundary.
+
 ---
 
 ## 6. Start And Progress Output

package/.onto/processes/shared/pipeline-execution-ledger-contract.md

@@ -130,16 +130,32 @@ ledger.
 
 ### Reconstruct
 
-`reconstruct` units follow stable `ReconstructStageId` values:
-
-- material profiling;
-- source inventory;
-- source observation;
-- LLM-authored directive production;
-- runtime directive validation;
-- Seed candidate, confirmation, competency-question, assessment,
-  failure-classification, revision, metrics, stop-decision, final-output, and
-  record assembly stages as the contract enables them.
+`reconstruct` units are runtime projections of the active reconstruct registry
+and the TypeScript stage contract. The registry owns artifact, gate, predicate,
+readiness, and validator authority; the TypeScript stage id list and ledger
+specs are implementation projections that must stay aligned with those registry
+authorities and must not introduce independent semantic authority. The current
+unit families are:
+
+- material profile and material-profile validation;
+- source inventory, source observation, source-observation directive, and
+  directive validation;
+- per-round source frontier, frontier validation, observation delta, delta
+  validation, perspective judgments, exploration synthesis, and observation
+  re-entry validation;
+- candidate inventory, candidate disposition, and candidate-disposition
+  validation;
+- `ontology-seed.yaml` and `ontology-seed-validation.yaml`;
+- competency questions, competency-question validation, assessment, and
+  assessment validation;
+- seed confirmation and seed-confirmation validation;
+- query proofs, visualization proofs, graph-exploration proofs, and their
+  runtime validations when the corresponding downstream capability is claimed;
+- failure classification, revision proposal, reconstruct metrics, and their
+  validations where applicable;
+- reconstruct run manifest and run-manifest validation;
+- handoff decision and handoff-decision validation before final output and
+  reconstruct-record projection.
 
 Runtime validation units are the trust gates for LLM-authored artifacts. A
 semantic artifact can exist but remain untrusted until its validation unit

package/.onto/processes/shared/target-material-kind-contract.md

@@ -97,12 +97,16 @@ cross-material interpretation belongs to the LLM after runtime observation.
 | Artifact | Required change |
 |---|---|
 | `review-target-profile.yaml` | Preserve `target_material_kind`, detection confidence, confidence basis, and unsupported-material state. |
-| `target-material-profile.yaml` | New reconstruct runtime artifact for material candidates, selected material kind, selected profiles, and support state. |
+| `target-material-profile.yaml` | New reconstruct runtime artifact for material candidates, selected material kind, selected profile snapshots, per-member selected profile ids for `mixed`, `contract_status`, `runtime_implementation_status`, and support state. |
 | `source-inventory.yaml` | Preserve material-specific inventory units and scan boundaries. |
 | `source-observations.yaml` | Include stable observation ids, material kind, adapter id, location, and structural data. |
 | `source-observation-directive-validation.yaml` | Preserve runtime validation of LLM-selected observation refs against `source-observations.yaml`. |
-| `seed-candidate-validation.yaml` | Preserve runtime validation that LLM-authored Seed claims cite selected runtime observations without runtime generating ontology meaning. |
-| `reconstruct-record.yaml` | Preserve refs to material profile, inventory, observations, directives, metrics, and final disposition. |
+| `candidate-disposition-validation.yaml` | Preserve runtime validation that every salient material-derived candidate has one allowed disposition before seed promotion. |
+| `ontology-seed-validation.yaml` | Preserve runtime validation that LLM-authored seed claims cite selected runtime observations, close ids, and do not require runtime to generate ontology meaning. |
+| `query-proofs-validation.yaml` | Preserve runtime validation of executable query/API proof refs when queryability is claimed. |
+| `reconstruct-run-manifest.pre-handoff-validation.yaml` | Preserve selected registry, contract, source profile, validator, reference-standard, version, and migration snapshot consistency before terminal handoff. |
+| `reconstruct-run-manifest.post-publication-validation.yaml` | Preserve complete manifest consistency after final output and record refs exist. |
+| `reconstruct-record.yaml` | Preserve refs to material profile, inventory, observations, directives, seed, validations, handoff, manifest validation, metrics, and final disposition. |
 | future `evolve-target-profile.yaml` | Preserve target refs, `target_material_kind`, support status, and boundary refs before any evolve adapter dispatch. |
 
 Artifact names remain contract-owned. Runtime implementation must either match
@@ -110,21 +114,26 @@ these shapes or update the owning contract before code lands.
 
 ## 6. Runtime Replacement Steps
 
-Implementation should proceed in this order:
+Implementation should proceed in this order. This table defines dependency
+order only; it is not the authority for current material support. Current
+reconstruct profile support, adapter readiness, profile versions, migration
+status, and definition hashes are owned by
+`.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml#source_profile_records`
+and must be copied into the runtime `target-material-profile.yaml` snapshot.
 
-| Step | Status |
+| Step | Runtime boundary replaced |
 |---|---|
-| Add a shared `target_material_kind` detection helper. | implemented |
-| Extend `review-target-profile.yaml` schema and materializer. | implemented |
-| Add reconstruct source profile loader. | implemented |
-| Add unsupported/fail-loud behavior for `unknown` and unsupported formats. | implemented for the current minimal adapter contract: unknown and unsupported refs are recorded and skipped without adapter dispatch |
-| Implement one minimal source adapter, preferably `document` or `spreadsheet`. | implemented: minimal structural observers write source observations for concrete material refs |
-| Define `source-observations.yaml` schema with stable observation ids. | implemented for preparation helper |
-| Validate directive evidence refs against observation ids. | implemented for `SourceObservationDirective` |
-| Validate Seed candidate claims against selected observation evidence refs. | implemented for `SeedCandidateDirective` helper |
-| Assemble reconstruct artifact refs into `reconstruct-record.yaml`. | implemented as record helper |
-| Add a reconstruct Core API facade over bounded runtime helpers. | implemented for preparation, profile listing, directive validation, and record assembly |
-| Add MCP schemas only after runtime contracts and tests exist. | implemented for `onto.list_source_profiles`, `onto.observe_source`, and `onto.validate_reconstruct_directive`; metrics remain future |
+| Add a shared `target_material_kind` detection helper. | Target refs can be classified without semantic interpretation. |
+| Extend `review-target-profile.yaml` schema and materializer. | Review target profiles can preserve material kind and unsupported state. |
+| Add reconstruct source profile loader. | Reconstruct can dereference selected source-profile records from the registry. |
+| Add unsupported/fail-loud behavior for `unknown` and unsupported formats. | Unsupported refs are recorded or halted before adapter dispatch. |
+| Implement one minimal source adapter for a concrete material kind. | A selected concrete profile can produce structural observations without ontology meaning. |
+| Define `source-observations.yaml` schema with stable observation ids. | LLM-authored artifacts can cite runtime observations by stable ids. |
+| Validate directive evidence refs against observation ids. | Source-observation directives cannot cite non-existent runtime evidence. |
+| Validate candidate disposition and ontology seed claims against selected observation evidence refs. | Candidate promotion and seed claims remain grounded in selected observations. |
+| Assemble reconstruct artifact refs into `reconstruct-record.yaml`. | Terminal records can preserve refs to material profile, inventory, observations, validations, manifest validation, and handoff result. |
+| Add a reconstruct Core API facade over bounded runtime helpers. | Host surfaces can call preparation, profile listing, directive validation, and record assembly through a stable API. |
+| Add MCP schemas only after runtime contracts and tests exist. | Public tool schemas expose bounded runtime facts and artifact refs. |
 
 Each step should replace one deterministic boundary. LLM-owned semantic
 judgment remains outside the runtime replacement steps.
@@ -137,6 +146,10 @@ Runtime must validate:
 - `unknown` does not dispatch a material adapter
 - `mixed` records per-member material kinds and one of the support states in
   section 4.1 before adapter dispatch
+- `target-material-profile.yaml` snapshots every selected source profile from
+  `source_profile_records`, including `profile_id`, `definition_ref`,
+  `definition_sha256`, `contract_status`, `runtime_implementation_status`,
+  `schema_version`, `profile_version`, and `migration_status`
 - unsupported formats halt or degrade explicitly
 - source observations do not claim ontology facts such as entity, relation,
   business rule, aggregate root, or policy meaning

package/AGENTS.md

@@ -60,10 +60,12 @@ target material 관련 작업 시 추가로 읽을 문서:
 `reconstruct` 작업 시 추가로 읽을 문서:
 
 1. [reconstruct-boundary-contract.md](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-boundary-contract.md)
-2. [reconstruct-execution-ux-contract.md](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-execution-ux-contract.md)
-3. [top-level-concept-discovery-contract.md](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/top-level-concept-discovery-contract.md)
-4. [source-profile-contract.md](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profile-contract.md)
-5. selected source profile under `.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/`
+2. [actionable-ontology-seed-recomposition-design.md](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/actionable-ontology-seed-recomposition-design.md)
+3. [foundry-style-ontology-seed-contract.md](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/foundry-style-ontology-seed-contract.md)
+4. [reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-contract-registry.yaml)
+5. [reconstruct-execution-ux-contract.md](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/reconstruct-execution-ux-contract.md)
+6. [source-profile-contract.md](/Users/kangmin/cowork/onto-mcp/.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profile-contract.md)
+7. selected source profile under `.onto/processes/reconstruct/source-profiles/`
 
 ---