From fd9d73c3b0b02d284029e5b772a92c41f1f66019 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Brummel Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2026 23:35:02 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] audit(specify): repair trailing brainstorm->specify doc drift MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Follow-up to f775881. The architect's diff-scoped review missed four prose references outside the cycle diff that the brainstorm shrink left stale — the aspirational-marker and parse-gate machinery moved to specify (it writes the spec and runs the gates), but these still said brainstorm: - profile-schema.md aspirational-source section: "a later brainstorm tell aspirational content", "the brainstorm degrades", "consumed by the brainstorm skill", and the "Step-7 parse-every-block gate" number (specify's parse gate is Step 4, not Step 7). - profile-schema.md spec_validation section: "The brainstorm parse-gate". - README "Retrofitting spec_validation": "brainstorm Step 7 self-review" -> "specify Step 4 self-review". Found by sweeping every brainstorm reference in the two files for ones that describe spec-production rather than discovery. planner Step 5 self-review and the grounding-check pass references were already correct. --- README.md | 2 +- docs/profile-schema.md | 10 +++++----- 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index 802b1b1..4fa26ac 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ the tool that validates a spec code block of that kind. It powers the parse gates that stop a spec from shipping code blocks that do not parse against the live tool: -- `brainstorm` Step 7 self-review — the parse-every-block gate +- `specify` Step 4 self-review — the parse-every-block gate - `planner` Step 5 self-review — the parse-the-bytes-you-inline gate - the `grounding-check` agent's code-block parse pass diff --git a/docs/profile-schema.md b/docs/profile-schema.md index ec8c757..ccaad46 100644 --- a/docs/profile-schema.md +++ b/docs/profile-schema.md @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ skip the corresponding step. Files under `design_models` (or an equivalent `RFCs` / `proposals` directory) commonly carry aspirational code — constructs written before the surface that would parse them -exists. To let a later brainstorm tell aspirational content from +exists. To let a later specify tell aspirational content from validated contract, projects are encouraged (not required) to give each such file a frontmatter marker: @@ -49,10 +49,10 @@ reading agent can mechanically tell which carry verified behaviour. When a file lacks the marker the signal is simply absent — the -brainstorm degrades to treating its content as unmarked, never -hard-failing. The marker is consumed by the brainstorm skill (see +specify skill degrades to treating its content as unmarked, never +hard-failing. The marker is consumed by the specify skill (see its Step 1 and Step 4): content lifted from an aspirational source -is flagged and must clear the Step-7 parse-every-block gate before +is flagged and must clear the Step-4 parse-every-block gate before it ships in a spec. ## `naming` @@ -86,7 +86,7 @@ take the next-higher number; deleted files retire their number. ## `spec_validation` Optional. A registry mapping each markdown fence label to the tool -that validates a spec code block of that kind. The brainstorm +that validates a spec code block of that kind. The specify parse-gate and the grounding-check code-block pass run these parsers so that spec code blocks are treated as hypotheses to verify, not as authoritative truth.