specs/PhaseLifecycleUseCases.md enumerates all nine use cases from the
workplan systematically, grounded in the actual schema, code, and the
three real pilot-candidate manifests rather than abstractly. Two
findings surfaced beyond the original scope: first-Phase and
successive-Phase provenance turn out to be one shared modeling
question (both feed T02), and breach-record publication already has a
decided Operator+ rights tier per the Control Plane concept doc while
extension registration/canonicalization does not — recorded as an
explicit open question for WP-0014-T01 instead of an assumption.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
TREV-WP-0012 is the modeling-only workplan requested after using the
Control Plane UI surfaced real gaps: Phase registration has no
structured repo/provenance fields, the ledger URI is hand-typed, and
degeneration policies are opaque ids with no reviewable spec behind
them. It produces a use-cases document and a discussable spec addendum
before any schema/UI implementation.
Two of the use cases uncovered while scoping this turned out to be
bigger than documentation gaps and are tracked as their own workplans
per that direction: TREV-WP-0013 (nothing currently computes or writes
Remission Credit ledger entries at all) and TREV-WP-0014 (Extension
Registry, Breach Record, and Conversion Attestation backends already
exist from WP-0006 but have no Control Plane UI).
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
