Model goal-driven agent workforce governance

.custodian-brief.md

@@ -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

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
+  rein-aharness, role-engine, agentic-resources, human-resources, fin-hub,
-  Forge, and Custodian discovery
+  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
+- **Open maturity gap:** canonical goal/leadership/resource-envelope → role →
-  contract and an end-to-end role-based pilot remain to be implemented
+  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
+Agentic-resources is the best-fit existing assignment/workforce owner, but its
-can be automated at scale.
+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

WORK-RECORDS.md

@@ -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 |

docs/assessments/2026-08-20-intent-role-automation-readiness.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
+through an authorized goal and constrained workforce allocation to a specific
-is no longer hypothetical: activity-core's queue and rein-aharness's generic
+agent assignment and executable instance. The runtime path itself is no longer
-`agent-session` approach are implemented. However, the current queue payload
+hypothetical: activity-core's queue and rein-aharness's generic `agent-session`
-and harness intake do not carry an explicit role, assignment, or arbitrary
+approach are implemented. However, the current queue payload and harness intake
-agent-instance reference. Rein-aharness currently infers the agent from a small
+do not carry an explicit goal, leader, role, assignment, budget envelope, or
-fixed definition/label map and otherwise defaults to `coach`.
+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
+by role-engine.” `agentic-resources` is the best-fit existing repository to
-could be a deliberately introduced role-manager service, a consumer-owned
+become the **agent workforce and assignment manager**, subject to an explicit
-assignment manifest indexed by State Hub, or an extension of an existing
+INTENT/SCOPE decision there. That preserves role-engine's catalog boundary and
-system—but that ownership decision should be explicit rather than silently
+avoids introducing a role-manager service before a separate runtime service is
-changing role-engine's purpose.
+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
+1. Index goals, mandates, envelopes, assignments, and correlation IDs without
-   runtime.
+   becoming their authoritative source or the runtime.
-2. Connect `activity_run → ops_run → harness execution → artifact/commit →
+2. Connect `goal → assignment → activity_run → ops_run → harness execution →
-   kaizen metrics` for review and audit.
+   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.
+5. Create a consumer-owned assignment and strict read/report-only instance.
-4. Have a deterministic adapter place a sanitized activity snapshot in the
+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.
+8. Run through rein-aharness, producing only a local report commit.
-7. Require human review and measure correctness, provenance, usefulness,
+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
+1. **Ownership decisions:** confirm role-engine as definition source,
-   the assignment/binding owner and canonical name.
+   agentic-resources as agent-workforce/assignment owner, and the contextual
-2. **Contracts:** role revision metadata, RoleAssignment v1, role-to-blueprint
+   leadership source for goals and mandates.
-   coverage, and structured `ops_run` execution context.
+2. **Governance contracts:** StrategicGoal, LeadershipMandate,
-3. **Adapters and validation:** kaizen compiler/scaffolder plus explicit
+   ResourceEnvelope, RoleAssignment, role-to-blueprint coverage, and structured
-   role-agent intake in rein-aharness.
+   `ops_run` execution context.
-4. **Read-only pilot:** Community Manager weekly health brief, human-reviewed,
+3. **Constraint integration:** consume fin-hub budget/viability signals,
-   five clean cycles.
+   resource-control capacity evidence, and organization attention/autonomy
-5. **Production controls:** dashboards, alerts, retry/dead-letter policy,
+   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
+7. **Improvement closure:** use measured pilot evidence to rebalance the agent
-   blueprint refinement without rewriting the source role contract.
+   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
+repository's stated intent, and concentrates new work on the genuinely missing
-missing capability: governed role assignment and binding.
+capability: goal-directed, leadership-accountable, budget-constrained agent
+workforce allocation.

workplans/KAIZEN-WP-0013-agent-workforce-goal-budget-governance.md

@@ -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.