frontend-patterns/workplans/FEP-WP-0002-seed-language-validation.md
tegwick 2ec23bb22c Route live research through llm-connect and record pilot findings
Assistant: codex
Assistant-Model: gpt-6-astra
Assistant-Session: 01a0cffe-206f-7323-89d3-b20ca4cf4bf9
2026-09-24 15:55:31 +02:00

157 lines
7 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

---
id: FEP-WP-0002
type: workplan
title: "Validate the seed frontend pattern language"
domain: infotech
repo: frontend-patterns
status: active
quality_dor: DoR-Ok
quality_dor_at: "2026-09-24"
quality_dor_by: codex
quality_dor_note: "Self-review against work-item-dor; see readiness assessment below."
reviewed_at: "2026-09-24"
reviewed_against_commit: "c161369ad58782ff0a13429c61cc7c8efc36e33d"
owner: codex
topic_slug: canon
created: "2026-09-23"
updated: "2026-09-24"
state_hub_workstream_id: "3350b7f2-375a-54e8-8f7c-3bf7c7c3af71"
---
# Validate the seed frontend pattern language
First executable cycle of `research/plan/ResearchProgram.md`, following `REVIEW.md`
and FEP-WP-0001. Readiness review on 2026-09-24: scaffold is present, source and
walkthrough templates exist, VC-01/VC-02 are defined, and deliverables below are
bounded. Schema reconciliation and source preparation began on 2026-09-24;
full source investigation and the M1 evidence gate remain incomplete.
T01 and source extraction in T02 can proceed independently. T03 requires both.
Use `research/plan/ResearchProtocol.md`; track Q01–Q04 in the question ledger.
## Reconcile the metadata contract
```task
id: FEP-WP-0002-T01
status: done
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "e59295dd-a087-5dbc-9bb2-230488c48e96"
```
Resolve relation spelling, force and pattern IDs, prerequisite target types,
multi-scale representation and editorial status versus evidence maturity.
Done when schema and template agree and a worked example resolves every reference.
## Establish traceable source evidence
```task
id: FEP-WP-0002-T02
status: progress
priority: high
state_hub_task_id: "0eb32b3e-07d6-5e16-a735-7d75d9dace83"
```
Complete the first source case and a contrasting local-first source review.
Record source identity, URL, date/version, claim references, interpretations and
counterexamples. Reconcile README maturity claims with the evidence.
## Validate a connected seed corpus
```task
id: FEP-WP-0002-T03
status: todo
priority: medium
state_hub_task_id: "54940b04-1d0f-5bff-98d4-be290eca8048"
```
Author a small connected pattern set and exercise it in server-authoritative and
local-first scenarios. Show forces, alternatives, ordering rationale, resulting
contexts and failure modes. Record gaps, then define the minimum metadata
validator and graph export needed by these examples.
## Phase acceptance
Produce 6–10 connected draft patterns, complete VC-01 and VC-02, and write
`research/reviews/M1-SeedReview.md` with evidence for each M1 criterion. Include
rejected or merged candidates and any source-access limitations. Retain hypothesis
maturity where evidence is incomplete. Handoff broader investigations to FEP-WP-0003;
metadata tooling and empirical evaluation are tracked in FEP-WP-0004.
## Readiness assessment
Self-reviewed by codex against State Hub `policies/work-item-dor.md` on
2026-09-24. Outcome: DoR-Ok for the plan structure; child tasks remain to be
assessed before execution.
- Scope: metadata reconciliation, two contrasting source reviews, 6–10 draft
patterns and VC-01/VC-02. Broad coverage, tooling implementation and real-repo
validation are outside this cycle and belong to FEP-WP-0003/0004.
- Owner and repository: codex in frontend-patterns. No external intake; this follows
the repository review and the user's research-program instruction.
- Dependencies: scaffold and templates are committed. No known blocker prevents
T01 or source discovery. T03 depends on T01/T02; inaccessible sources must be
reported and alternatives assessed rather than evidence invented.
- Execution boundary: documentation and read-only public-source research, with
ordinary Git/State Hub synchronization. Deployments, purchases and third-party
messaging are outside scope. This plan does not schedule background execution.
- Verification: schema/template agreement, traceable claims and references, two
walkthrough reviews, explicit counterevidence and the M1 acceptance review.
- Done-condition: the phase acceptance section above; hypotheses may be rejected
or deferred with reasons rather than falsely confirmed to close a task.
## Source investigation tooling
FEP-WP-0005 established `research/bench/README.md` and `scripts/research_bench.py`.
Use one isolated workspace per source excerpt, review original-source-grounded
claims/candidates/relations/critique, and follow `research/bench/Admission.md`.
The fixture run is synthetic and does not complete any task in this workplan.
T02 still owns source acquisition/review; T03 owns cross-source synthesis and cases.
## 2026-09-24 execution evidence
T01 completed: `canon/PatternSchema.md`, `canon/vocabulary.yaml` and the pattern
template agree on identities, scales, force keys, statuses, evidence and typed
relations. `research/examples/schema-contract.yaml` exercises resolved references;
`make schema-test` verifies it. Review: `research/reviews/SchemaAndSourcePreparation.md`.
T02 in progress: SRC-0001/SRC-0002 verified and indexed. Two original-passage
workspaces and four-call preflight plans are prepared under `research/bench/infospaces/`.
No live generation or complete source review is claimed. Selection of model/provider,
source-grounded investigation, broader case review and counterexamples remain.
## First source investigation — 2026-09-24
Attempted the two four-stage source investigations with Gemini 2.5 Flash through
OpenRouter. Both stopped at the first call; a separate authentication probe returned
HTTP 401. No provider-generated research artifacts exist. The existing workload
credential route does not apply to a generic workstation client; a correct route or
provider was requested from the user. Failed receipts are retained.
Manual authority-focused reviews are in `research/cases/CarniatoGrandUnifyingArchitecture.md`
and `research/cases/LocalFirstAuthority.md`; synthesis/dispositions are in
`research/reviews/AuthorityPilot.md`. Source catalog states are extracted, not fully
reviewed. Added safe error status/model recording to the adapter and a regression
check preventing raw sensitive diagnostic detail from entering receipts.
T02 remains progress: broader evidence and independent known uses are still needed.
Live reruns specifically depend on an authorized working credential; manual research
can continue. No failure of the research hypothesis is inferred from provider failure.
## llm-connect execution — 2026-09-24
User clarified that live execution must use llm-connect. Replaced direct OpenRouter
execution with the llm-connect service contract; no workstation credential required.
Service model/usage/finish reason and safe failure receipts are retained. Carniato
`-03` completed four stages; Carniato `-02` and local-first `-02` were truncated and
rejected. Review: `research/reviews/LLMConnectPilot.md`. No proposal admitted.
T02 remains progress and owns the next bounded steps: resolve local-first truncation
with explicit research settings; tighten prompts and checks around unsourced known
uses, recurrence and claim-vs-pattern relation targets; continue source evidence.
These replace the earlier workstation-credential dependency. T03 remains todo.