# Vercy AI instruction - YAML 1.2 (JSON-compatible) { "vercy": "1.0-draft", "publication": { "status": "published", "adjudicationStatus": "reviewable-draft", "publishableCanonical": false, "generatedAt": "2026-10-21T16:52:56Z", "synthesisSha256": "71570d2cc238d808b78b1656773705ef2c56393d81760e8d41ca95320dc5474c", "providerMode": "single-provider-waiver", "providers": [ "Codex" ], "waivedProviders": [ "Claude", "Grok" ] }, "metaModel": { "id": "WM-MEM-017", "registryId": "vr.wm-mem-017", "name": "Context Policy", "version": "0.1.0", "previousVersions": [], "entryKind": "entity", "family": "World Models", "category": "Information and virtual systems", "industry": [ "Cross-industry" ], "domain": [ "INF.MEM.POL" ], "tags": [ "context", "policy", "inf.mem.pol" ], "status": "published" }, "canonicalUrl": "https://ver.cy/models/wm-mem-017-context-policy/", "sourceUrl": "https://github.com/ver-cy/world-models/tree/feat/mega-model-registry/research/runs/wm-mem-017", "model": { "registry_id": "vr.wm-mem-017", "model_id": "WM-MEM-017", "name": "Context Policy", "entry_kind": "entity", "purpose": "Describe an authorized, scoped policy whose applicable constraints take precedence over ordinary memory use at each recall.", "scope_statement": "One identifiable authored context policy with revisioned recall requirements and external bindings. Every recall must resolve applicable authorized policies under the adopting profile; this record does not itself execute recall, enforce permissions or certify evidence. Mandatory constraints and advisory preferences remain distinct.", "in_scope": [ "Policy-specific identity, issuer mandate, authored provenance and recall selectors", "Override intent, governed precedence references, obligations and runtime checkpoint contracts", "Local policy revision, exception and disposition records; assurance and interoperability requirements" ], "out_of_scope": [ "Memory storage, ranking, token packing, truth adjudication and factual conflict resolution", "Runtime policy evaluation, grant issuance, tool execution, redaction, quarantine and erasure operations", "Generic policy-language implementation, complete audit-ledger semantics and universal legal compliance" ], "boundary_notes": [ { "neighbor": "WM-KNW-012 Policy / Rule", "distinction": "Registry parent is a conceptual specialization candidate. Generic normative machinery is referenced; this draft declares recall-specific parameters and does not claim a tested inheritance schema.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-001 Memory Store and WM-MEM-002 Memory Item", "distinction": "Storage, record truth, ordinary memory identity and their lifecycles stay outside the policy record.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-007 Memory Recall Event and WM-MEM-013 Context Assembly", "distinction": "Own actual retrieval, ranking, packing, use and event evidence. This model only states checkpoint, capacity and evidence requirements.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-009 Memory Conflict and Precedence Rule", "distinction": "Owns precedence machinery and contradictions between memory records. Context Policy binds an external profile and declares intended overrides; it does not resolve factual contradictions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-010 Memory Retention and Forgetting Policy", "distinction": "Owns memory decay and erasure rules. Local policy-record disposition is distinct from forgetting the referenced memory.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-011 Memory Scope and Sharing Grant", "distinction": "Owns memory grants. Context Policy may restrict their exercise but cannot create rights by carrying a selector or a permission-like word.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-018 Memory Trust Assessment", "distinction": "Owns trust determinations. This model asks for referenced evidence and acceptance conditions, without calculating trust.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "neighbor": "WM-MEM-019 Memory Poisoning Incident and WM-MEM-020 Memory Quarantine and Redaction", "distinction": "Own incident management and quarantine or redaction operations. Here only protective requirements and evidence references are recorded.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] }, { "neighbor": "Runtime policy evaluator and enforcement boundary", "distinction": "Owns decisions, enforcement, revocation propagation and audit events. A textual policy and local approval record do not establish actual enforcement.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ] }, "sources": [ { "id": "SRC-001", "title": "ODRL Information Model 2.2", "organization": "W3C", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/odrl-model/", "version_or_date": "Recommendation 2018-02-15", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T16:51:24Z", "relevance": "Policy expressions, constraints and profiles; sections 2.1, 2.10 and 3. These are conceptual alignments, not recall enforcement semantics." }, { "id": "SRC-002", "title": "eXtensible Access Control Markup Language (XACML) Version 3.0", "organization": "OASIS", "url": "https://docs.oasis-open.org/xacml/3.0/xacml-3.0-core-spec-os-en.html", "version_or_date": "OASIS Standard 2013-01-22", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T16:51:24Z", "relevance": "Policy versus decision and enforcement roles; sections 7.15-7.19 and Appendix C distinguish outcomes, errors, obligations and combining algorithms. No implementation conformance claimed." }, { "id": "SRC-003", "title": "Guide to Attribute Based Access Control (ABAC) Definition and Considerations", "organization": "NIST", "url": "https://csrc.nist.gov/pubs/sp/800/162/upd2/final", "version_or_date": "SP 800-162, January 2014, updates 2019-08-02", "source_type": "public-authority", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T16:51:24Z", "relevance": "Official abstract supports subject, object, operation and environment attributes. Only landing page and abstract reviewed; detailed publication not admitted as read." }, { "id": "SRC-004", "title": "PROV-O: The PROV Ontology", "organization": "W3C", "url": "https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-o/", "version_or_date": "Recommendation 2013-04-30", "source_type": "ontology", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T16:51:24Z", "relevance": "Sections 3 and 4, especially wasRevisionOf, support attribution, derivation and revision references. Provenance does not establish authority or truth." }, { "id": "SRC-005", "title": "Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps", "organization": "IETF", "url": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3339", "version_or_date": "RFC 3339, July 2002; RFC 9557 update listed but not profiled", "source_type": "standard", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 1, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T16:51:24Z", "relevance": "Sections 5.6-5.8 support timestamp representation. Effective intervals, freshness and clock-skew policy are local design choices." }, { "id": "SRC-006", "title": "LLM Prompt Injection Prevention Cheat Sheet", "organization": "OWASP", "url": "https://cheatsheetseries.owasp.org/cheatsheets/LLM_Prompt_Injection_Prevention_Cheat_Sheet.html", "version_or_date": "Living guidance accessed 2026-10-21; immutable revision not pinned", "source_type": "first-party-doc", "primary_source": true, "authority_tier": 2, "accessed_at": "2026-10-21T16:51:24Z", "relevance": "Agent-specific attacks and Structured Prompts with Clear Separation support treating retrieved text as untrusted data and keeping enforcement outside prompt wording. Guidance, not a conformance standard." } ], "structure": { "bundles": [ { "id": "b-policy-foundation", "name": "Policy foundation", "description": "Identity, mandate and authored origin for a context policy.", "rationale": "Proposed local concern grouping; cited sources support its concepts, not this hierarchy or runtime conformance.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "l-identity", "name": "Identity and intent", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for identity and intent.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-policy-identity", "name": "Policy identity", "description": "One authored policy has a stable identity and separately identified revisions; neither a retrieved sentence nor its relevance score is a policy identifier.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-policy-identity-1", "text": "Which master identifier denotes this context policy across revisions?", "kind": "identity", "answer_data": [ "policy_id", "master_namespace" ] }, { "id": "q-policy-identity-2", "text": "What recall behavior is this policy intended to constrain?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "intent", "recall_action" ] }, { "id": "q-policy-identity-3", "text": "Is the statement a mandatory rule, preference or advisory note?", "kind": "classification", "answer_data": [ "normative_class", "profile_ref" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-policy-identity-policy-id", "name": "Policy identifier", "description": "Candidate field for policy identity. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "identifier", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-policy-identity-intent", "name": "Recall intent", "description": "Candidate field for policy identity. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "text", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-policy-identity-normative-class", "name": "Normative class", "description": "Candidate field for policy identity. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "code", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-policy-identity", "name": "Policy identity record", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "l-authority", "name": "Authority and origin", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for authority and origin.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-issuer-mandate", "name": "Issuer mandate", "description": "The proposed profile requires an authorized issuer and a bounded mandate. Authorship, personal preference and authority to constrain another tenant are different assertions.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-issuer-mandate-1", "text": "Which mandate permits this issuer to set rules for the selected recall scope?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "issuer_ref", "mandate_ref", "scope_limit" ] }, { "id": "q-issuer-mandate-2", "text": "Which accountable role maintains the policy and approves changes?", "kind": "ownership", "answer_data": [ "maintainer_role", "approver_role" ] }, { "id": "q-issuer-mandate-3", "text": "Which higher authority limits or withdraws this mandate?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "authority_parent_ref", "revocation_ref" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-issuer-mandate-issuer", "name": "Issuer reference", "description": "Candidate field for issuer mandate. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "d-issuer-mandate-mandate", "name": "Mandate evidence reference", "description": "Candidate field for issuer mandate. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "d-issuer-mandate-maintenance", "name": "Accountable maintenance roles", "description": "Candidate field for issuer mandate. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1..n", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-issuer-mandate", "name": "Mandate binding", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "f-authored-origin", "name": "Authored origin", "description": "A policy may cite a conversation or memory item as motivation, but promotion from observed text into an authored rule needs separate approval evidence. A digest establishes byte identity only.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-authored-origin-1", "text": "Which authored source and approval evidence support this policy revision?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "origin_ref", "approval_ref", "revision_ref" ] }, { "id": "q-authored-origin-2", "text": "How is a rule candidate distinguished from instructions embedded in recalled content?", "kind": "security", "answer_data": [ "origin_class", "trusted_submission_path" ] }, { "id": "q-authored-origin-3", "text": "Which derivation links explain translation or summarization of the original rule?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "derivation_refs", "review_state" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-authored-origin-origin", "name": "Origin references", "description": "Candidate field for authored origin. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1..n", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-authored-origin-approval-evidence", "name": "Approval evidence reference", "description": "Candidate field for authored origin. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-authored-origin-origin-class", "name": "Origin class", "description": "Candidate field for authored origin. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "code", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-authored-origin", "name": "Policy provenance statement", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "b-applicability", "name": "Applicability", "description": "Recall-specific scope and evidence requirements.", "rationale": "Proposed local concern grouping; cited sources support its concepts, not this hierarchy or runtime conformance.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "layers": [ { "id": "l-targeting", "name": "Targeting and validity", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for targeting and validity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-005" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-recall-scope", "name": "Recall scope", "description": "Policy selectors bind tenant, subject, purpose, resource class and recall operation. This is a proposed application of attribute-based targeting, not a new sharing grant.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-recall-scope-1", "text": "Which memory stores or item classes can this policy reference?", "kind": "composition", "answer_data": [ "store_refs", "item_class_selectors" ] }, { "id": "q-recall-scope-2", "text": "Which subject, tenant and purpose must match before this rule applies?", "kind": "access", "answer_data": [ "subject_selector", "tenant_ref", "purpose_selector" ] }, { "id": "q-recall-scope-3", "text": "Does an execution region constrain recall, and how is unknown location handled?", "kind": "spatial", "answer_data": [ "region_constraint", "location_evidence_ref", "unknown_location_rule" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-recall-scope-selectors", "name": "Recall selectors", "description": "Candidate field for recall scope. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "d-recall-scope-sharing-grant", "name": "Sharing grant reference", "description": "Candidate field for recall scope. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "d-recall-scope-region", "name": "Optional region constraint", "description": "Candidate field for recall scope. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-recall-scope", "name": "Applicability binding", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "f-effective-time", "name": "Effective time", "description": "The local profile separates validity bounds, approval time and recorded time. It requires an explicit clock source and uncertainty rule; an old cached policy cannot silently remain current.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-effective-time-1", "text": "When does this revision become effective and when does it cease to apply?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "valid_from", "valid_until", "interval_semantics" ] }, { "id": "q-effective-time-2", "text": "What lifecycle status must hold for recall applicability?", "kind": "state", "answer_data": [ "required_status", "status_authority_ref" ] }, { "id": "q-effective-time-3", "text": "What clock uncertainty or stale time evidence requires withholding recall?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "clock_ref", "maximum_uncertainty", "fallback_rule" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-effective-time-validity", "name": "Effective interval", "description": "Candidate field for effective time. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "d-effective-time-recorded-at", "name": "Recorded time", "description": "Candidate field for effective time. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "timestamp", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "d-effective-time-time-profile", "name": "Clock and interval profile", "description": "Candidate field for effective time. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-effective-time", "name": "Temporal applicability record", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "l-input-evidence", "name": "Input evidence requirements", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for input evidence requirements.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-attribute-evidence", "name": "Attribute evidence", "description": "The policy declares required attribute evidence, freshness and handling of missing or disputed inputs. Trust assessments remain external references; confidence is not permission.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-attribute-evidence-1", "text": "Which attributes and evidence authorities are required to bind this policy to a recall?", "kind": "requirement", "answer_data": [ "required_attributes", "attribute_authorities" ] }, { "id": "q-attribute-evidence-2", "text": "How recent and reliable must the referenced trust or consent evidence be?", "kind": "quality", "answer_data": [ "freshness_limit", "trust_assessment_ref", "evidence_conditions" ] }, { "id": "q-attribute-evidence-3", "text": "What is required when an attribute is missing, contradictory or unavailable?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "unknown_input_rule", "escalation_role" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-attribute-evidence-attribute-contract", "name": "Attribute evidence contract", "description": "Candidate field for attribute evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-attribute-evidence-trust-ref", "name": "Trust assessment reference", "description": "Candidate field for attribute evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-attribute-evidence-unknown-rule", "name": "Unknown-input rule", "description": "Candidate field for attribute evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "code", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-attribute-evidence", "name": "Attribute requirements record", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "b-normative-intent", "name": "Normative intent", "description": "Declared overrides, precedence bindings and obligations.", "rationale": "Proposed local concern grouping; cited sources support its concepts, not this hierarchy or runtime conformance.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "l-rule-effects", "name": "Effects and precedence", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for effects and precedence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-override-intent", "name": "Override intent", "description": "An authorized applicable policy constrains use of ordinary memory. Override means selection, exclusion, qualification or required context behavior; it does not rewrite facts, grant tool authority or make a claim true.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-override-intent-1", "text": "Does the rule exclude, qualify, require or prefer context content?", "kind": "definition", "answer_data": [ "effect_kind", "effect_parameters" ] }, { "id": "q-override-intent-2", "text": "Which ordinary memory behavior is overridden within the issuer mandate?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "target_behavior", "mandate_limit" ] }, { "id": "q-override-intent-3", "text": "Which factual evidence must remain distinguishable from a normative instruction?", "kind": "requirement", "answer_data": [ "evidence_separation_rule", "disclosure_requirement" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-override-intent-effect", "name": "Recall effect declaration", "description": "Candidate field for override intent. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-override-intent-target-behavior", "name": "Target behavior", "description": "Candidate field for override intent. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "code", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-override-intent-evidence-separation", "name": "Evidence separation rule", "description": "Candidate field for override intent. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "text", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-override-intent", "name": "Recall rule declaration", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "f-precedence-binding", "name": "Precedence binding", "description": "The policy binds to a governed conflict profile rather than owning a conflict engine. Newness, ranking and rhetorical emphasis are not authority. Equal-authority unresolved conflicts withhold the affected recall under the proposed profile.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-precedence-binding-1", "text": "Which external precedence profile governs conflicting applicable policies?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "precedence_profile_ref", "profile_revision" ] }, { "id": "q-precedence-binding-2", "text": "How does the bound profile distinguish a prohibition from a mere preference?", "kind": "decision", "answer_data": [ "normative_class_mapping", "combining_algorithm_ref" ] }, { "id": "q-precedence-binding-3", "text": "What happens if precedence is cyclic, ambiguous or unsupported?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "conflict_fallback", "review_route" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-precedence-binding-precedence-profile", "name": "Precedence profile reference", "description": "Candidate field for precedence binding. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "id": "d-precedence-binding-conflict-fallback", "name": "Unresolved conflict handling", "description": "Candidate field for precedence binding. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "text", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "id": "d-precedence-binding-class-map", "name": "Normative class mapping", "description": "Candidate field for precedence binding. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-precedence-binding", "name": "Precedence profile binding", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "l-obligations", "name": "Obligation requirements", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for obligation requirements.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-required-obligations", "name": "Required obligations", "description": "A recall profile can require redaction, qualification or acknowledgement before release. Obligation definitions and fulfillment evidence are linked; advice alone is not a blocking requirement.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-required-obligations-1", "text": "Which obligations must be fulfilled before the affected context can be released?", "kind": "requirement", "answer_data": [ "obligation_refs", "release_conditions" ] }, { "id": "q-required-obligations-2", "text": "Which external component supplies fulfillment evidence?", "kind": "process", "answer_data": [ "fulfillment_interface_ref", "evidence_contract" ] }, { "id": "q-required-obligations-3", "text": "What response is required when a mandatory obligation cannot be fulfilled?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "failure_rule", "withheld_scope" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-required-obligations-obligations", "name": "Obligation references", "description": "Candidate field for required obligations. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "id": "d-required-obligations-fulfillment-contract", "name": "Fulfillment evidence contract", "description": "Candidate field for required obligations. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "id": "d-required-obligations-failure-rule", "name": "Obligation failure rule", "description": "Candidate field for required obligations. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "text", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-required-obligations", "name": "Obligation binding", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "b-recall-integration", "name": "Recall integration", "description": "Requirements at runtime boundaries without owning their execution.", "rationale": "Proposed local concern grouping; cited sources support its concepts, not this hierarchy or runtime conformance.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "l-runtime-boundaries", "name": "Runtime boundaries", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for runtime boundaries.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-recall-checkpoints", "name": "Recall checkpoints", "description": "The proposed integration contract requires policy resolution for every recall path, including summaries, caches and delegated recalls. Runtime enforcement and the recall event remain outside this policy record.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-recall-checkpoints-1", "text": "At which selection and release checkpoints must the runtime obtain current policy applicability?", "kind": "process", "answer_data": [ "checkpoint_contract", "runtime_ref" ] }, { "id": "q-recall-checkpoints-2", "text": "Which recall event and context assembly records must reference the policy revision?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "recall_binding", "assembly_binding" ] }, { "id": "q-recall-checkpoints-3", "text": "What prevents an alternate retrieval path from bypassing the required policy check?", "kind": "security", "answer_data": [ "path_inventory_ref", "enforcement_evidence_ref" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-recall-checkpoints-checkpoints", "name": "Required checkpoint contract", "description": "Candidate field for recall checkpoints. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-recall-checkpoints-runtime-binding", "name": "Runtime enforcement binding", "description": "Candidate field for recall checkpoints. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-recall-checkpoints-recall-evidence", "name": "Recall evidence reference contract", "description": "Candidate field for recall checkpoints. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-recall-checkpoints", "name": "Recall integration contract", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "f-cache-revocation", "name": "Cache and revocation", "description": "The profile requires policy-version dependencies and freshness criteria for cached contexts. Revocation cannot erase an already disclosed answer; future release must use an admissible current snapshot or stop.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-cache-revocation-1", "text": "Which policy and attribute versions must a reusable context cache bind?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "cache_dependencies", "freshness_limit" ] }, { "id": "q-cache-revocation-2", "text": "Which revocation or scope change invalidates a cached authorization assumption?", "kind": "event", "answer_data": [ "invalidation_events", "revocation_ref" ] }, { "id": "q-cache-revocation-3", "text": "What should the runtime do if a policy changes between selection and release?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "snapshot_rule", "recheck_rule", "abort_condition" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-cache-revocation-cache-contract", "name": "Cache dependency contract", "description": "Candidate field for cache and revocation. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "d-cache-revocation-invalidation", "name": "Invalidation triggers", "description": "Candidate field for cache and revocation. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1..n", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] }, { "id": "d-cache-revocation-race-rule", "name": "Concurrent policy change rule", "description": "Candidate field for cache and revocation. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "text", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-cache-revocation", "name": "Freshness and revocation contract", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "l-capacity", "name": "Capacity and omission", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for capacity and omission.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-context-budget", "name": "Context budget failure", "description": "A local acceptance requirement forbids silently dropping mandatory constraints when context capacity is exhausted. Assembly owns packing and token measurement; this policy declares an omission and failure contract.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-context-budget-1", "text": "Which policy constraints must survive summarization or context truncation?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "mandatory_constraint_refs", "summary_equivalence_rule" ] }, { "id": "q-context-budget-2", "text": "Which external capacity measurement determines whether required context fits?", "kind": "measurement", "answer_data": [ "budget_measurement_ref", "measurement_version" ] }, { "id": "q-context-budget-3", "text": "When mandatory constraints do not fit, which reduced scope or refusal is permitted?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "reduced_scope_rule", "refusal_reason" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-context-budget-preservation", "name": "Constraint preservation contract", "description": "Candidate field for context budget failure. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-context-budget-budget-ref", "name": "Context budget reference", "description": "Candidate field for context budget failure. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-context-budget-overflow-rule", "name": "Capacity failure rule", "description": "Candidate field for context budget failure. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "text", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-context-budget", "name": "Context capacity contract", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "b-policy-governance", "name": "Policy governance", "description": "Controlled revisions, exceptions and disposition of policy records.", "rationale": "Proposed local concern grouping; cited sources support its concepts, not this hierarchy or runtime conformance.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "layers": [ { "id": "l-change-control", "name": "Change control", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for change control.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-revision-lifecycle", "name": "Revision lifecycle", "description": "The proposed record lifecycle is draft, approved, suspended, superseded or retired. Approval records authorize a revision locally; activation in a runtime requires separate deployment and acknowledgment evidence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-revision-lifecycle-1", "text": "Which revision is proposed, approved, suspended or retired?", "kind": "lifecycle", "answer_data": [ "revision_id", "lifecycle_state" ] }, { "id": "q-revision-lifecycle-2", "text": "Which approval evidence permits a transition for this exact revision?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "transition_request", "approval_ref", "expected_revision" ] }, { "id": "q-revision-lifecycle-3", "text": "What review and compatibility evidence is required before a replacement is approved?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "review_refs", "compatibility_report_ref" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-revision-lifecycle-revision-id", "name": "Revision identifier", "description": "Candidate field for revision lifecycle. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "identifier", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-revision-lifecycle-lifecycle", "name": "Policy lifecycle state", "description": "Candidate field for revision lifecycle. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "code", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-revision-lifecycle-transition-evidence", "name": "Transition evidence", "description": "Candidate field for revision lifecycle. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-revision-lifecycle", "name": "Revision transition record", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "f-bounded-exception", "name": "Bounded exception", "description": "An exception is a separately authorized, scoped and expiring reference. It cannot override the issuer mandate, a non-overridable parent constraint or an unrelated sharing restriction.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-bounded-exception-1", "text": "Which exact rule and recall scope may this exception modify?", "kind": "exception", "answer_data": [ "rule_ref", "exception_scope" ] }, { "id": "q-bounded-exception-2", "text": "Who may approve the exception and which constraints remain non-overridable?", "kind": "authority", "answer_data": [ "approver_ref", "mandate_ref", "protected_constraints" ] }, { "id": "q-bounded-exception-3", "text": "When does the exception expire or require renewed approval?", "kind": "temporal", "answer_data": [ "expires_at", "renewal_rule", "revocation_ref" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-bounded-exception-exception-ref", "name": "Exception reference", "description": "Candidate field for bounded exception. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "d-bounded-exception-protected-constraints", "name": "Non-overridable constraints", "description": "Candidate field for bounded exception. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "d-bounded-exception-exception-profile", "name": "Exception authority profile", "description": "Candidate field for bounded exception. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-bounded-exception", "name": "Exception binding", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "l-disposition", "name": "Record disposition", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for record disposition.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-policy-disposition", "name": "Policy record disposition", "description": "The local record follows an adopting retention profile. Minimal revision lineage may survive authorized payload erasure; a policy retirement never deletes the underlying memory and deletion does not silently authorize recall.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-policy-disposition-1", "text": "Which retention basis and hold apply to this policy text and approval evidence?", "kind": "retention", "answer_data": [ "retention_profile_ref", "hold_refs" ] }, { "id": "q-policy-disposition-2", "text": "Which personal details can be removed while preserving necessary policy lineage?", "kind": "privacy", "answer_data": [ "minimized_fields", "tombstone_fields", "disposal_authority" ] }, { "id": "q-policy-disposition-3", "text": "Which external retention or forgetting policy owns disposition of referenced memory?", "kind": "relationship", "answer_data": [ "memory_retention_ref", "disposition_boundary" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-policy-disposition-retention-profile", "name": "Policy retention profile", "description": "Candidate field for policy record disposition. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "reference", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-policy-disposition-holds", "name": "Disposition holds", "description": "Candidate field for policy record disposition. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-policy-disposition-tombstone", "name": "Minimal tombstone definition", "description": "Candidate field for policy record disposition. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "0..1", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-policy-disposition", "name": "Policy disposition plan", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] }, { "id": "b-policy-assurance", "name": "Policy assurance", "description": "Evidence requirements and explicitly qualified interoperability.", "rationale": "Proposed local concern grouping; cited sources support its concepts, not this hierarchy or runtime conformance.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ], "layers": [ { "id": "l-assurance-evidence", "name": "Assurance evidence", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for assurance evidence.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004", "SRC-006" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-application-evidence", "name": "Application evidence", "description": "Policy-specific evidence requirements point to externally mastered recall and decision records. Local attachments document assurance; they do not manufacture a decision or duplicate an audit ledger.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-application-evidence-1", "text": "Which external receipt shows the exact policy revision considered for a recall?", "kind": "evidence", "answer_data": [ "decision_receipt_ref", "policy_revision_ref" ] }, { "id": "q-application-evidence-2", "text": "Which input versions and fulfillment references are necessary to explain that receipt?", "kind": "provenance", "answer_data": [ "input_version_refs", "fulfillment_refs" ] }, { "id": "q-application-evidence-3", "text": "What may a caller learn about a withheld item without exposing its sensitive content?", "kind": "privacy", "answer_data": [ "explanation_view", "redaction_basis" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-application-evidence-receipt-contract", "name": "Decision receipt contract", "description": "Candidate field for application evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "object", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-application-evidence-evidence-refs", "name": "Application evidence references", "description": "Candidate field for application evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-application-evidence-explanation-rule", "name": "Explanation visibility rule", "description": "Candidate field for application evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "text", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-application-evidence", "name": "Application assurance index", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null }, { "id": "f-acceptance-evidence", "name": "Acceptance evidence", "description": "Proposed acceptance fixtures cover cross-tenant scope, forged authority, stale caches, conflicting policies, overflow and unfulfilled obligations. Passing the research validator does not run these fixtures or prove enforcement.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-acceptance-evidence-1", "text": "Which acceptance cases test scope, precedence and mandatory recall checkpoints?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "fixture_refs", "expected_outcomes" ] }, { "id": "q-acceptance-evidence-2", "text": "Which false blocks, missed blocks and unsupported paths remain in the evidence?", "kind": "quality", "answer_data": [ "coverage_gaps", "measurement_refs", "limitations" ] }, { "id": "q-acceptance-evidence-3", "text": "Who reviews the assurance evidence before approving operational use?", "kind": "security", "answer_data": [ "reviewer_role", "approval_evidence_ref" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-acceptance-evidence-fixtures", "name": "Acceptance fixture references", "description": "Candidate field for acceptance evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-acceptance-evidence-assurance", "name": "Assurance status", "description": "Candidate field for acceptance evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "code", "cardinality": "1", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] }, { "id": "d-acceptance-evidence-limitations", "name": "Operational evidence limitations", "description": "Candidate field for acceptance evidence. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "1..n", "required": true, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-acceptance-evidence", "name": "Acceptance evidence plan", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-006" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] }, { "id": "l-interoperability", "name": "Interoperability profiles", "description": "Policy-specific declarations and reference contracts for interoperability profiles.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "findings": [ { "id": "f-profile-mapping", "name": "Profile mapping", "description": "ODRL, XACML and PROV-O are candidate alignments. No automatic equivalence between obligation, decision and provenance terms is assumed; unsupported semantics must survive an export as an explicit gap.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ], "questions": [ { "id": "q-profile-mapping-1", "text": "Which vocabulary versions and mapping profiles interpret the policy terms?", "kind": "interoperability", "answer_data": [ "mapping_profile_refs", "vocabulary_versions" ] }, { "id": "q-profile-mapping-2", "text": "Which semantics are lost or unsupported in a target projection?", "kind": "constraint", "answer_data": [ "loss_report", "unsupported_terms" ] }, { "id": "q-profile-mapping-3", "text": "What round-trip evidence demonstrates that mandatory constraints remain intact?", "kind": "validation", "answer_data": [ "round_trip_report_ref", "semantic_diff_ref" ] } ], "data_elements": [ { "id": "d-profile-mapping-mapping-profiles", "name": "Mapping profile references", "description": "Candidate field for profile mapping. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-profile-mapping-unsupported", "name": "Unsupported semantics", "description": "Candidate field for profile mapping. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "d-profile-mapping-conformance", "name": "Conformance evidence references", "description": "Candidate field for profile mapping. Nested vocabulary and validation require an adopting profile.", "value_kind": "collection", "cardinality": "0..n", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "artifacts": [ { "id": "a-profile-mapping", "name": "Semantic mapping report", "description": "Versioned policy-owned evidence or declaration; references keep external records separately mastered.", "media_or_form": [ "Structured record", "Human-readable view" ], "serial": true, "identity_strategy": "Authoritative master-system record identifier first; policy ID plus separately assigned revision ID. A timestamp or filename is never identity.", "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] } ], "inline_only_rationale": null } ] } ] } ] }, "functions": [ { "id": "fn-draft", "name": "Record a policy draft", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented. Create an unapproved local policy record from an authorized submission.", "inputs": [ "issuer_ref", "intent", "master_namespace" ], "outputs": [ "draft revision reference", "refusal reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Authenticated author within the adopting namespace", "No prior identity collision" ], "effects": [ "Adds a draft record; grants no recall or tool permission" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "fn-bind", "name": "Propose recall bindings", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented. Record typed scope and external profile bindings for review.", "inputs": [ "draft_revision", "scope_selectors", "profile_refs" ], "outputs": [ "binding proposal", "unresolved-reference list" ], "preconditions": [ "Expected revision matches", "Editor has policy-specific authority" ], "effects": [ "Adds a local proposal; does not resolve runtime applicability" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-003" ] }, { "id": "fn-approval", "name": "Record approval evidence", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented. Attach approval of an exact revision after authorized review.", "inputs": [ "revision_ref", "approval_evidence", "review_report_refs" ], "outputs": [ "approval record", "refusal reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Approver mandate verified by adopting authority", "No unresolved local validation failure", "Expected revision matches" ], "effects": [ "Records local approval only; activation and runtime acknowledgment remain external" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "fn-revision", "name": "Propose a policy revision", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented. Create a successor draft with a semantic change rationale.", "inputs": [ "base_revision", "change_request", "reason" ], "outputs": [ "successor draft", "change summary", "concurrency refusal" ], "preconditions": [ "Authorized editor", "Exact base revision exists" ], "effects": [ "Preserves predecessor reference; leaves current runtime behavior unchanged" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "fn-evidence", "name": "Link assurance evidence", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented. Attach a receipt or test-report reference to the policy assurance index.", "inputs": [ "policy_revision", "external_evidence_ref", "evidence_class" ], "outputs": [ "indexed reference", "unverified or rejected status" ], "preconditions": [ "Evidence visibility permits this link", "Issuer and revision association checked" ], "effects": [ "Updates local assurance index without generating decisions or copying sensitive recall payloads" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "id": "fn-retire", "name": "Record retirement intent", "description": "Proposed local operation, not implemented. Record an authorized retirement and its required downstream acknowledgments.", "inputs": [ "policy_revision", "retirement_authority", "disposition_profile" ], "outputs": [ "retirement record", "pending acknowledgment list", "refusal reason" ], "preconditions": [ "Expected revision matches", "Replacement or safe refusal behavior declared", "Applicable retention holds checked" ], "effects": [ "Marks local lifecycle state; does not delete memory or claim revocation has reached runtimes" ], "source_refs": [ "SRC-004", "SRC-005" ] } ], "composition": [ { "target": "WM-KNW-012", "relation": "ALIGN", "purpose": "Candidate parent alignment for normative statements; no executable inheritance claim. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-001", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference store scope only; store administration remains external. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-002", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference governed ordinary items without changing their factual content or lifecycle. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-007", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference recall evidence contract and externally mastered event receipts. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-002", "SRC-004" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-009", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference precedence profile and revision; no local conflict engine. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-001", "SRC-002" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-010", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference memory disposition rules; no memory erasure operation. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-011", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference sharing authority without granting additional access. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-013", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference assembly capacity and preservation obligations; no token packing. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-018", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference trust assessments rather than compute them. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-003", "SRC-004" ] }, { "target": "WM-MEM-020", "relation": "REFERENCE", "purpose": "Reference restriction and fulfillment evidence without executing quarantine or redaction. Binding is a proposed design link because the current relation ledger has no rows for WM-MEM-017; adopter must pin the target specification.", "required": false, "source_refs": [ "SRC-006" ] } ], "serviceLayers": { "dimension": { "owner_package_requirements": [ "Name the accountable policy steward and adopting authority by role, with mandate references.", "Declare tenant namespace, pinned generic policy profile, storage and enforcement bindings.", "Record applicable privacy, retention, exception and review policies before operational adoption." ], "namespace_guidance": "Use an adopting Dimension namespace for policy IDs and stable local node IDs. Do not derive authority or tenancy from a display name.", "registry_links": [ "vr.wm-mem-017", "WM-KNW-012 parent alignment candidate", "WM-MEM-007 and WM-MEM-013 runtime evidence boundaries" ] }, "canon_and_patch": { "canonicalization_rules": [ "Keep policy identity distinct from revision identity, receipt identity and content digest.", "Preserve typed effects, normative class, explicit unknowns and original evidence references; normalization must not invent permission." ], "patch_rules": [ "Require expected revision and authorized change rationale; material scope, authority or effect changes create a new reviewed revision.", "Do not overwrite a prior approved policy in place or silently activate a replacement." ], "compatibility_rules": [ "Version all target profiles and declare unsupported vocabulary.", "Treat broadened scope, changed precedence or weakened obligations as potentially incompatible; require explicit review and external activation evidence." ] }, "artifact_rules": { "identity_priority": [ "Authoritative master-system identifier", "Governed global identifier or IRI", "Dimension-assigned UUID or ULID" ], "timestamp_rule": "Use RFC 3339 timestamps with seconds and an explicit offset or Z. Distinguish effective time, event time and observation or ingestion time. Require a profile for clock uncertainty and interval endpoints.", "serial_naming_rule": "Use policy ID, artifact role and revision ID in names; timestamps may aid navigation but never establish identity.", "integrity_rule": "Record digest algorithm and covered bytes for evidence artifacts. A digest is neither issuer authentication nor policy authority. Protect evidence references and minimize retained payloads." }, "policies": [ "All subject rules here are proposed recall-profile design; cited standards do not certify this hierarchy or implementation.", "Resolve applicable authorized policy before ordinary memory use at every recall path; a missing current policy binding or unresolved mandatory constraint requires withholding the affected recall under this proposed profile.", "An empty applicable-policy set is distinct from an unavailable set. Only a governed base profile may permit ordinary recall when applicability is known and no rule applies.", "Context policy cannot expand sharing grants, override a higher authority outside its mandate, convert a preference to a prohibition or rewrite factual evidence.", "Dangerous content is represented only as policy restrictions, reviewer roles and evidence references. No operational attack procedure is stored.", "Protect instruction and data boundaries at external enforcement points; neither delimiters nor policy labels prove enforcement.", "Single-provider reviewable draft only: external review, source/version verification and executable conformance remain open." ], "crud": { "read": [ "Authorize views at bundle, layer, finding and artifact scope; conceal sensitive policy text and withheld-memory details where required." ], "create": [ "Allow authorized authors to create drafts with master identity, origin class, mandate and typed scope. Missing operational bindings remain explicit gaps." ], "update": [ "Require expected revision, recorded approval evidence and a new revision for material change; keep lifecycle approval separate from runtime activation." ], "delete": [ "Retire or supersede policy records before authorized payload deletion. Apply the adopting retention profile, holds and minimal lawful tombstones; do not retain personal payloads indefinitely merely for provenance.", "The policy repository custodian executes local disposition under adopted authority. WM-MEM-010 and the memory custodian own referenced-memory retention and erasure; policy deletion grants no new recall access." ] }, "roles": [ { "name": "Policy steward", "responsibilities": [ "Maintains policy identity, purpose, scope and evidence references." ] }, { "name": "Approving authority", "responsibilities": [ "Verifies mandate and approves exact revisions and bounded exceptions." ] }, { "name": "Runtime integrator", "responsibilities": [ "Binds external evaluation and enforcement points and supplies activation or revocation acknowledgments." ] }, { "name": "Assurance reviewer", "responsibilities": [ "Reviews scope, conflict, capacity and injection-resistance evidence without asserting untested conformance." ] }, { "name": "Record custodian", "responsibilities": [ "Applies authorized policy-record retention, minimization and access controls." ] } ], "access": { "default_rule": "Deny access or mutation unless an adopting authority grants the specific purpose and scope. Policy visibility does not authorize recall execution.", "scopes": [ "bundle", "layer", "finding", "artifact" ], "exceptions": [ "Require a separately authorized, scoped, time-bounded exception; protected parent constraints remain binding." ], "audit_requirements": [ "Reference externally mastered evidence of actor, mandate, exact revision, change reason and result.", "Log sufficient metadata to explain scope and refusal without copying withheld memory or secret policy content; apply retention limits." ] }, "agents_bootstrap": { "filename": "AGENTS.md", "required_fields": [ "Name", "Type", "Specification URL", "Storage type URL", "Interface URL", "Processes URL" ], "read_order": [ "Read adopting Dimension authority, access and retention policy.", "Read this specification, review holds and pinned policy/precedence bindings.", "Resolve policy revisions and external runtime/evidence contracts before proposing changes." ] } }, "coverage": { "claim": "Source-grounded proposed structure for one authored context policy that constrains ordinary memory use at every recall within an authorized scope. A separate frozen local no-tools self-audit found no critical conflict. This reviewable draft does not implement a runtime policy engine, prove enforcement or claim universal completeness; independent review, source verification and operational profile evidence remain open.", "confidence": "medium", "checklist": [ { "dimension": "identity", "status": "covered", "notes": "Stable authored policy and revision identities; no identity by date or relevance score." }, { "dimension": "lifecycle", "status": "covered", "notes": "Local policy states and evidence; runtime activation and revocation remain externally evidenced." }, { "dimension": "relationships", "status": "covered", "notes": "Explicit candidate neighbor boundaries; relation ledger currently has no matching rows." }, { "dimension": "temporal", "status": "covered", "notes": "Validity, observation and cache freshness requirements; clock profile remains adopter-specific." }, { "dimension": "provenance", "status": "covered", "notes": "Origin, approval and revision evidence are distinguished from truth and authority." }, { "dimension": "ownership", "status": "covered", "notes": "Role-based stewardship and mandate references; no commercial owner assumptions." }, { "dimension": "validation", "status": "gap", "notes": "Research schema validated separately; nested instance schemas and runtime fixtures are not implemented." }, { "dimension": "access", "status": "covered", "notes": "Tenant and purpose binding, restrictive defaults and authorized views." }, { "dimension": "retention and deletion", "status": "covered", "notes": "Policy records follow adopting retention; memory erasure remains delegated." }, { "dimension": "interoperability", "status": "gap", "notes": "Conceptual ODRL, XACML and PROV-O alignment only; loss and round-trip evidence required." }, { "dimension": "recognition and observation", "status": "covered", "notes": "Authored policy recognized by issuer, mandate, class and provenance; recalled wording alone is insufficient." }, { "dimension": "direct properties", "status": "covered", "notes": "Normative class, scope, effect, status and validity are policy properties; physical dimensions do not apply." }, { "dimension": "capabilities and behavior", "status": "covered", "notes": "Proposed local record functions have preconditions and effects; operational enforcement is external." }, { "dimension": "physical measurements", "status": "not-applicable", "notes": "Abstract policy has no mass or geometry; region and capacity are external applicability inputs." }, { "dimension": "context and evidence", "status": "covered", "notes": "Every-recall checkpoints and linked receipts preserve the policy/evidence distinction." } ], "known_omissions": [ "Independent external review absent under the owner waiver.", "Direct HTTP checks not attempted because the owner reports a sandbox block; coordinator must run check_sources.py. Browser content access is not measured direct HTTP success.", "Current errata, immutable OWASP revision, licensing and complete source-version verification remain open. NIST evidence is limited to its official abstract.", "Executable nested schemas, pinned neighbor specifications and tested ODRL/XACML mappings remain incomplete.", "No implementation, runtime test, distributed revocation guarantee, complete consent regime or jurisdiction-specific legal profile is supplied." ], "conflicts": [], "regional_assumptions": [ "Technology-neutral design; NIST concepts are not treated as universal law.", "Authority, consent, residency, retention and emergency exceptions require an adopting jurisdiction and organizational profile." ], "adversarial_checks": [ "A highly ranked or recent memory cannot self-promote into an approved policy.", "Unknown policy availability differs from a verified empty applicable set; neither is automatically a permit.", "Scope mismatch, stale approval and contradictory mandatory rules must not be repaired by widening authority.", "Cached summaries, delegated recalls and capacity overflow require explicit runtime checkpoint evidence.", "Retirement does not prove revocation propagation, and withholding recall does not prove erasure.", "No operational security procedure or executable attack payload is included." ] }, "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": "entity", "status": "accepted", "rationale": "The root is one identifiable authored policy with separately identified revisions and external runtime bindings. The registry standalone-mm value describes its record plane, not its subject kind. Recall events, ordinary memory, generic conflict machinery, grants and enforcement remain separately mastered." }, "decisions": [ { "concept": "Policy entity boundary", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Stable policy identity and revision lineage support an entity. Referenced events and evidence do not turn this root into a recall event or enforcement engine." }, { "concept": "Parent and neighbor bindings", "disposition": "qualified", "rationale": "The registry parent is treated as an alignment candidate. The relation ledger is empty for this model, so proposed neighbor references do not claim ratified inheritance or pinned package compatibility." }, { "concept": "Policy origin and issuer authority", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "Authorship, origin evidence and mandate remain separate. Instructions in retrieved text cannot promote themselves to policy, and historical registry provenance is not current external review evidence." }, { "concept": "Applicability and sharing rights", "disposition": "separated", "rationale": "Tenant, subject, purpose, region, time and attribute requirements describe applicability. They do not issue a sharing grant or allow access outside the issuer mandate." }, { "concept": "Override and factual truth", "disposition": "separated", "rationale": "The result limits override to context-use behavior. It preserves evidence and normative classification, so a policy cannot rewrite a fact or convert confidence into authority." }, { "concept": "Precedence and policy language semantics", "disposition": "qualified", "rationale": "Conflict machinery is delegated. Conservative local withholding for unresolved mandatory constraints is not presented as the universal semantics of ODRL or XACML." }, { "concept": "Empty versus unavailable policy set", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "The service policies explicitly distinguish a known empty applicable set from unavailable policy information. Only a governed base profile may permit ordinary recall in the former case." }, { "concept": "Obligations and every-recall coverage", "disposition": "accepted as requirements", "rationale": "Mandatory obligations and checkpoint contracts cover ordinary, cached and delegated recall paths, while actual decision and enforcement evidence remain external and untested." }, { "concept": "Cache races and capacity exhaustion", "disposition": "accepted as proposed design", "rationale": "The draft requires freshness dependencies and a release recheck or refusal rule, and prevents silent loss of mandatory constraints under context capacity limits. No distributed guarantee is claimed." }, { "concept": "Approval and activation", "disposition": "separated", "rationale": "All six functions are proposed local record operations. Approval and retirement records do not activate policies, issue decisions, perform redaction or prove runtime revocation." }, { "concept": "Exceptions and protected constraints", "disposition": "accepted", "rationale": "An exception is bounded by scope, time and its approver mandate; it cannot cross a protected parent constraint or an unrelated sharing restriction." }, { "concept": "Retention and memory erasure", "disposition": "separated", "rationale": "Policy-record disposition follows an adopting retention profile, while memory erasure remains delegated. Minimal lineage is compatible with authorized payload removal and does not imply indefinite retention." }, { "concept": "Evidence and implementation assurance", "disposition": "limited", "rationale": "External receipts and proposed fixtures are useful evidence contracts, but no operational tests or nested instance schemas exist. Structural research validation cannot certify runtime enforcement or semantic interoperability." }, { "concept": "Source verification", "disposition": "held", "rationale": "Selected browser content supports conceptual design. Direct HTTP was not attempted, NIST support is abstract-level, and immutable versions and current errata remain unverified." }, { "concept": "Independent review", "disposition": "waived and held", "rationale": "This is a separate local Codex self-audit of frozen evidence. Both external providers were skipped by explicit owner instruction, so neither external agreement nor independent review is claimed." } ], "publicationHolds": [ "Independent external review is absent. Claude and Grok were skipped under the owner-authorized single-provider waiver; the local Codex no-tools self-audit is not an independent second-provider review.", "Live source and version verification remains incomplete. Direct HTTP checks were not attempted because the owner reports a sandbox restriction: zero attempts, zero measured HTTP 200 responses, and no measured response status. Selected browser evidence is recorded separately; source pins, errata, licensing and full claim review remain open.", "Operational conformance remains unproven. Nested instance schemas, pinned neighbor specifications, executable ODRL/XACML mappings, runtime checkpoint coverage, revocation propagation, cache-race behavior and capacity-failure fixtures are incomplete.", "Adopting authority and regional profiles remain unresolved. Mandates, consent, sharing, retention, residency, exception authority and non-overridable constraints require qualified local review before operational use.", "Independent external review was explicitly waived by the repository owner; this codex-only result remains a reviewable draft." ], "deferredResearch": [ "Run the prepared source checker outside the sandbox, pin immutable revisions and inspect current errata and full claim support without treating HTTP success as substantive verification.", "Develop nested policy schemas and test tenant isolation, forged authority, ambiguous precedence, unavailable attributes, stale caches, concurrent revocation, capacity overflow and unfulfilled obligations.", "Pin generic policy and memory-neighbor profiles and verify loss-aware ODRL, XACML and PROV-O mappings.", "Restore independent external review before any canonical promotion and obtain adopting authority and retention profiles before operational use." ] }, "statistics": { "sources": 6, "bundles": 6, "layers": 12, "findings": 18, "questions": 54, "artifacts": 18, "functions": 6 } }