# Vercy AI instruction - YAML 1.2 (JSON-compatible) { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "published", "adjudicationStatus": "reviewable-draft", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-09-05T22:34:12Z", "synthesisSha256": "b2d9b19e96824960211a2c8fc1447ddac1c3765411db1d1c92c21fcef5f572eb", "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "Claude", "Grok" ] }, "metaModel": { "id": "WM-ACT-021", "registryId": "vr.wm-act-021", "name": "Service Case / Ticket", "version": "0.3.0-research.1", "previousVersions": [], "entryKind": "aggregate", "family": "World Models", "category": "Activities and processes", "industry": [ "Cross-industry" ], "domain": [ "ACT.CSE" ], "tags": [ "service", "case", "ticket", "act.cse" ], "status": "published" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/wm-act-021-service-case-ticket/", "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/ver-cy/world-models/tree/feat/mega-model-registry/research/runs/wm-act-021", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.wm-act-021", "model_id": "WM-ACT-021", "name": "Service Case / Ticket", "entry_kind": "aggregate", "purpose": "Represent a governed request, inquiry, issue or complaint that an organization receives, owns, coordinates and brings to an evidence-backed outcome across channels and systems.", "scope_statement": "Owns case identity, classification, participation roles, intake, triage, case state, assignment, case-local communication and evidence indexes, applied commitment instances, outcome, closure, reopening and governed projections while referencing external parties, content, policies and work execution.", "in_scope": [ "Case identity, intake, classification, relationships, requester and handling roles, state and assignment history", "Case-local communication, evidence and knowledge bindings, applied service commitments, outcome, closure, feedback and federation", "Typed references to parties, products, services, contracts, messages, documents, tasks, policies, calendars and knowledge" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Person or organization identity, message and document payloads, generic workflow, work-order execution, knowledge lifecycle and policy evaluation engines", "Universal status, priority, entitlement, SLA, complaint, resolution or retention vocabularies", "Access enforcement, audit-log persistence and master data owned by external systems" ], "boundary_notes": [ { "neighbor": "Request, inquiry, issue and complaint", "distinction": "These are profile-bound case types. A complaint may follow ISO 10002, but that complaints profile does not define every service case.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "neighbor": "Incident or problem", "distinction": "A case is a handling aggregate initiated around a need or issue; the underlying incident, defect, problem or affected object keeps its own identity and lifecycle.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ] }, { "neighbor": "Task, work order and workflow", "distinction": "The case owns coordination status and assignments but references independently governed execution tasks and workflows.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] }, { "neighbor": "SLA policy and calendar", "distinction": "The case stores the pinned policy binding and observed KPI timer instance, while policy definition and business-time calculation remain external.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004" ] }, { "neighbor": "Communication, document and knowledge", "distinction": "The case indexes relevance, chronology and visibility; external systems own message, file, evidence and knowledge payload lifecycles.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "SRC-001", "title": "ISO 10002:2018 Quality management - Customer satisfaction - Guidelines for complaints handling in organizations", "organization": "International Organization for Standardization", "url": "https://www.iso.org/standard/71580.html", "version_or_date": "Edition 3, confirmed 2023", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T01:00:00Z", "relevance": "Defines an authoritative complaints-handling profile and explicitly limits that profile, preventing all service cases from being treated as complaints." }, { "id": "SRC-002", "title": "Help organizations manage and optimize their case to resolution processes with Dynamics 365", "organization": "Microsoft", "url": "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/guidance/business-processes/case-to-resolution-introduction", "version_or_date": "Updated 2024-04-26", "source_type": "first-party-doc", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T01:00:00Z", "relevance": "Describes generic logging, assignment, investigation, resolution, closure, stakeholders, channels and integrations across customer and employee cases." }, { "id": "SRC-003", "title": "Resolve, cancel, and reassign cases", "organization": "Microsoft", "url": "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/customer-service/use/customer-service-hub-user-guide-resolve-cancel-reassign-a-case", "version_or_date": "Updated 2026-08-31", "source_type": "first-party-doc", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T01:00:00Z", "relevance": "Provides concrete lifecycle, assignment, merge, parent-child, resolution, cancellation and reopening semantics." }, { "id": "SRC-004", "title": "Overview of service-level agreements", "organization": "Microsoft", "url": "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/customer-service/use/overview-service-level-agreements", "version_or_date": "Current documentation accessed 2026-09-06", "source_type": "first-party-doc", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T01:00:00Z", "relevance": "Distinguishes support entitlement and SLA policy from case-bound KPI timers, schedules and measured service performance." }, { "id": "SRC-005", "title": "Jira Cloud platform REST API v3 - Issues", "organization": "Atlassian", "url": "https://developer.atlassian.com/cloud/jira/platform/rest/v3/api-group-issues/", "version_or_date": "Cloud REST API v3 accessed 2026-09-06", "source_type": "schema", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T01:00:00Z", "relevance": "Supplies a widely deployed issue representation with keys, fields, transitions, comments, attachments, links, properties and update semantics." }, { "id": "SRC-006", "title": "Zendesk Tickets API", "organization": "Zendesk", "url": "https://developer.zendesk.com/api-reference/ticketing/tickets/tickets/", "version_or_date": "Current API documentation accessed 2026-09-06", "source_type": "schema", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T01:00:00Z", "relevance": "Provides mature ticket fields, requester and submitter roles, assignee and group ownership, status, priority, comments, collaborators, tags and safe-update controls." }, { "id": "SRC-007", "title": "PROV-O: The PROV Ontology", "organization": "World Wide Web Consortium", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/", "version_or_date": "W3C Recommendation, 30 April 2013", "source_type": "ontology", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T01:00:00Z", "relevance": "Provides interoperable entity, activity, agent, derivation and attribution semantics for case assertions and revisions." }, { "id": "SRC-008", "title": "RFC 3339: Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps", "organization": "Internet Engineering Task Force", "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339", "version_or_date": "RFC 3339, July 2002", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-09-06T01:00:00Z", "relevance": "Defines the timestamp representation required for interoperable case events and artifact naming metadata." } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "identity-classification-and-relations", "name": "Identity, classification and relations", "description": "Establishes the governed case aggregate and how it is recognized, classified and linked.", "rationale": "Identity and classification must remain stable enough for routing and federation while allowing profile-specific case types and revisions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "case-identity", "name": "Case identity", "description": "Authoritative and federated identity of the case aggregate.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "findings": [ { "id": "authoritative-case-identity", "name": "Authoritative case identity", "description": "Master-system identifier, namespace, immutable revision and record authority.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "questions": [ { "id": "authoritative-case-identity-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of authoritative case identity for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "identity", "answer_data": [ "Authoritative case identity", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "authoritative-case-identity-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes authoritative case identity, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "authoritative-case-identity-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise authoritative case identity while preserving case history?", "kind": "privacy", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "authoritative-case-identity-data", "name": "Authoritative case identity assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for authoritative case identity, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "identifier", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "authoritative-case-identity-artifact", "name": "Authoritative case identity record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting authoritative case identity with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "aliases-and-external-references", "name": "Aliases and external references", "description": "Human-readable keys, imported identifiers and resolvable references without changing mastership.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "aliases-and-external-references-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of aliases and external references for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "Aliases and external references", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "aliases-and-external-references-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes aliases and external references, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "process", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "aliases-and-external-references-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise aliases and external references while preserving case history?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "aliases-and-external-references-data", "name": "Aliases and external references assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for aliases and external references, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." } ] }, { "id": "case-classification", "name": "Case classification", "description": "Profile-bound type, subject and prioritization.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "case-type-category-and-subject", "name": "Case type, category and subject", "description": "Type such as inquiry, request, issue or complaint plus category and concise subject under pinned schemes.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "case-type-category-and-subject-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of case type, category and subject for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "Case type, category and subject", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "case-type-category-and-subject-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes case type, category and subject, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "case-type-category-and-subject-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise case type, category and subject while preserving case history?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "case-type-category-and-subject-data", "name": "Case type, category and subject assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for case type, category and subject, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "case-type-category-and-subject-artifact", "name": "Case type, category and subject record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting case type, category and subject with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "impact-urgency-priority-and-tags", "name": "Impact, urgency, priority and tags", "description": "Profile-specific routing and prioritization assertions with scheme, rationale and history.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "impact-urgency-priority-and-tags-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of impact, urgency, priority and tags for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "Impact, urgency, priority and tags", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "impact-urgency-priority-and-tags-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes impact, urgency, priority and tags, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "impact-urgency-priority-and-tags-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise impact, urgency, priority and tags while preserving case history?", "kind": "identity", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "impact-urgency-priority-and-tags-data", "name": "Impact, urgency, priority and tags assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for impact, urgency, priority and tags, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "impact-urgency-priority-and-tags-artifact", "name": "Impact, urgency, priority and tags record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting impact, urgency, priority and tags with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "case-relationships", "name": "Case relationships", "description": "Identity-preserving relations among cases and originating subjects.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "parent-child-and-related-cases", "name": "Parent, child and related cases", "description": "Typed case-to-case relationships with cardinality, direction and lifecycle effect declared by policy.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "parent-child-and-related-cases-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of parent, child and related cases for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "Parent, child and related cases", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "parent-child-and-related-cases-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes parent, child and related cases, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "parent-child-and-related-cases-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise parent, child and related cases while preserving case history?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "parent-child-and-related-cases-data", "name": "Parent, child and related cases assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for parent, child and related cases, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." }, { "id": "duplicates-merge-and-originating-subject", "name": "Duplicates, merge and originating subject", "description": "Duplicate or merged identity continuity and links to the event, request, product, service or other object that caused intake.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "duplicates-merge-and-originating-subject-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of duplicates, merge and originating subject for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "composition", "answer_data": [ "Duplicates, merge and originating subject", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "duplicates-merge-and-originating-subject-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes duplicates, merge and originating subject, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "duplicates-merge-and-originating-subject-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise duplicates, merge and originating subject while preserving case history?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "duplicates-merge-and-originating-subject-data", "name": "Duplicates, merge and originating subject assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for duplicates, merge and originating subject, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "duplicates-merge-and-originating-subject-artifact", "name": "Duplicates, merge and originating subject record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting duplicates, merge and originating subject with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "parties-ownership-and-participation", "name": "Parties, ownership and participation", "description": "Records the roles by which external identities participate in the case.", "rationale": "The case owns time-bounded role bindings and contact choices, while person and organization master records remain external.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "originating-parties", "name": "Originating parties", "description": "Requester, submitter, represented party and beneficiary distinctions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "requester-submitter-and-represented-party", "name": "Requester, submitter and represented party", "description": "Separate references for who needs the outcome, who created the record and on whose behalf it was submitted.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "requester-submitter-and-represented-party-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of requester, submitter and represented party for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "ownership", "answer_data": [ "Requester, submitter and represented party", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "requester-submitter-and-represented-party-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes requester, submitter and represented party, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "requester-submitter-and-represented-party-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise requester, submitter and represented party while preserving case history?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "requester-submitter-and-represented-party-data", "name": "Requester, submitter and represented party assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for requester, submitter and represented party, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." }, { "id": "contact-preferences-consent-and-availability", "name": "Contact preferences, consent and availability", "description": "Case-specific channel, language, availability, consent and accessibility constraints without copying the party profile.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "contact-preferences-consent-and-availability-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of contact preferences, consent and availability for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "privacy", "answer_data": [ "Contact preferences, consent and availability", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "contact-preferences-consent-and-availability-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes contact preferences, consent and availability, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "quality", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "contact-preferences-consent-and-availability-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise contact preferences, consent and availability while preserving case history?", "kind": "security", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "contact-preferences-consent-and-availability-data", "name": "Contact preferences, consent and availability assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for contact preferences, consent and availability, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "contact-preferences-consent-and-availability-artifact", "name": "Contact preferences, consent and availability record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting contact preferences, consent and availability with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "handling-parties", "name": "Handling parties", "description": "Accountable owner, working assignment and bounded collaboration.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "owner-queue-group-and-assignee", "name": "Owner, queue, group and assignee", "description": "Distinguishes accountable case owner and queue or group from the current working assignee.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "owner-queue-group-and-assignee-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of owner, queue, group and assignee for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "ownership", "answer_data": [ "Owner, queue, group and assignee", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "owner-queue-group-and-assignee-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes owner, queue, group and assignee, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "owner-queue-group-and-assignee-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise owner, queue, group and assignee while preserving case history?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "owner-queue-group-and-assignee-data", "name": "Owner, queue, group and assignee assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for owner, queue, group and assignee, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "owner-queue-group-and-assignee-artifact", "name": "Owner, queue, group and assignee record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting owner, queue, group and assignee with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "collaborators-followers-and-observers", "name": "Collaborators, followers and observers", "description": "Time-bounded participation, visibility and notification roles that do not imply ownership.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "collaborators-followers-and-observers-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of collaborators, followers and observers for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "Collaborators, followers and observers", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "collaborators-followers-and-observers-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes collaborators, followers and observers, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "identity", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "collaborators-followers-and-observers-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise collaborators, followers and observers while preserving case history?", "kind": "measurement", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "collaborators-followers-and-observers-data", "name": "Collaborators, followers and observers assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for collaborators, followers and observers, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." } ] } ] }, { "id": "intake-triage-and-coverage", "name": "Intake, triage and coverage", "description": "Captures how the case entered the system and the decisions that make it actionable.", "rationale": "Intake facts are preserved separately from triage decisions, entitlement policy and downstream work execution.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "intake", "name": "Intake", "description": "Submission channel, times, description and initial evidence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "source-channel-and-intake-times", "name": "Source, channel and intake times", "description": "Originating system and channel with submitted, received, observed and acknowledged times kept distinct.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "source-channel-and-intake-times-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of source, channel and intake times for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "Source, channel and intake times", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "source-channel-and-intake-times-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes source, channel and intake times, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "lifecycle", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "source-channel-and-intake-times-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise source, channel and intake times while preserving case history?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "source-channel-and-intake-times-data", "name": "Source, channel and intake times assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for source, channel and intake times, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "source-channel-and-intake-times-artifact", "name": "Source, channel and intake times record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting source, channel and intake times with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "description-symptoms-request-and-initial-evidence", "name": "Description, symptoms, request and initial evidence", "description": "The reporter's description, requested outcome, observed symptoms and referenced intake attachments without asserting they are verified facts.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "description-symptoms-request-and-initial-evidence-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of description, symptoms, request and initial evidence for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "Description, symptoms, request and initial evidence", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "description-symptoms-request-and-initial-evidence-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes description, symptoms, request and initial evidence, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "requirement", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "description-symptoms-request-and-initial-evidence-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise description, symptoms, request and initial evidence while preserving case history?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "description-symptoms-request-and-initial-evidence-data", "name": "Description, symptoms, request and initial evidence assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for description, symptoms, request and initial evidence, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "description-symptoms-request-and-initial-evidence-artifact", "name": "Description, symptoms, request and initial evidence record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting description, symptoms, request and initial evidence with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "triage-and-coverage", "name": "Triage and coverage", "description": "Acceptance, routing and service-coverage bindings.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "accept-reject-redirect-and-routing", "name": "Accept, reject, redirect and routing", "description": "Authorized triage outcome, target queue, rationale and confidence without erasing the original submission.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "accept-reject-redirect-and-routing-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of accept, reject, redirect and routing for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "Accept, reject, redirect and routing", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "accept-reject-redirect-and-routing-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes accept, reject, redirect and routing, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "accept-reject-redirect-and-routing-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise accept, reject, redirect and routing while preserving case history?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "accept-reject-redirect-and-routing-data", "name": "Accept, reject, redirect and routing assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for accept, reject, redirect and routing, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "accept-reject-redirect-and-routing-artifact", "name": "Accept, reject, redirect and routing record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting accept, reject, redirect and routing with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "entitlement-contract-product-and-service-binding", "name": "Entitlement, contract, product and service binding", "description": "References to the coverage authority and supported object that govern eligibility and service commitments.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "entitlement-contract-product-and-service-binding-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of entitlement, contract, product and service binding for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "requirement", "answer_data": [ "Entitlement, contract, product and service binding", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "entitlement-contract-product-and-service-binding-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes entitlement, contract, product and service binding, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "retention", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "entitlement-contract-product-and-service-binding-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise entitlement, contract, product and service binding while preserving case history?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "entitlement-contract-product-and-service-binding-data", "name": "Entitlement, contract, product and service binding assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for entitlement, contract, product and service binding, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." } ] } ] }, { "id": "lifecycle-assignment-and-escalation", "name": "Lifecycle, assignment and escalation", "description": "Tracks case-owned state, work coordination and escalation decisions.", "rationale": "The case records coordination state and references tasks; it does not absorb generic workflow, work-order or resource-allocation lifecycles.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "case-state", "name": "Case state", "description": "Current state, status reason and append-only transition history.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "state-status-reason-and-transition", "name": "State, status reason and transition", "description": "Profile-bound state with allowed transition, actor, effective time, reason and previous revision.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "state-status-reason-and-transition-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of state, status reason and transition for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "State, status reason and transition", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "state-status-reason-and-transition-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes state, status reason and transition, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "state-status-reason-and-transition-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise state, status reason and transition while preserving case history?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "state-status-reason-and-transition-data", "name": "State, status reason and transition assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for state, status reason and transition, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "state-status-reason-and-transition-artifact", "name": "State, status reason and transition record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting state, status reason and transition with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "pending-waiting-and-blocking-condition", "name": "Pending, waiting and blocking condition", "description": "Why progress is paused, what external response or condition is awaited and which clock effects apply.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "pending-waiting-and-blocking-condition-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of pending, waiting and blocking condition for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "Pending, waiting and blocking condition", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "pending-waiting-and-blocking-condition-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes pending, waiting and blocking condition, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "pending-waiting-and-blocking-condition-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise pending, waiting and blocking condition while preserving case history?", "kind": "composition", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "pending-waiting-and-blocking-condition-data", "name": "Pending, waiting and blocking condition assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for pending, waiting and blocking condition, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "pending-waiting-and-blocking-condition-artifact", "name": "Pending, waiting and blocking condition record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting pending, waiting and blocking condition with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "assignment-and-escalation", "name": "Assignment and escalation", "description": "Assignment history and governed escalation.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "assignment-reassignment-and-routing-history", "name": "Assignment, reassignment and routing history", "description": "Every ownership or queue movement with source rule, actor, reason and effective interval.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "assignment-reassignment-and-routing-history-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of assignment, reassignment and routing history for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "lifecycle", "answer_data": [ "Assignment, reassignment and routing history", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "assignment-reassignment-and-routing-history-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes assignment, reassignment and routing history, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "assignment-reassignment-and-routing-history-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise assignment, reassignment and routing history while preserving case history?", "kind": "event", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "assignment-reassignment-and-routing-history-data", "name": "Assignment, reassignment and routing history assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for assignment, reassignment and routing history, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "assignment-reassignment-and-routing-history-artifact", "name": "Assignment, reassignment and routing history record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting assignment, reassignment and routing history with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "escalation-level-trigger-and-target", "name": "Escalation level, trigger and target", "description": "Case-specific escalation request or decision with threshold evidence, destination and acknowledgement.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "escalation-level-trigger-and-target-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of escalation level, trigger and target for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "process", "answer_data": [ "Escalation level, trigger and target", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "escalation-level-trigger-and-target-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes escalation level, trigger and target, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "measurement", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "escalation-level-trigger-and-target-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise escalation level, trigger and target while preserving case history?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "escalation-level-trigger-and-target-data", "name": "Escalation level, trigger and target assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for escalation level, trigger and target, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "escalation-level-trigger-and-target-artifact", "name": "Escalation level, trigger and target record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting escalation level, trigger and target with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "communications-evidence-and-knowledge", "name": "Communications, evidence and knowledge", "description": "Indexes case communications, evidence and relevant knowledge without taking over their payload lifecycles.", "rationale": "Case context needs chronology and visibility bindings, but message, document, evidence and knowledge masters stay in their native systems.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "layers": [ { "id": "case-communications", "name": "Case communications", "description": "Thread membership, audience, visibility and delivery events.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "message-thread-and-visibility-bindings", "name": "Message thread and visibility bindings", "description": "References to messages and conversations with direction, participant role and public, internal or restricted visibility.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "message-thread-and-visibility-bindings-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of message thread and visibility bindings for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "Message thread and visibility bindings", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "message-thread-and-visibility-bindings-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes message thread and visibility bindings, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "privacy", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "message-thread-and-visibility-bindings-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise message thread and visibility bindings while preserving case history?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "message-thread-and-visibility-bindings-data", "name": "Message thread and visibility bindings assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for message thread and visibility bindings, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." }, { "id": "acknowledgement-update-and-notification-events", "name": "Acknowledgement, update and notification events", "description": "What update was issued or received, to whom, by which channel and with what delivery result.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "acknowledgement-update-and-notification-events-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of acknowledgement, update and notification events for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "event", "answer_data": [ "Acknowledgement, update and notification events", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "acknowledgement-update-and-notification-events-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes acknowledgement, update and notification events, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "acknowledgement-update-and-notification-events-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise acknowledgement, update and notification events while preserving case history?", "kind": "retention", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "acknowledgement-update-and-notification-events-data", "name": "Acknowledgement, update and notification events assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for acknowledgement, update and notification events, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "acknowledgement-update-and-notification-events-artifact", "name": "Acknowledgement, update and notification events record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting acknowledgement, update and notification events with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "evidence-and-knowledge", "name": "Evidence and knowledge", "description": "Attachment provenance and knowledge applicability.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "findings": [ { "id": "attachment-document-and-evidence-references", "name": "Attachment, document and evidence references", "description": "Resolvable content references with digest, provenance, relevance, access and retention bindings.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "questions": [ { "id": "attachment-document-and-evidence-references-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of attachment, document and evidence references for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "Attachment, document and evidence references", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "attachment-document-and-evidence-references-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes attachment, document and evidence references, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "attachment-document-and-evidence-references-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise attachment, document and evidence references while preserving case history?", "kind": "lifecycle", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "attachment-document-and-evidence-references-data", "name": "Attachment, document and evidence references assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for attachment, document and evidence references, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." }, { "id": "knowledge-reference-and-applicability", "name": "Knowledge reference and applicability", "description": "Versioned knowledge-article or answer references with suggested use, limitations and observed usefulness.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "knowledge-reference-and-applicability-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of knowledge reference and applicability for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "Knowledge reference and applicability", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "knowledge-reference-and-applicability-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes knowledge reference and applicability, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "ownership", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "knowledge-reference-and-applicability-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise knowledge reference and applicability while preserving case history?", "kind": "quality", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "knowledge-reference-and-applicability-data", "name": "Knowledge reference and applicability assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for knowledge reference and applicability, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." } ] } ] }, { "id": "commitments-resolution-and-feedback", "name": "Commitments, resolution and feedback", "description": "Binds applicable service commitments and records outcome, closure, reopening and feedback.", "rationale": "The case owns the applied commitment instance and outcome assertions while policy design, calendars, work execution and corrective-action programs remain external.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "service-commitments", "name": "Service commitments", "description": "Applied SLA policy and measured KPI instances.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "sla-policy-kpi-and-calendar-binding", "name": "SLA policy, KPI and calendar binding", "description": "Pinned entitlement, SLA item, KPI and business-calendar references applied to the case.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "sla-policy-kpi-and-calendar-binding-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of sla policy, kpi and calendar binding for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "requirement", "answer_data": [ "SLA policy, KPI and calendar binding", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "sla-policy-kpi-and-calendar-binding-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes sla policy, kpi and calendar binding, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "event", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "sla-policy-kpi-and-calendar-binding-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise sla policy, kpi and calendar binding while preserving case history?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "sla-policy-kpi-and-calendar-binding-data", "name": "SLA policy, KPI and calendar binding assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for sla policy, kpi and calendar binding, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." }, { "id": "target-clock-pause-and-breach-instance", "name": "Target, clock, pause and breach instance", "description": "Case-bound target time, start, pause, resume, success or breach observations and calculation provenance.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ], "questions": [ { "id": "target-clock-pause-and-breach-instance-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of target, clock, pause and breach instance for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "measurement", "answer_data": [ "Target, clock, pause and breach instance", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "target-clock-pause-and-breach-instance-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes target, clock, pause and breach instance, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "security", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "target-clock-pause-and-breach-instance-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise target, clock, pause and breach instance while preserving case history?", "kind": "process", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "target-clock-pause-and-breach-instance-data", "name": "Target, clock, pause and breach instance assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for target, clock, pause and breach instance, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "target-clock-pause-and-breach-instance-artifact", "name": "Target, clock, pause and breach instance record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting target, clock, pause and breach instance with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "resolution-and-remedy", "name": "Resolution and remedy", "description": "Resolution assertion and referenced remedial work.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "resolution-type-summary-and-outcome", "name": "Resolution type, summary and outcome", "description": "The proposed or delivered answer, disposition and observed result with authority and supporting references.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "resolution-type-summary-and-outcome-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of resolution type, summary and outcome for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "Resolution type, summary and outcome", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "resolution-type-summary-and-outcome-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes resolution type, summary and outcome, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "resolution-type-summary-and-outcome-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise resolution type, summary and outcome while preserving case history?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "resolution-type-summary-and-outcome-data", "name": "Resolution type, summary and outcome assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for resolution type, summary and outcome, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "resolution-type-summary-and-outcome-artifact", "name": "Resolution type, summary and outcome record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting resolution type, summary and outcome with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "remedy-root-cause-and-corrective-action-bindings", "name": "Remedy, root cause and corrective-action bindings", "description": "References to delivered remedy, investigation, root-cause analysis, problem record and corrective-action program.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "remedy-root-cause-and-corrective-action-bindings-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of remedy, root cause and corrective-action bindings for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "Remedy, root cause and corrective-action bindings", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "remedy-root-cause-and-corrective-action-bindings-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes remedy, root cause and corrective-action bindings, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "composition", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "remedy-root-cause-and-corrective-action-bindings-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise remedy, root cause and corrective-action bindings while preserving case history?", "kind": "ownership", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "remedy-root-cause-and-corrective-action-bindings-data", "name": "Remedy, root cause and corrective-action bindings assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for remedy, root cause and corrective-action bindings, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." } ] }, { "id": "closure-reopen-and-feedback", "name": "Closure, reopen and feedback", "description": "Governed completion and post-resolution signals.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "closure-cancellation-and-acceptance", "name": "Closure, cancellation and acceptance", "description": "Decision, authority, prerequisite checks, outcome acceptance and unresolved obligations for closing or cancelling the case.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ], "questions": [ { "id": "closure-cancellation-and-acceptance-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of closure, cancellation and acceptance for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "lifecycle", "answer_data": [ "Closure, cancellation and acceptance", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "closure-cancellation-and-acceptance-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes closure, cancellation and acceptance, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "closure-cancellation-and-acceptance-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise closure, cancellation and acceptance while preserving case history?", "kind": "privacy", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "closure-cancellation-and-acceptance-data", "name": "Closure, cancellation and acceptance assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for closure, cancellation and acceptance, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "closure-cancellation-and-acceptance-artifact", "name": "Closure, cancellation and acceptance record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting closure, cancellation and acceptance with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "reopen-appeal-satisfaction-and-feedback", "name": "Reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback", "description": "Reopening or appeal basis plus consented satisfaction and feedback signals linked to the prior outcome.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003" ], "questions": [ { "id": "reopen-appeal-satisfaction-and-feedback-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "quality", "answer_data": [ "Reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "reopen-appeal-satisfaction-and-feedback-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "process", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "reopen-appeal-satisfaction-and-feedback-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback while preserving case history?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "reopen-appeal-satisfaction-and-feedback-data", "name": "Reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "reopen-appeal-satisfaction-and-feedback-artifact", "name": "Reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting reopen, appeal, satisfaction and feedback with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "governance-provenance-and-interoperability", "name": "Governance, provenance and interoperability", "description": "Protects sensitive case data and preserves trustworthy exchange and mutation semantics.", "rationale": "Agents need explicit access, retention, provenance, concurrency and mapping rules because case fields are mutable and often shared across systems.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007", "SRC-008" ], "layers": [ { "id": "access-privacy-and-retention", "name": "Access, privacy and retention", "description": "Minimum projections, exceptions and disposition controls.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "findings": [ { "id": "visibility-access-and-privacy-projection", "name": "Visibility, access and privacy projection", "description": "Field and artifact visibility, purpose, recipient, redaction and exceptional-access decision.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "visibility-access-and-privacy-projection-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of visibility, access and privacy projection for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "Visibility, access and privacy projection", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "visibility-access-and-privacy-projection-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes visibility, access and privacy projection, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "visibility-access-and-privacy-projection-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise visibility, access and privacy projection while preserving case history?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "visibility-access-and-privacy-projection-data", "name": "Visibility, access and privacy projection assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for visibility, access and privacy projection, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "visibility-access-and-privacy-projection-artifact", "name": "Visibility, access and privacy projection record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting visibility, access and privacy projection with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "retention-legal-hold-deletion-and-tombstone", "name": "Retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone", "description": "Pinned retention authority, hold status, permitted erasure and non-cascading reference disposition.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "questions": [ { "id": "retention-legal-hold-deletion-and-tombstone-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "retention", "answer_data": [ "Retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "retention-legal-hold-deletion-and-tombstone-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "retention-legal-hold-deletion-and-tombstone-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone while preserving case history?", "kind": "identity", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "retention-legal-hold-deletion-and-tombstone-data", "name": "Retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "retention-legal-hold-deletion-and-tombstone-artifact", "name": "Retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting retention, legal hold, deletion and tombstone with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "provenance-concurrency-and-federation", "name": "Provenance, concurrency and federation", "description": "Trustworthy revision history and cross-system mapping.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007", "SRC-008" ], "findings": [ { "id": "revision-provenance-etag-and-safe-update", "name": "Revision provenance, ETag and safe update", "description": "Who or what generated each revision, from which inputs, with optimistic concurrency and conflict handling.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "questions": [ { "id": "revision-provenance-etag-and-safe-update-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of revision provenance, etag and safe update for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "Revision provenance, ETag and safe update", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "revision-provenance-etag-and-safe-update-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes revision provenance, etag and safe update, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "revision-provenance-etag-and-safe-update-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise revision provenance, etag and safe update while preserving case history?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "revision-provenance-etag-and-safe-update-data", "name": "Revision provenance, ETag and safe update assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for revision provenance, etag and safe update, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "revision-provenance-etag-and-safe-update-artifact", "name": "Revision provenance, ETag and safe update record", "description": "Versioned case-owned record supporting revision provenance, etag and safe update with provenance and access marking.", "media_or_form": [ "structured case record", "signed or controlled statement", "resolvable supporting index" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative case master-system identifier first; otherwise a Dimension-governed UUID or ULID.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "external-schema-mapping-and-projection", "name": "External schema mapping and projection", "description": "Pinned field mappings, transform loss, extension namespace and digest for exported or imported case projections.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ], "questions": [ { "id": "external-schema-mapping-and-projection-q01", "text": "What is the current governed value of external schema mapping and projection for this service case, and which parts are unknown or disputed?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "External schema mapping and projection", "assertion status", "applicable scope or explicit unknown" ] }, { "id": "external-schema-mapping-and-projection-q02", "text": "Which source, participant or authority establishes external schema mapping and projection, at what effective and observation times, and with what evidence?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "source or authority reference", "effective and observation timestamps", "evidence and confidence" ] }, { "id": "external-schema-mapping-and-projection-q03", "text": "Which validation, authorization or conflict rule may revise external schema mapping and projection while preserving case history?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "validation and authorization rule", "revision event and reason", "predecessor or counterclaim reference" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "external-schema-mapping-and-projection-data", "name": "External schema mapping and projection assertion", "description": "Structured case-local answer data for external schema mapping and projection, including status, effective time and provenance where applicable.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "artifacts": [], "inline_only_rationale": "This finding stores only typed references and case-local bindings; the referenced system owns the payload and independent lifecycle." } ] } ] } ] }, "functions": [ { "id": "register-case", "name": "Register case", "description": "Create a case from an authorized submission without inventing missing facts.", "inputs": [ "submission", "source and channel", "requester or submitter reference" ], "outputs": [ "case identity", "intake revision" ], "preconditions": [ "intake purpose and record authority are known" ], "effects": [ "an attributable case with explicit unknowns exists" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "validate-and-triage-case", "name": "Validate and triage case", "description": "Check minimum data, duplicates, scope, eligibility and routing rules.", "inputs": [ "case", "triage profile", "coverage references" ], "outputs": [ "triage decision", "routing target" ], "preconditions": [ "profile and decision authority resolve" ], "effects": [ "acceptance, rejection or redirect is preserved with rationale" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "classify-and-prioritize-case", "name": "Classify and prioritize case", "description": "Apply pinned type, category, impact, urgency and priority schemes.", "inputs": [ "case", "classification schemes", "evidence" ], "outputs": [ "classification revision" ], "preconditions": [ "schemes are versioned" ], "effects": [ "routing inputs are reproducible without a universal vocabulary" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "link-or-merge-case", "name": "Link or merge case", "description": "Create a typed case relation or merge a duplicate while preserving aliases.", "inputs": [ "case identities", "relation type", "authority and evidence" ], "outputs": [ "relationship or merge decision" ], "preconditions": [ "identities resolve and merge policy permits the action" ], "effects": [ "predecessor identities and history remain resolvable" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "assign-or-route-case", "name": "Assign or route case", "description": "Bind or change the accountable owner, queue and working assignee.", "inputs": [ "case", "target role or queue", "routing reason" ], "outputs": [ "assignment revision" ], "preconditions": [ "target is eligible and actor is authorized" ], "effects": [ "current assignment and full routing history are distinguishable" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "transition-case-state", "name": "Transition case state", "description": "Apply a permitted state transition with reason and effective time.", "inputs": [ "case", "current state", "proposed state", "evidence" ], "outputs": [ "state transition revision" ], "preconditions": [ "transition profile and authority permit the change" ], "effects": [ "case state changes without rewriting prior revisions" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "record-case-communication", "name": "Record case communication", "description": "Link a message or delivery event with audience and visibility metadata.", "inputs": [ "case", "message reference", "participants and visibility" ], "outputs": [ "communication binding" ], "preconditions": [ "content and audience are permitted" ], "effects": [ "chronology is updated while the message system retains mastership" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "bind-evidence-or-knowledge", "name": "Bind evidence or knowledge", "description": "Attach a governed reference to evidence, a document or knowledge item.", "inputs": [ "case", "external object reference", "relevance and provenance" ], "outputs": [ "typed binding" ], "preconditions": [ "reference resolves and access is allowed" ], "effects": [ "case context expands without copying the external lifecycle" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] }, { "id": "evaluate-case-commitment", "name": "Evaluate case commitment", "description": "Record case-bound SLA KPI timing using external policy and calendar results.", "inputs": [ "case", "SLA and entitlement references", "timer events" ], "outputs": [ "commitment instance revision" ], "preconditions": [ "policy, KPI and calendar versions resolve" ], "effects": [ "target, pause and breach status are reproducible" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-008" ] }, { "id": "resolve-close-or-cancel-case", "name": "Resolve, close or cancel case", "description": "Record an authorized outcome and completion decision separately.", "inputs": [ "case", "resolution or cancellation reason", "prerequisite checks" ], "outputs": [ "outcome revision", "closure decision" ], "preconditions": [ "state profile and authority permit the action" ], "effects": [ "resolution, acceptance, closure and cancellation remain distinct" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "reopen-or-appeal-case", "name": "Reopen or appeal case", "description": "Create a governed continuation from new evidence, failed outcome or appeal.", "inputs": [ "closed case", "basis and evidence", "authority" ], "outputs": [ "reopen or appeal revision" ], "preconditions": [ "policy permits continuation" ], "effects": [ "prior outcome remains immutable and linked" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "issue-case-projection", "name": "Issue case projection", "description": "Produce a minimum authorized view for a recipient, purpose or external schema.", "inputs": [ "case revision", "recipient and purpose", "projection policy" ], "outputs": [ "digest-pinned projection" ], "preconditions": [ "access decision permits disclosure" ], "effects": [ "redaction, mapping version and provenance are recorded" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] } ], "composition": [ { "target": "Person and Organization models", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Binds requester, submitter, beneficiary, owner, assignee and collaborator identities without duplicating their master records.", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] }, { "target": "Product, Service, Asset and Entitlement models", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Identifies the supported or affected object and coverage authority without importing those lifecycles.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "target": "Communication and Message models", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Maintains case chronology, participant and visibility bindings while the communication system owns content and delivery records.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "target": "Document and Evidence models", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Indexes case evidence with integrity, provenance and access bindings while the repository owns content and custody.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006", "SRC-007" ] }, { "target": "Task, Work Order and Workflow models", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Links executable work without conflating case state with task completion or resource allocation.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ] }, { "target": "SLA Policy and Business Calendar models", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Pins policy, KPI and calendar versions used to calculate case commitment instances.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004" ] }, { "target": "Knowledge Article model", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Binds suggested or applied knowledge with version and applicability without owning article publication.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-005" ] }, { "target": "Jira issue and Zendesk ticket schemas", "relation": "ALIGN", "purpose": "Supports versioned import and export mappings with explicit loss and extension handling.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ] }, { "target": "W3C PROV-O", "relation": "ALIGN", "purpose": "Aligns case entities, revisions, activities and accountable agents for portable provenance.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-007" ] } ], "serviceLayers": { "dimension": { "owner_package_requirements": [ "Declare the Dimension owner, case namespace, case master systems, constituencies, stewards and delegated decision authorities.", "Publish model, object, event, relation, policy and role registries plus channel, time, privacy, retention and federation rules.", "Pin case-type, status, priority, entitlement, SLA, calendar, closure and appeal profiles used by each case.", "Declare external party, product, service, communication, document, work, knowledge and audit masters." ], "namespace_guidance": "Mint case identities only in the adopting Dimension's governed namespace; preserve human keys and provider IDs as typed aliases with authority, tenant scope and history.", "registry_links": [ "https://ver.cy/models/", "https://ver.cy/model-agent-protocol.md", "Dimension-local case, object, event, policy and role registries" ] }, "canon_and_patch": { "canonicalization_rules": [ "Canonicalize by registry ID, model version, case master identifier, immutable revision and explicit authority; never use mutable title or status as identity.", "Keep request facts, triage decisions, case state, work state, resolution, acceptance and closure as distinct concepts." ], "patch_rules": [ "Additive extensions use a Dimension-owned namespace and declare target node, case profile, source, rationale, access impact and migration behavior.", "Breaking changes require a new model version, migration map, compatibility declaration and continued resolution of prior case revisions." ], "compatibility_rules": [ "Consumers may ignore unknown additive fields only when identity, authority, provenance, access and temporal meaning remain intact.", "Vendor and partner mappings pin API or schema versions and declare omitted, transformed, redacted or non-round-trippable values." ] }, "artifact_rules": { "identity_priority": [ "Authoritative case master-system identifier and immutable revision identifier.", "Governed globally resolvable case IRI or federation identifier.", "Adopting-Dimension UUID or ULID when no authoritative external identifier exists." ], "timestamp_rule": "Record all event timestamps in RFC 3339 with seconds and an explicit UTC offset or Z; keep submitted, received, observed, effective, due and ingestion times distinct.", "serial_naming_rule": "Name serial artifacts as {case-id}--{artifact-kind}--{revision-or-event-id}; never use a date, filename or hash alone as case identity.", "integrity_rule": "Store digest, media type, byte length, issuer or collector, provenance, access marking and immutable version reference for every retained serial artifact." }, "policies": [ "The adopting Dimension declares who may register, triage, classify, assign, escalate, disclose, resolve, close, cancel, merge, reopen and delete a case.", "Every material case assertion keeps source, effective time, observation time, confidence where applicable and revision history.", "Agents minimize personal and sensitive data and use the narrowest permitted projection for the active purpose and recipient.", "Messages, documents, evidence, policies, calendars, tasks, knowledge, access enforcement and audit persistence remain in their owning systems and are referenced.", "Automated agents may perform delegated low-risk enrichment but must honor Dimension policy for consequential disclosure, denial, closure, deletion and cross-Dimension transfer." ], "crud": { "read": [ "Resolve the active Dimension, model and profile versions, role, purpose, access policy and external masters; return only the permitted case projection and explicit unknowns." ], "create": [ "Create the authoritative identity, source, intake time, requester or submitter binding, description and explicit unknowns; do not imply acceptance, entitlement or resolution." ], "update": [ "Append an immutable revision with actor, authority, reason and RFC 3339 effective time; validate identity, concurrency, state, references and access before and after mutation." ], "delete": [ "Apply retention, legal hold and erasure policy; tombstone case-owned records or use approved erasure while external systems retain their own copies and references never cascade automatically." ] }, "roles": [ { "name": "Dimension owner", "responsibilities": [ "Own namespace, mastership, profiles, delegation, federation, access and retention rules." ] }, { "name": "Case owner", "responsibilities": [ "Remain accountable for triage, coordination, outcome and closure within mandate." ] }, { "name": "Case agent or assignee", "responsibilities": [ "Maintain evidence-backed case context, communication bindings, progress and proposed outcome." ] }, { "name": "Requester or represented party", "responsibilities": [ "Supply the need and evidence, receive permitted updates and respond to proposed outcomes." ] }, { "name": "Supervisor or escalation authority", "responsibilities": [ "Approve escalations, exceptions, reassignment and high-impact disposition decisions." ] }, { "name": "Privacy, legal or records steward", "responsibilities": [ "Review disclosure, consent, legal hold, retention, deletion and regulated complaint bindings." ] }, { "name": "Auditor", "responsibilities": [ "Review decisions, provenance, access and revisions without rewriting operational truth." ] } ], "access": { "default_rule": "Deny mutation and sensitive disclosure unless the active Dimension, role, purpose, case type and field or artifact policy grant the action; expose the minimum necessary projection.", "scopes": [ "bundle", "layer", "finding", "artifact" ], "exceptions": [ "Emergency or break-glass access is time-limited, purpose-bound, attributable, independently reviewed and cannot erase immutable history or legal hold." ], "audit_requirements": [ "Log actor, role, purpose, case and revision identity, action, decision, policy version, RFC 3339 timestamp with offset, affected scope and outcome for each privileged mutation or disclosure." ] }, "agents_bootstrap": { "filename": "AGENTS.md", "required_fields": [ "Name", "Type", "Specification URL", "Storage type URL", "Interface URL", "Processes URL" ], "read_order": [ "Read the nearest Dimension-owner AGENTS.md, role, purpose, case profiles and access policies.", "Read this model AGENTS.md, then pinned spec.yaml and required party, content, work, commitment and audit model instructions before mutation." ] } }, "coverage": { "claim": "A source-grounded reviewable draft of the generic Service Case / Ticket aggregate across ISO guidance, Microsoft case-management documentation, Atlassian and Zendesk APIs, W3C provenance and IETF time standards, without a claim of universal sector, jurisdiction or platform completeness.", "confidence": "medium", "checklist": [ { "dimension": "identity", "status": "covered", "notes": "Master identity, aliases, tenant scope, revision, duplicate merge and parent-child continuity are explicit." }, { "dimension": "classification and recognition", "status": "covered", "notes": "Case type, category, subject, tags, impact, urgency and priority bind to versioned profiles." }, { "dimension": "lifecycle", "status": "covered", "notes": "Intake, triage, assignment, transitions, resolution, closure, cancellation, reopening and appeal preserve history." }, { "dimension": "relationships", "status": "covered", "notes": "Parties, affected subjects, cases, communications, evidence, work, policies and knowledge use typed references." }, { "dimension": "temporal", "status": "covered", "notes": "Submitted, received, acknowledged, observed, effective, due, paused, resumed and closed times remain distinct." }, { "dimension": "provenance", "status": "covered", "notes": "Sources, authorities, evidence, confidence, derivation and revision lineage are represented per material assertion." }, { "dimension": "ownership", "status": "covered", "notes": "Requester, submitter, represented party, case owner, queue, assignee and external masters have distinct roles." }, { "dimension": "validation", "status": "covered", "notes": "Identity, duplicate, required data, transition, concurrency, reference, access and pre or post mutation checks are explicit." }, { "dimension": "access and privacy", "status": "covered", "notes": "Default deny, participant visibility, minimum projections, consent, redaction and exceptional access are explicit." }, { "dimension": "retention and deletion", "status": "covered", "notes": "Retention authority, legal hold, tombstone, approved erasure and non-cascading references are defined." }, { "dimension": "interoperability", "status": "covered", "notes": "Vendor and partner mappings require pinned versions, transform provenance and declared information loss." }, { "dimension": "direct properties", "status": "not-applicable", "notes": "The case is an abstract aggregate; physical and intrinsic properties belong to referenced products, assets, people and services." }, { "dimension": "behavior and possible actions", "status": "covered", "notes": "Case state and authorized functions are represented without conflating them with external work execution." }, { "dimension": "service commitments", "status": "covered", "notes": "Entitlement and policy references, KPI targets, clocks, pauses and observed breaches are separated from policy design." } ], "known_omissions": [ "Sector, organization and jurisdiction profiles must supply exact case types, states, priorities, entitlements, SLA rules, closure tests and retention periods.", "Sibling model identifiers and cardinality contracts for parties, products, services, communications, documents, evidence, work, knowledge, policies and calendars remain to be pinned as the catalogue matures.", "Clause and field-level mappings to ISO 10002, Jira, Zendesk, Dynamics 365 and other case platforms remain profile work." ], "conflicts": [ "Case, ticket, issue, request, complaint and incident overlap across platforms; this draft treats them as profile-bound case classifications and does not claim one universal vocabulary.", "Vendor status and priority fields are not semantically identical, so mappings must preserve original codes and declare loss rather than silently normalize them.", "A resolved case is not automatically accepted, closed, compliant or factually corrected; each assertion has separate authority and evidence." ], "regional_assumptions": [ "ISO 10002 is an optional complaints profile and does not make every service case a complaint or apply external-dispute rules universally.", "No universal privacy, consumer, employment, public-records, SLA or retention rule is assumed; the active Dimension and jurisdiction supply these profiles." ], "adversarial_checks": [ "Reject tickets that omit authoritative identity, source, intake time or requester and submitter distinctions while claiming operational completeness.", "Reject silent status normalization, overwritten assignment history, unsupported priority, invented entitlement, inferred acceptance or closure without authority.", "Reject copied party, communication, document, evidence, task, policy, calendar and knowledge lifecycles when governed references are sufficient.", "Reject timestamps without seconds and explicit offset, unsafe last-write-wins updates, broken aliases and external mappings without pinned versions and loss declarations.", "Reject disclosure, merge, closure, cancellation, reopening and deletion decisions that lack purpose, authority, access review and preserved provenance." ] }, "researchAdjudication": { "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "activeProviders": [ "codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "claude", "grok" ], "providerPolicy": { "contract_version": "1.0.0", "mode": "single-provider-waiver", "effective_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "scope": "Canonical single-stream subject-model research after the six-workstream consolidation", "active_providers": [ "codex" ], "waived_providers": [ { "provider": "claude", "authorized_by": "repository owner", "authorized_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "reason": "Claude produced no result on prior 1800-second and 900-second attempts and again timed out on bounded 600-second Sonnet and 300-second Haiku passes. The owner prioritized completion over provider availability." }, { "provider": "grok", "authorized_by": "repository owner", "authorized_at": "2026-09-06T00:00:00Z", "reason": "The repository owner authorized completion without Grok when Grok is unavailable, slow or schema-invalid. Grok may still be attempted as a bounded supplemental reviewer, but its failure never blocks a valid Claude plus no-tools result." } ], "review_rule": "Codex may complete source-grounded fallback research after bounded Claude and Grok attempts fail. It requires a separate no-tools adversarial audit and remains reviewable-draft with a visible absence-of-external-review hold.", "supplemental_provider_attempts": [ { "provider": "claude", "required": false, "maximum_attempts": 1, "failure_policy": "record-and-continue", "admission_rule": "Use only a locally schema-valid result whose sources and boundaries survive adjudication." }, { "provider": "grok", "required": false, "maximum_attempts": 1, "failure_policy": "record-and-continue", "admission_rule": "Use only a locally schema-valid result whose sources and boundaries survive adjudication." } ] }, "boundaryDecision": { "entry_kind": "aggregate", "status": "accepted", "rationale": "The record-plane label standalone-mm is separate from subject kind. A service case groups intake, evolving decisions, role bindings, communications, evidence references, commitments and outcomes under one governed identity, so aggregate is more defensible than entity or event." }, "decisions": [ { "concept": "Generic case boundary", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Request, inquiry, issue and complaint are represented as profile-bound case classifications. The base model does not force complaint-specific or vendor-specific semantics on every case." }, { "concept": "Case versus underlying subject", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "The case handles a need or reported condition but references the originating incident, problem, product, service or asset, which retains independent identity and lifecycle." }, { "concept": "Case versus work execution", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Case assignment and coordination are native, while tasks, work orders and workflows remain independently governed and are linked by reference." }, { "concept": "Requester, submitter and represented party", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "These roles can belong to different identities and have different authority, privacy and communication consequences, so they cannot be collapsed into one customer field." }, { "concept": "Universal status and priority vocabulary", "disposition": "rejected", "rationale": "Platform and organization vocabularies are not semantically identical. Every case pins the applicable profile and preserves original external codes during federation." }, { "concept": "SLA ownership", "disposition": "accepted as binding and observed instance only", "rationale": "The case records which entitlement, policy, KPI and calendar were applied and the resulting target, pause and breach observations, while policy design and time calculation remain external." }, { "concept": "Resolution, acceptance and closure", "disposition": "accepted as separate assertions", "rationale": "A resolved status does not prove requester acceptance, factual correction, regulatory compliance or completed downstream work. Each assertion retains its own authority and evidence." }, { "concept": "Communications, evidence and knowledge", "disposition": "accepted as typed references", "rationale": "The case owns chronology, relevance and visibility bindings while message, document, evidence and knowledge systems retain payload mastership and lifecycle." }, { "concept": "Physical direct properties", "disposition": "not applicable to the case aggregate", "rationale": "A service case is an abstract aggregate. Physical properties belong to referenced affected objects, while case-local descriptive, temporal, relational and outcome properties remain native." }, { "concept": "Safe mutation and federation", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Append-only revisions, authority, ETag or equivalent concurrency, pinned mappings and explicit transform loss are required because cases are mutable and commonly synchronized across systems." }, { "concept": "Question coverage", "disposition": "accepted as reviewable draft", "rationale": "Every finding asks for current governed value, source and temporal provenance, and authorized revision or conflict handling. Repeated structure is machine-friendly but still needs later sector-profile editorial review." } ], "publicationHolds": [ "Claude and Grok timed out during their bounded attempts, so independent external review is absent and explicitly waived for this published reviewable draft.", "The shared relation ledger contains no approved outgoing edges for WM-ACT-021, so all sibling-model links in this draft are provisional composition proposals until registry reconciliation.", "Clause and field-level mappings, exact external schema versions and round-trip behavior remain unverified for canonical conformance even though official source pages were checked during Codex research.", "Sector and jurisdiction profiles must validate case types, status vocabularies, service commitments, closure, privacy and retention rules before operational enforcement.", "Independent external review was explicitly waived by the repository owner; this codex-only result remains a reviewable draft." ], "deferredResearch": [ "Validate the logical structure against public service, healthcare, finance, education, legal, employment, facilities, IT service management and customer-support case profiles.", "Create clause and field-level crosswalks for ISO 10002, Jira, Zendesk, Dynamics 365 and additional portable case-management schemas.", "Approve sibling model identifiers, relation directions and cardinality contracts for parties, products, services, communications, evidence, work, policies, calendars and knowledge.", "Review generated question wording with case workers, service agents, records managers, privacy officers and platform architects." ] }, "statistics": { "sources": 8, "bundles": 7, "layers": 16, "findings": 32, "questions": 96, "artifacts": 21, "functions": 12 } }