Model goal-driven agent workforce governance
This commit is contained in:
parent
d1dece7409
commit
6ed5708c21
5 changed files with 373 additions and 51 deletions
|
|
@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
|
|||
# Custodian Brief — kaizen-agentic
|
||||
|
||||
**Domain:** infotech
|
||||
**Last synced:** 2026-08-20 10:06 UTC
|
||||
**Last synced:** 2026-08-20 11:03 UTC
|
||||
**State Hub:** http://127.0.0.1:8000 *(adjust if running on a remote machine)*
|
||||
|
||||
## Active Workstreams
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
37
SCOPE.md
37
SCOPE.md
|
|
@ -52,8 +52,9 @@ boundary in `INTENT.md`, not an unfinished runtime hidden in this repository.
|
|||
packages, staffed-role lifecycle, bound agent definitions, ramp-up/down,
|
||||
client-custodied memory, engagement metrics, and reference pilot artifacts
|
||||
- **Interoperability contracts and reference patterns** for activity-core,
|
||||
rein-aharness, role-engine, llm-connect, State Hub, artifact-store, Helix
|
||||
Forge, and Custodian discovery
|
||||
rein-aharness, role-engine, agentic-resources, human-resources, fin-hub,
|
||||
resource-control, llm-connect, State Hub, artifact-store, Helix Forge, and
|
||||
Custodian discovery
|
||||
- **ADRs, workplans, tutorials, and integration handoffs** that make these
|
||||
conventions human-readable and machine-consumable
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -67,6 +68,8 @@ boundary in `INTENT.md`, not an unfinished runtime hidden in this repository.
|
|||
- Holding credentials or granting authentication, authorization, decision
|
||||
rights, or tool permissions
|
||||
- Live assignment of a person or agent to an organizational role
|
||||
- Setting organizational goals, granting leadership authority, allocating the
|
||||
agent workforce, or owning financial/resource budgets
|
||||
- Owning the complete organizational role catalog; role-engine is the current
|
||||
definition source, while this repository may consume roles and package
|
||||
execution-oriented reference Roles
|
||||
|
|
@ -89,6 +92,8 @@ boundary in `INTENT.md`, not an unfinished runtime hidden in this repository.
|
|||
- Declaring a repo-local agent instance and preparing it for scheduled execution
|
||||
- Designing a staffed digital Role engagement or mapping an organizational role
|
||||
to an executable agent blueprint
|
||||
- Translating leadership-owned goals and budget-constrained assignments into
|
||||
measurable blueprint, protocol, schedule, and evidence contracts
|
||||
- Integrating Kaizen work with activity-core, rein-aharness, State Hub, Helix
|
||||
Forge, or artifact-store
|
||||
- Understanding the KaizenAgentic product and agency operating model
|
||||
|
|
@ -101,6 +106,11 @@ boundary in `INTENT.md`, not an unfinished runtime hidden in this repository.
|
|||
- The need is purely schedule/runtime operation; use activity-core and the
|
||||
selected rein/harness
|
||||
- The need is organizational role definition only; use role-engine
|
||||
- The need is agent inventory, assignment, capacity planning, portfolio review,
|
||||
or retirement; agentic-resources is the intended owner once its boundary is
|
||||
ratified and implemented
|
||||
- The need is authoritative budget, burn, runway, resource capacity, or
|
||||
procurement evidence; use fin-hub and resource-control
|
||||
- The need is identity, credentials, or authorization; use the owning identity,
|
||||
OpenBao/credential-routing, and policy systems
|
||||
- The need is repository capability profiling or SCOPE generation at scale; use
|
||||
|
|
@ -124,8 +134,9 @@ boundary in `INTENT.md`, not an unfinished runtime hidden in this repository.
|
|||
standardized
|
||||
- **Repository health:** Forgejo CI, release checks, agent validation, and
|
||||
metadata/workplan conventions are normalized through KAIZEN-WP-0011
|
||||
- **Open maturity gap:** a canonical role-definition → assignment → agent-instance
|
||||
contract and an end-to-end role-based pilot remain to be implemented
|
||||
- **Open maturity gap:** canonical goal/leadership/resource-envelope → role →
|
||||
assignment → agent-instance contracts and an end-to-end role-based pilot
|
||||
remain to be implemented
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -133,9 +144,14 @@ boundary in `INTENT.md`, not an unfinished runtime hidden in this repository.
|
|||
|
||||
| Concern | Owning system | KaizenAgentic relationship |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Organizational goals and leadership mandates | Accountable organization/engagement control source (`binky-control` for Binky) | Consume goal, outcome, decision-right, and escalation references; never invent strategic authority |
|
||||
| Organizational role definitions | `role-engine` | Consume stable role references and translate duties/evidence into blueprint inputs |
|
||||
| Agent workforce inventory, assignment, capacity, and portfolio review | `agentic-resources` (recommended boundary; not yet implemented) | Provide blueprint/metric contracts and receive assignment/performance references |
|
||||
| Human workforce planning and mixed-team boundaries | `human-resources` | Align compatible vocabulary without sharing human-sensitive records or treating people as compute |
|
||||
| Agent blueprints and improvement | `kaizen-agentic` | Own |
|
||||
| Repo-local agent instance | Consuming repository | Define through `.kaizen/` contracts owned jointly with runtime extensions |
|
||||
| Monetary budgets, commitments, burn, runway, and AI-plan booked cost | `fin-hub` | Consume provenance-bearing constraints; publish goal/assignment/duty attribution evidence |
|
||||
| Resource demand, capacity, allocation, utilization, and technical economics | `resource-control` | Consume capacity/cost evidence; do not duplicate resource or procurement authority |
|
||||
| Scheduling and claimable work | `activity-core` | Supply manifests, definitions, prepare commands, and event contracts |
|
||||
| Governed unattended execution | `rein-aharness` (selected rein) | Supply blueprint/orientation bundle; receive metrics and improvement evidence |
|
||||
| Model/provider abstraction | `llm-connect` | Runtime dependency outside this repository |
|
||||
|
|
@ -144,8 +160,10 @@ boundary in `INTENT.md`, not an unfinished runtime hidden in this repository.
|
|||
|
||||
The workspace currently has `role-engine`, not a component named
|
||||
`role-manager`. Role-engine explicitly excludes live assignment and execution.
|
||||
An assignment/binding contract therefore needs an explicit owner before roles
|
||||
can be automated at scale.
|
||||
Agentic-resources is the best-fit existing assignment/workforce owner, but its
|
||||
current implemented scope is session improvement and its root SCOPE is stale;
|
||||
that responsibility needs an explicit boundary decision before roles can be
|
||||
automated at scale.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -159,7 +177,12 @@ can be automated at scale.
|
|||
containing blueprint/protocol/ramp assets; currently not the canonical
|
||||
organization-wide role catalog
|
||||
- **Assignment / binding**: a record that selects who or what fills a role in a
|
||||
specific context; ownership is not yet standardized
|
||||
specific goal/context under a leadership mandate and resource envelope;
|
||||
agentic-resources is the recommended owner
|
||||
- **Leadership mandate**: explicit delegation of goal decomposition, decision
|
||||
rights, review, and escalation; not implied by an agent or role name
|
||||
- **Resource envelope**: provenance-bearing financial, token, time, capacity,
|
||||
and attention constraints delegated to an assignment
|
||||
- **Instance**: consumer-owned declaration binding a blueprint to target,
|
||||
cadence, policy lane, tool profile, budget, memory, and metrics
|
||||
- **Engagement**: a client-scoped lifecycle and custody boundary for staffed work
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
|
|||
| workplan | KAIZEN-WP-0010 | finished | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0010-forgejo-pypi-migration.md |
|
||||
| workplan | KAIZEN-WP-0011 | finished | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0011-repository-health-normalization.md |
|
||||
| workplan | KAIZEN-WP-0012 | finished | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0012-scope-intent-role-automation-assessment.md |
|
||||
| workplan | KAIZEN-WP-0013 | finished | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0013-agent-workforce-goal-budget-governance.md |
|
||||
| task | T01 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0003-measurement-loop.md |
|
||||
| task | T02 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0003-measurement-loop.md |
|
||||
| task | T03 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0003-measurement-loop.md |
|
||||
|
|
@ -138,3 +139,7 @@
|
|||
| task | KAIZEN-WP-0012-T02 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0012-scope-intent-role-automation-assessment.md |
|
||||
| task | KAIZEN-WP-0012-T03 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0012-scope-intent-role-automation-assessment.md |
|
||||
| task | KAIZEN-WP-0012-T04 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0012-scope-intent-role-automation-assessment.md |
|
||||
| task | KAIZEN-WP-0013-T01 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0013-agent-workforce-goal-budget-governance.md |
|
||||
| task | KAIZEN-WP-0013-T02 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0013-agent-workforce-goal-budget-governance.md |
|
||||
| task | KAIZEN-WP-0013-T03 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0013-agent-workforce-goal-budget-governance.md |
|
||||
| task | KAIZEN-WP-0013-T04 | done | — | workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0013-agent-workforce-goal-budget-governance.md |
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -30,12 +30,13 @@ now exist elsewhere:
|
|||
evidence.
|
||||
|
||||
The missing link is a governed, machine-readable chain from a role definition
|
||||
to a specific agent assignment and executable instance. The runtime path itself
|
||||
is no longer hypothetical: activity-core's queue and rein-aharness's generic
|
||||
`agent-session` approach are implemented. However, the current queue payload
|
||||
and harness intake do not carry an explicit role, assignment, or arbitrary
|
||||
agent-instance reference. Rein-aharness currently infers the agent from a small
|
||||
fixed definition/label map and otherwise defaults to `coach`.
|
||||
through an authorized goal and constrained workforce allocation to a specific
|
||||
agent assignment and executable instance. The runtime path itself is no longer
|
||||
hypothetical: activity-core's queue and rein-aharness's generic `agent-session`
|
||||
approach are implemented. However, the current queue payload and harness intake
|
||||
do not carry an explicit goal, leader, role, assignment, budget envelope, or
|
||||
arbitrary agent-instance reference. Rein-aharness currently infers the agent
|
||||
from a small fixed definition/label map and otherwise defaults to `coach`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Naming and ownership finding
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -51,11 +52,55 @@ This matters because role-engine's `INTENT.md` explicitly says:
|
|||
- machinery should be added only for demonstrated consumer requirements.
|
||||
|
||||
Therefore “roles as defined by role-manager” is treated here as “roles defined
|
||||
by role-engine.” A separate **assignment/binding owner** is still required. It
|
||||
could be a deliberately introduced role-manager service, a consumer-owned
|
||||
assignment manifest indexed by State Hub, or an extension of an existing
|
||||
system—but that ownership decision should be explicit rather than silently
|
||||
changing role-engine's purpose.
|
||||
by role-engine.” `agentic-resources` is the best-fit existing repository to
|
||||
become the **agent workforce and assignment manager**, subject to an explicit
|
||||
INTENT/SCOPE decision there. That preserves role-engine's catalog boundary and
|
||||
avoids introducing a role-manager service before a separate runtime service is
|
||||
actually needed. Consumer-owned assignment manifests can remain the durable
|
||||
source while agentic-resources indexes, plans, and governs the portfolio.
|
||||
|
||||
## Agentic-resources and human-resources finding
|
||||
|
||||
`agentic-resources` is **not intent-only**, although its root `SCOPE.md` is a
|
||||
stale generated placeholder. Its finished AGENTIC-WP-0002 through WP-0011 work
|
||||
implements a substantial Helix Forge loop:
|
||||
|
||||
- capture and normalize Claude, Codex, and Grok coding sessions;
|
||||
- retain raw/digested memory within storage budgets;
|
||||
- detect cost, failure, success, and infrastructure-friction signals;
|
||||
- curate evidence-backed solution patterns with human approval;
|
||||
- distribute approved patterns into agent environments;
|
||||
- measure before/after effectiveness and fleet trends;
|
||||
- publish weekly retrospectives and correlate with Kaizen project metrics.
|
||||
|
||||
That is already an **agent performance and development** subsystem. It is a
|
||||
natural foundation for agent inventory, selection, assignment, capacity
|
||||
planning, performance review, development, reallocation, and retirement. It
|
||||
does not currently implement those workforce-management records, nor does its
|
||||
current session-memory code understand organizational goals or financial
|
||||
budget envelopes.
|
||||
|
||||
`human-resources` is the useful sibling model, but is much earlier: its current
|
||||
implementation is a draft workflow registry and assessment loop covering
|
||||
current-state inventory, automation potential, human-touch boundaries, and
|
||||
readiness. Its INTENT explicitly includes human goal-setting, feedback,
|
||||
coaching, compensation, workforce planning, and development. The two resource
|
||||
systems should share vocabulary where useful—goal assignment, accountability,
|
||||
capacity, performance evidence, development plan, lifecycle—without combining
|
||||
human-sensitive records with agent telemetry or pretending humans and agents
|
||||
have identical authority and welfare concerns.
|
||||
|
||||
Recommended boundary for agentic-resources:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Own:** agent workforce inventory, fit/selection evidence, assignments,
|
||||
capacity allocations, performance/development plans, portfolio reviews, and
|
||||
rebalance/retirement recommendations.
|
||||
- **Consume:** leadership goals and mandates, role-engine definitions, Kaizen
|
||||
blueprints/metrics, fin-hub constraints, resource-control evidence, State Hub
|
||||
work/outcomes, and runtime status.
|
||||
- **Do not own:** company strategy, the meaning of organizational roles,
|
||||
financial truth or spending authority, resource procurement, credentials,
|
||||
scheduling, or execution.
|
||||
|
||||
## Assessment against INTENT.md
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -130,21 +175,109 @@ Important existing controls include:
|
|||
This means the next work is integration and governance, not building another
|
||||
scheduler or agent runtime.
|
||||
|
||||
## Goal, leadership, and budget governance spine
|
||||
|
||||
Role automation needs a control hierarchy above the execution backbone:
|
||||
|
||||
```text
|
||||
organizational intent
|
||||
↓
|
||||
leadership-owned goals and outcome measures
|
||||
↓
|
||||
financial/resource/attention envelopes
|
||||
↓
|
||||
agentic-resources workforce plan and RoleAssignment
|
||||
↓
|
||||
Kaizen blueprint + consumer-owned AgentInstance
|
||||
↓
|
||||
activity-core scheduled duty → rein-aharness bounded run
|
||||
↓
|
||||
outcome, cost, evidence, escalation
|
||||
↓
|
||||
leadership review + workforce rebalance + blueprint improvement
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
There is no single generic goal/leadership repository in the current
|
||||
workspace. Goal authority is contextual. For Binky Hedgehog GmbH,
|
||||
`binky-control` is the ratified company brain: it owns company intent, success
|
||||
milestones, autonomy lanes, decision queues, and the founder-attention budget.
|
||||
Other organizations or clients need an equivalent accountable control source.
|
||||
Agentic-resources may translate a goal into workforce allocation, but it must
|
||||
not invent or silently reprioritize strategic goals.
|
||||
|
||||
Leadership is an accountable relationship, not a prompt adjective. A
|
||||
`LeadershipMandate` should identify:
|
||||
|
||||
- the organization/engagement and accountable leader or leadership agent;
|
||||
- the goal(s) the leader may decompose and the outcomes it must preserve;
|
||||
- decision rights, delegation depth, and prohibited commitments;
|
||||
- who may approve, pause, reallocate, or terminate work;
|
||||
- reporting/review cadence and the escalation chain;
|
||||
- conflict-resolution order when goals or constraints compete;
|
||||
- the time/attention budget expected from human reviewers.
|
||||
|
||||
An agent may lead other agents only inside this mandate. Role wording alone
|
||||
must never create authority, and a leadership agent cannot widen its own budget
|
||||
or tool grants.
|
||||
|
||||
### Budget layers and enforcement
|
||||
|
||||
“Budget” must not collapse into one token integer:
|
||||
|
||||
| Constraint | Authority/source | Allocation/control | Hard enforcement |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| Monetary budget, commitments, burn, runway | `fin-hub` | Leadership plus agentic-resources consume bounded constraint signals | Financial/approval systems; no autonomous spend outside an approved envelope |
|
||||
| Infrastructure/model capacity and technical economics | `resource-control` | Agentic-resources uses forecasts, allocations, and optimization evidence | Platform/provider quotas and owning operators |
|
||||
| AI-plan entitlement and booked effectiveness | `fin-hub`, joined to State Hub token evidence | Portfolio review and model/profile selection | Provider entitlement plus runtime policy |
|
||||
| Per-run tokens and wall time | Delegated `ResourceEnvelope` | Agent instance/duty allocation | rein-aharness / llm-connect budget tracker and timeout |
|
||||
| Concurrent agents and duty capacity | Agentic-resources workforce plan | Assignment allocator | activity-core eligibility plus harness worker/profile limits |
|
||||
| Human attention and decision load | Organization leadership source; Binky example in `binky-control` | Decision batching and escalation policy | Approval queues and office-hour/autonomy lanes |
|
||||
|
||||
Fin-hub already exposes provenance-bearing budget-ceiling, commitment,
|
||||
burn-pressure, and runway-pressure signals and owns booked AI-plan cost and
|
||||
entitlements. Resource-control explicitly defers budget authority to fin-hub
|
||||
and owns resource demand, capacity, utilization, allocation, and technical cost
|
||||
evidence. Agentic-resources should consume both and allocate agent capacity
|
||||
within them; it should not create a parallel money ledger or procurement
|
||||
authority.
|
||||
|
||||
The shared `ResourceEnvelope` should support:
|
||||
|
||||
- stable ID, authority/source reference, period, scope, and currency/unit;
|
||||
- hard ceiling, soft target, warning thresholds, and reserve;
|
||||
- financial, token, wall-time, concurrency, and human-attention dimensions;
|
||||
- amount allocated, committed, consumed, forecast, and remaining, with unknown
|
||||
distinct from zero;
|
||||
- allowed reallocation authority and approval threshold;
|
||||
- cost-attribution key and goal/assignment/duty correlation;
|
||||
- exhaustion behavior: refuse, degrade, defer, or prepare an approval package;
|
||||
- evidence timestamps and supersession/version links.
|
||||
|
||||
Activity-core should schedule only eligible allocations, while rein-aharness
|
||||
enforces the per-run slice. Agentic-resources controls the period/portfolio
|
||||
allocation and proposes rebalancing. Leadership decides goal priority and any
|
||||
material budget or authority change.
|
||||
|
||||
## The missing role-to-run contract
|
||||
|
||||
Four distinct records must remain separate:
|
||||
The following records must remain distinct even when one manifest references
|
||||
several of them:
|
||||
|
||||
| Record | Question answered | Recommended owner |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| `RoleDefinition` | What outcomes, duties, authority, interfaces, and evidence define the role? | role-engine |
|
||||
| `AgentBlueprint` / executable Role package | How can an agent perform a safe subset of those duties? | kaizen-agentic |
|
||||
| `RoleAssignment` | Which agent instance fills which role, for whom, on what targets and dates? | Explicit new owner or consumer-owned manifest indexed centrally |
|
||||
| `StrategicGoal` | What outcome matters, why, by when, and how will success be judged? | Accountable organization/engagement leadership source |
|
||||
| `LeadershipMandate` | Who may decompose the goal, direct work, decide, and escalate? | Accountable organization/engagement leadership source |
|
||||
| `ResourceEnvelope` | Which financial, token, time, capacity, and attention constraints apply? | Fin-hub/resource-control/leadership facts composed into a delegated envelope |
|
||||
| `RoleAssignment` | Which agent instance fills which role, for which goals, within which mandate and envelope? | Recommended: agentic-resources, with consumer-owned manifest as source |
|
||||
| `AgentInstance` | Which blueprint, cadence, lane, profile, budget, memory, and runtime pin apply? | Consuming repository, validated by kaizen-agentic and the selected rein |
|
||||
|
||||
The first implementation should define a versioned `RoleAssignment` contract
|
||||
with at least:
|
||||
|
||||
- stable assignment ID and lifecycle state;
|
||||
- `goal_refs`, accountable outcome owner, and leadership-mandate reference;
|
||||
- `role_ref` containing role ID plus immutable revision/version;
|
||||
- `blueprint_ref` containing agent name plus package/version or content digest;
|
||||
- client/tenant and one or more target references;
|
||||
|
|
@ -152,6 +285,7 @@ with at least:
|
|||
- expected outputs and evidence for each duty;
|
||||
- cadence/event trigger references and timezone;
|
||||
- autonomy lane, named tool profile, token/time budget, and harness-major pin;
|
||||
- resource-envelope references plus duty-level allocation and exhaustion policy;
|
||||
- credential-route **references**, never secret values;
|
||||
- approval and escalation rules derived from role decision rights;
|
||||
- memory/metrics custody location and retention classification;
|
||||
|
|
@ -159,6 +293,42 @@ with at least:
|
|||
|
||||
## Required changes by repository
|
||||
|
||||
### Organization leadership/control source
|
||||
|
||||
1. Publish stable goal and leadership-mandate records with accountable owners,
|
||||
outcomes, measures, priority, horizon, decision rights, and escalation.
|
||||
2. Delegate bounded financial, capacity, token, time, and attention envelopes;
|
||||
do not express “use judgment” as unlimited authority.
|
||||
3. Resolve cross-goal priority and approve material reallocation, spending,
|
||||
external commitments, or expansion of autonomy.
|
||||
4. For the Binky company context, reuse `binky-control` intent, milestones,
|
||||
autonomy lanes, decision packages, and founder-attention policy instead of
|
||||
creating parallel company governance in an agent repository.
|
||||
|
||||
### agentic-resources
|
||||
|
||||
1. Deliberately refine INTENT/SCOPE from the implemented Helix Forge
|
||||
session-improvement subsystem into an agent-workforce control boundary.
|
||||
2. Define agent inventory, `RoleAssignment`, capacity allocation,
|
||||
performance/development plan, portfolio review, and retirement contracts.
|
||||
3. Match roles and blueprints to delegated goals using evidence; record why an
|
||||
assignment is suitable and which role duties remain unstaffed.
|
||||
4. Consume fin-hub constraint signals and resource-control evidence to allocate
|
||||
period budgets without copying financial or resource ledgers.
|
||||
5. Aggregate run outcomes/costs by goal, role, assignment, and duty; recommend
|
||||
continue, coach/refine, reallocate, pause, or retire.
|
||||
6. Require leadership approval for goal reprioritization, material envelope
|
||||
changes, and authority expansion.
|
||||
|
||||
### human-resources
|
||||
|
||||
1. Reuse compatible goal, accountability, capacity, review, and development
|
||||
vocabulary where it helps human/agent collaboration.
|
||||
2. Keep human-sensitive records, compensation, welfare, employment, and
|
||||
relational judgment separate from agent telemetry and automated scoring.
|
||||
3. Represent mixed human-agent teams and handoffs without treating people as
|
||||
interchangeable compute resources.
|
||||
|
||||
### role-engine
|
||||
|
||||
1. Add stable revision metadata or a small machine-readable companion format
|
||||
|
|
@ -176,14 +346,15 @@ with at least:
|
|||
former should be a derived execution package, not a competing organizational
|
||||
role source.
|
||||
3. Add a compiler/scaffolder that consumes a pinned role definition plus an
|
||||
assignment and produces:
|
||||
assignment, goal, mandate, and resource-envelope references and produces:
|
||||
- a bound agent blueprint;
|
||||
- protocols and success metrics;
|
||||
- `.kaizen/schedule.yml` base/runtime fields;
|
||||
- activity-core definition/rule fragments;
|
||||
- validation evidence showing which role duties are covered or excluded.
|
||||
4. Add schema validation for blueprint version, role revision, idempotency,
|
||||
expected output, evidence, and escalation metadata.
|
||||
expected output, evidence, goal traceability, budget/refusal behavior, and
|
||||
escalation metadata.
|
||||
5. Close the improvement promotion loop: evidence → proposed blueprint change →
|
||||
tests/evaluation → human approval → versioned canary → rollback or promote.
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -192,8 +363,9 @@ with at least:
|
|||
1. Keep schedule and queue ownership.
|
||||
2. Extend the task/`ops_run` contract with structured execution metadata instead
|
||||
of encoding it only in labels or prose. Minimum useful fields are
|
||||
`goal_refs`, `leadership_mandate_ref`, `resource_envelope_ref`,
|
||||
`assignment_id`, `role_id`, `duty_id`, `agent_instance`, `blueprint_ref`,
|
||||
`expected_output`, and a correlation/run key.
|
||||
`expected_output`, allocated run budget, and a correlation/run key.
|
||||
3. Emit `labels: [automated, agent-session]` and
|
||||
`approach_hint: agent-session` for governed agent sessions.
|
||||
4. Resolve only active, enabled assignments and generate a unique run for each
|
||||
|
|
@ -206,25 +378,37 @@ with at least:
|
|||
2. Replace fixed label-to-agent inference for role sessions with an explicit
|
||||
validated `agent_instance`/blueprint reference from the run contract.
|
||||
3. Verify the run's assignment is active and its role/blueprint/runtime versions
|
||||
match the repo manifest.
|
||||
match the repo manifest; refuse expired mandates or envelopes.
|
||||
4. Enforce duty-level tool profile, target allow-list, budget, timeout,
|
||||
concurrency, and escalation policy.
|
||||
5. Return compact structured evidence: outcome, artifact path, commit, target,
|
||||
blueprint/role/assignment revisions, metrics, and refusal/escalation reason.
|
||||
goal/blueprint/role/assignment revisions, allocated/consumed budget,
|
||||
metrics, and refusal/escalation reason.
|
||||
6. Separate deterministic connectors from the LLM session. For example,
|
||||
Telegram collection or publishing should be bounded adapters; the model
|
||||
should receive prepared data and should not gain arbitrary network access.
|
||||
|
||||
### State Hub and policy/identity systems
|
||||
|
||||
1. Index assignments and correlation IDs without becoming the role source or
|
||||
runtime.
|
||||
2. Connect `activity_run → ops_run → harness execution → artifact/commit →
|
||||
kaizen metrics` for review and audit.
|
||||
1. Index goals, mandates, envelopes, assignments, and correlation IDs without
|
||||
becoming their authoritative source or the runtime.
|
||||
2. Connect `goal → assignment → activity_run → ops_run → harness execution →
|
||||
artifact/commit → kaizen metrics → workforce review` for audit.
|
||||
3. Represent human-needed/refused/escalated outcomes explicitly.
|
||||
4. Route credential needs through the catalog/OpenBao path and enforce technical
|
||||
authorization independently of role wording.
|
||||
|
||||
### fin-hub and resource-control
|
||||
|
||||
1. Fin-hub remains authoritative for monetary budgets, commitments, burn,
|
||||
runway, AI-plan booked cost, entitlement, and viability signals.
|
||||
2. Resource-control remains authoritative for resource identity, demand,
|
||||
capacity, utilization, allocation evidence, and technical economics.
|
||||
3. Expose provenance-bearing constraints with stable period/scope keys so
|
||||
agentic-resources can allocate without guessing or treating unknown as zero.
|
||||
4. Accept goal/assignment/duty attribution on usage and outcome evidence while
|
||||
keeping allocation evidence distinct from booked spend.
|
||||
|
||||
## Proposed instance shape
|
||||
|
||||
This is a **target contract**, not the current kaizen schedule schema:
|
||||
|
|
@ -235,6 +419,10 @@ timezone: Europe/Berlin
|
|||
harness: 0
|
||||
assignments:
|
||||
community-manager-coulomb:
|
||||
goal_refs:
|
||||
- binky-control:goal:coulomb-community-health
|
||||
leadership_mandate_ref: binky-control:mandate:community-operations
|
||||
accountable_outcome_owner: founder
|
||||
role_ref:
|
||||
repository: role-engine
|
||||
id: community-manager
|
||||
|
|
@ -243,15 +431,22 @@ assignments:
|
|||
name: community-manager
|
||||
package_version: "<kaizen-agentic-version>"
|
||||
target: coulomb-society-operations
|
||||
resource_envelopes:
|
||||
financial: fin-hub:budget:coulomb-community:2026-Q3
|
||||
capacity: agentic-resources:envelope:community-ops:2026-W34
|
||||
attention: binky-control:attention:founder:2026-W34
|
||||
duties:
|
||||
weekly-community-health:
|
||||
goal_ref: binky-control:goal:coulomb-community-health
|
||||
cadence: weekly
|
||||
cron: "0 9 * * 1"
|
||||
enabled: true
|
||||
expected_output: reports/community-health/YYYY-MM-DD.md
|
||||
lane: green
|
||||
tool_profile: community-observe-report
|
||||
budget: 40000
|
||||
run_budget_tokens: 40000
|
||||
run_timeout_seconds: 900
|
||||
exhaustion: defer-and-report
|
||||
approval: none
|
||||
publication-draft:
|
||||
cadence: weekly
|
||||
|
|
@ -259,6 +454,7 @@ assignments:
|
|||
expected_output: outbox/community-update-YYYY-MM-DD.md
|
||||
lane: green
|
||||
tool_profile: community-draft-only
|
||||
run_budget_tokens: 30000
|
||||
approval: human-before-publish
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
@ -283,18 +479,24 @@ Pilot sequence:
|
|||
|
||||
1. Pin the role-engine revision and identify which Community Manager success
|
||||
criteria the brief measures.
|
||||
2. Create a Kaizen blueprint/protocol and tests for evidence quality,
|
||||
2. Record the leadership-owned goal, accountable outcome owner, review cadence,
|
||||
and bounded financial/capacity/attention envelopes.
|
||||
3. Have agentic-resources create the assignment and allocate a weekly duty/run
|
||||
budget without copying the authoritative budget ledger.
|
||||
4. Create a Kaizen blueprint/protocol and tests for evidence quality,
|
||||
provenance, privacy handling, and “insufficient evidence” refusal.
|
||||
3. Create a consumer-owned assignment and strict read/report-only instance.
|
||||
4. Have a deterministic adapter place a sanitized activity snapshot in the
|
||||
5. Create a consumer-owned assignment and strict read/report-only instance.
|
||||
6. Have a deterministic adapter place a sanitized activity snapshot in the
|
||||
target repo or artifact input; do not expose general Telegram credentials to
|
||||
the model session.
|
||||
5. Register an activity-core weekly definition that emits an `agent-session`
|
||||
7. Register an activity-core weekly definition that emits an `agent-session`
|
||||
run with explicit assignment and duty identity.
|
||||
6. Run through rein-aharness, producing only a local report commit.
|
||||
7. Require human review and measure correctness, provenance, usefulness,
|
||||
8. Run through rein-aharness, producing only a local report commit.
|
||||
9. Require human review and measure correctness, provenance, usefulness,
|
||||
false assertions, runtime, tokens, and escalation quality.
|
||||
8. Complete five clean scheduled/forced cycles before removing any manual
|
||||
10. Review goal progress and envelope burn through agentic-resources; reallocate
|
||||
or pause if marginal value is poor or leadership priorities change.
|
||||
11. Complete five clean scheduled/forced cycles before removing any manual
|
||||
fallback or considering a write-capable duty.
|
||||
|
||||
Only after the observation/reporting pilot is stable should the system add
|
||||
|
|
@ -310,6 +512,10 @@ For this system, fully automated should mean:
|
|||
- work is emitted once, claimed safely, and retried within policy;
|
||||
- the exact role, duty, blueprint, target, runtime, and policy versions are
|
||||
known before execution;
|
||||
- the run traces to a leadership-owned goal, accountable owner, active mandate,
|
||||
and unexpired resource envelope;
|
||||
- portfolio and per-run financial/token/time/attention constraints are checked,
|
||||
with unknown never treated as unlimited or zero;
|
||||
- the agent receives bounded context and tools;
|
||||
- success is verified against an explicit output/evidence contract;
|
||||
- results and costs are correlated and reviewable;
|
||||
|
|
@ -322,19 +528,26 @@ while only its safe, explicitly assigned duties are automated.
|
|||
|
||||
## Recommended implementation order
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Ownership decision:** confirm role-engine as definition source and choose
|
||||
the assignment/binding owner and canonical name.
|
||||
2. **Contracts:** role revision metadata, RoleAssignment v1, role-to-blueprint
|
||||
coverage, and structured `ops_run` execution context.
|
||||
3. **Adapters and validation:** kaizen compiler/scaffolder plus explicit
|
||||
role-agent intake in rein-aharness.
|
||||
4. **Read-only pilot:** Community Manager weekly health brief, human-reviewed,
|
||||
five clean cycles.
|
||||
5. **Production controls:** dashboards, alerts, retry/dead-letter policy,
|
||||
1. **Ownership decisions:** confirm role-engine as definition source,
|
||||
agentic-resources as agent-workforce/assignment owner, and the contextual
|
||||
leadership source for goals and mandates.
|
||||
2. **Governance contracts:** StrategicGoal, LeadershipMandate,
|
||||
ResourceEnvelope, RoleAssignment, role-to-blueprint coverage, and structured
|
||||
`ops_run` execution context.
|
||||
3. **Constraint integration:** consume fin-hub budget/viability signals,
|
||||
resource-control capacity evidence, and organization attention/autonomy
|
||||
policy without duplicating their authority.
|
||||
4. **Adapters and validation:** Kaizen compiler/scaffolder, agentic-resources
|
||||
allocator, and explicit role-agent intake in rein-aharness.
|
||||
5. **Read-only pilot:** Community Manager weekly health brief, human-reviewed,
|
||||
goal- and budget-correlated, for five clean cycles.
|
||||
6. **Production controls:** dashboards, alerts, retry/dead-letter policy,
|
||||
pause/rollback, version canary, secret-route/policy audit.
|
||||
6. **Improvement closure:** use measured pilot evidence to version and canary a
|
||||
blueprint refinement without rewriting the source role contract.
|
||||
7. **Improvement closure:** use measured pilot evidence to rebalance the agent
|
||||
portfolio and version/canary a blueprint refinement without rewriting the
|
||||
leadership goal or source role contract.
|
||||
|
||||
This route reuses the platform that is already live, preserves each
|
||||
repository's stated intent, and concentrates new work on the one genuinely
|
||||
missing capability: governed role assignment and binding.
|
||||
repository's stated intent, and concentrates new work on the genuinely missing
|
||||
capability: goal-directed, leadership-accountable, budget-constrained agent
|
||||
workforce allocation.
|
||||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,81 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
id: KAIZEN-WP-0013
|
||||
type: workplan
|
||||
title: "Agent workforce, goal, leadership, and budget governance"
|
||||
domain: agents
|
||||
repo: kaizen-agentic
|
||||
status: finished
|
||||
owner: codex
|
||||
topic_slug: custodian
|
||||
created: "2026-08-20"
|
||||
updated: "2026-08-20"
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
# KAIZEN-WP-0013 — Agent workforce, goal, leadership, and budget governance
|
||||
|
||||
## Assess sibling resource-management repositories
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: KAIZEN-WP-0013-T01
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Review agentic-resources and human-resources intent, scope, workplans, and
|
||||
implementation evidence, plus authoritative budget and resource-control
|
||||
boundaries.
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** agentic-resources is not intent-only: it implements a tested
|
||||
multi-agent session capture, pattern curation/distribution, measurement, and
|
||||
retrospective loop. Its root SCOPE is stale and it does not yet implement agent
|
||||
assignments, goal allocation, or portfolio budgets. Human-resources remains a
|
||||
planning/workflow-registry scaffold. Fin-hub owns budgets and viability signals;
|
||||
resource-control owns technical resource and cost evidence.
|
||||
|
||||
## Define goals, leadership, and constrained allocation model
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: KAIZEN-WP-0013-T02
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: high
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Extend the role-agent readiness architecture with explicit organizational
|
||||
goals, leadership/accountability, agent-workforce allocation, and layered
|
||||
financial, resource, token, time, and attention constraints.
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** the assessment now defines a leadership-to-workforce control spine,
|
||||
StrategicGoal, LeadershipMandate, ResourceEnvelope, RoleAssignment, and
|
||||
AgentInstance separation, layered constraint authority/enforcement, and a
|
||||
goal/budget-correlated pilot path.
|
||||
|
||||
## Reconcile KaizenAgentic ecosystem scope
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: KAIZEN-WP-0013-T03
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Update SCOPE ownership mappings so agentic-resources, human-resources, fin-hub,
|
||||
resource-control, and organization-specific leadership sources are represented
|
||||
without moving their responsibilities into kaizen-agentic.
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** SCOPE now maps organization leadership, role-engine,
|
||||
agentic-resources, human-resources, fin-hub, resource-control, activity-core,
|
||||
and rein-aharness to distinct ownership concerns.
|
||||
|
||||
## Validate and close out
|
||||
|
||||
```task
|
||||
id: KAIZEN-WP-0013-T04
|
||||
status: done
|
||||
priority: medium
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Run repository checks, synchronize generated work records and State Hub, record
|
||||
the findings, and close the workplan.
|
||||
|
||||
**Result:** full pytest, `make release-check`, `make agents-validate`, and
|
||||
`git diff --check` pass. State Hub consistency and production UUID registration
|
||||
are handled through the normal closeout path.
|
||||
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue