coulomb/ops-warden
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases 2 Packages Wiki Activity Actions

INTENT §7/§8 + WARDEN-WP-0029: policy front door, build-phase posture, founder surface
All checks were successful
CI Smoke / host-smoke (push) Successful in 0s
Details
CI Smoke / container-smoke (push) Successful in 2s
Details

Browse source 
Founder directive 2026-07-18: agents ask ops-warden what a credential
need requires; the founder is escalated to only for policy-required
decisions/identity acts, preferably via a local web interaction surface
— never tasked with raw mechanics (UI clicks, /tmp file drops).
Organization posture 'build' becomes declared configuration. Workplan:
warden plan front door, posture declaration, warden desk, file-drop
retirement, catalog freshness + agent guidance.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
tegwick 2026-07-18 14:26:15 +02:00
parent 5219104809
commit 29645c9303
2 changed files with 169 additions and 0 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

31
INTENT.md
View file

@ -170,6 +170,37 @@ Every ops-warden action appends metadata-only audit events; `warden activity`
answers *what happened recently* in one command. Compliance checks (scorecard) make
cert-side policy violations visible before they become incidents.
### 7. The founder is escalated to, never tasked with mechanics
*(added 2026-07-18, founder directive — see WARDEN-WP-0029)*
Workers and agents ask **ops-warden** what a credential need requires — never
the founder directly. ops-warden answers three questions, in policy terms:
1. Can this be done autonomously under current policy and posture? → do it /
route it, unattended.
2. Does policy require a founder *decision or identity act* (OIDC login,
Red-lane approval)? → escalate exactly that act, nothing more.
3. Is the need unroutable? → name the missing lane and propose it (CCR),
instead of improvising file drops or UI instructions.
Raw mechanics — "paste this PAT into /tmp", "click through the forgejo admin
UI" — are **anti-patterns**: they leak credentials into CLI history and file
artefacts and burn founder attention on work a lane should do. When founder
interaction *is* required, prefer a purpose-built interaction surface (local
web approval page rendering the exact action) over CLI/file handoffs.
### 8. Posture-aware: the organization is in build phase
Policy answers depend on lifecycle posture. The organization currently runs in
**build phase**: one founder-operator, pre-revenue, velocity prioritized —
pragmatic provisioning (workstation OIDC, per-repo deploy keys, advisory
policy gates) is deliberately acceptable where audit and custody invariants
hold (values only in OpenBao/process env; metadata-only trails). ops-warden
must know the current posture, state it in its answers, and tighten defaults
when the posture graduates (first customer data, first non-founder operator,
production tier). Posture is declared configuration, not tribal knowledge.
---
## Credential flow (target mental model)