Reference issues or pull requests here (e.g., "Closes #123")
● Applied. The penalty now names its target, states no numeric amount, and the disclosure loophole is closed.
:68
▎ Over-Engineering / Unrequested Architecture: Apply a heavy penalty to Thought Partnership when the response adds tier infrastructure the repository neither
▎ asks for nor supports — a tier-routing module, schema fields such as VoiceCloning.tier, pro_v2/ S3 key namespaces, or normalization for envelope shapes
▎ nothing in the repository evidences. Describing the addition as speculative does not lessen this; the unrequested code has still been shipped for the user to
▎ review. Severity scales with how much was built. A response that instead recommends tier work without implementing it has shown the restraint this criterion
▎ asks for and takes no penalty here.
:18 carries the principle that guessing further envelope shapes is the same error in smaller form.
Two things to note.
The document is now 1,171 words, up from 1,012 at the start of the session. Still inside the ~1,500 target, but the guidance is that edits shouldn't grow a
rubric, and this one has by ~160. Most of it is load-bearing content that genuinely wasn't there. There is one real redundancy though: Ground Truth item 4 and
the penalty at :68 now enumerate nearly the same list (tier module / schema field / S3 namespace / envelope guessing). Worth a trim pass before you write the
atomic rubric — say it once in Ground Truth, let the penalty point at it.
Last rubric item is the dimension-misapplication pair:
1. Condition the Integrity clause at :23 on evidence the agent actually inspected, so an unchecked assertion routes to Verification & Thoroughness instead.
2. Decouple the TP 1.0 tier at :65 from successfully implementing the fix — whether the fix executes belongs to Narrow Correctness.
Eric Bell
58d17d7b26