feat(processes): authoring contract — a process is a shape, never a script
CI & Build / Python lint (push) Successful in 3s
CI & Build / Plugin hooks (push) Successful in 9s
CI & Build / integration (push) Successful in 17s
CI & Build / TypeScript typecheck (push) Successful in 32s
CI & Build / Python tests (push) Successful in 46s
CI & Build / Build & push image (push) Successful in 26s

Operator's generalization of #2582: the benefit of nearly every stored
process is the accumulated SHAPE — steps, taxonomy, quality bar — and a
process must not force anything or overwrite the intent of the request
that invoked it. create_process now states the authoring side of the
composition contract: no embedded approach mandates, no pre-granted
approvals, clarify steps seed from the conversation instead of
re-asking it.

(All three stored processes were also audited: DRY Pass and Rulebook
Review were already propose-approve-apply with no forcing language;
both gained the seeded-clarify line — data changes, live already.)

Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-08-10 09:40:23 -04:00
co-authored by Claude Fable 5
parent 9c68faa0bd
commit 5cb7cfe706
+9
View File
@@ -49,6 +49,15 @@ async def create_process(
) -> dict:
"""Create a stored process (a reusable saved prompt).
AUTHOR IT AS A SHAPE, NOT A SCRIPT. A process's value is the accumulated
procedure — the steps, the taxonomy, the quality bar, the failure modes
worth guarding. It must not force anything the invoking conversation
didn't choose: no embedded approach mandates, no pre-granted approvals
(a fan-out opt-in, a permission to act), no assumptions that overwrite
the live request's intent. The conversation that invokes it supplies the
parameters and always wins where they disagree; write clarify steps to
seed from what the operator already said, not to re-ask it.
Args:
title: Process name, e.g. "Drift Audit" (required).
body: The full prompt to run later (markdown). Required.