M3 implementation brief: Authorization vertical slice¶
Work contract¶
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Milestone | M3 |
| Status | verified |
| Primary gaps | G2, G4, G11, G12 |
| Definition items | D-04 runtime mode, D-05, D-06 |
| Depends on | M0, M1, and M2 verified |
| Mutation boundary | Conductor emits control-plane review and authorization artifacts; executing agents own project-state and production writes |
Objective¶
Prove one end-to-end supervisory conversation in which a requesting agent prepares a version-bound plan, resolves review findings, receives a compact execution authorization, and is forced to reauthorize after material change.
M3 proves the control plane. It does not execute the real-estate golden path, perform broad candidate triage, or make Conductor a Notion/GitHub/production writer.
Locked inputs¶
- Four MCP operations:
prepare,converse,authorize, andfeedback. - Proposed plans, review artifacts, and authorization records are distinct.
authorizedmeans Conductor-authorized, never human-approved.- One authorization covers one Initiative, workstream, stage, role, exact plan digest, corpus revision, context revision, scope, and conditions.
- Material plan, context, target, role, stage, or corpus changes invalidate the authorization.
- Deterministic validation and supervisory judgment are both visible.
- Human escalation is reserved for authority exceptions and unresolved organization decisions.
- Executing agents apply authorized changes and persist project-state evidence.
- Operator-mediated
ghremains the GitHub read mode unless a separate unattended runtime decision is approved.
Deliverables¶
M3.1 Plan bundle¶
- Versioned plan-bundle schema.
- Initiative/workstream/stage/role and exact-target bindings.
- Proposed operations, expected artifacts, evidence, rollback, assumptions, open questions, and pattern choice.
- Stable canonical serialization and plan digest.
M3.2 Preparation¶
preparegathers approved state, estate, corpus, and source envelopes.- Source availability, freshness, truncation, and permission gaps remain explicit.
- Compact initial pack includes selection reasons and expansion handles.
- Preparation cannot authorize execution.
M3.3 Conversational review¶
converserecords questions, findings, refusals, revision requests, escalations, and resolved decisions.- Review distinguishes deterministic failures from judgment-led concerns.
- Review artifacts cite the exact plan and context versions.
M3.4 Authorization¶
authorizeaccepts only a validated, reviewed, exact plan.- Authorization envelope is immutable, compact, signed or integrity-bound, and independently verifiable.
- Status is one of
not-reviewed,changes-requested,authorized, orrefused. - Invalidation rules reject stale or materially changed execution.
- Authorization IDs come from the Conductor identity allocator.
M3.5 Feedback¶
feedbackaccepts execution outcome and evidence against an authorization.- Feedback never mutates binding corpus automatically.
- Project-state writeback remains the executing agent's responsibility.
M3.6 Evaluation and audit¶
- Positive end-to-end fixture through authorization and feedback.
- Negative fixtures for digest changes, stale context, role/stage/target drift, missing evidence, unauthorized expansion, replay, and false human-approval representation.
- Immutable authorization and review-event audit records.
Entry conditions¶
- M1 receives independent verification of its state/read foundation.
- M3 decision package is approved.
- Implementation issues define bounded schema, preparation, review, authorization, and feedback work.
All entry conditions are satisfied. Tracking issue: #15, with bounded work packages #16 through #20.
Implementation evidence¶
- Versioned schemas cover proposed plans, prepared contexts, review artifacts, authorization envelopes, and feedback.
- The public MCP surface exposes
prepare,converse,authorize, andfeedback; none performs project-state or production mutation. - Compact-context expansion generates a different deterministic context revision. Review and authorization reject it until a newly digested plan binds that revision.
- Authorization envelopes are allocator-identified, integrity-bound, immutable in the audit store, expiring, and one-shot.
- The positive lifecycle and adversarial digest, context, target, stage, role,
evidence, expansion, replay, and false-human-approval cases are executable in
service/tests/test_m3_control_plane.py. - Local verification: 16 focused tests and 114 complete service tests pass; strict documentation build and diff checks pass.
Independent verification is recorded in
verification.md. The reviewer reproduced 28 focused
positive/adversarial checks, all 114 service tests, strict documentation, and
the diff check at c40c0ea.
Exit conditions¶
- A fresh requesting agent can prepare a plan from approved remote context.
- Review findings produce a revised, separately identified plan.
- An exact reviewed plan receives a verifiable authorization envelope.
- Any material mutation invalidates that authorization.
- Expansion requires a new plan and authorization.
- Feedback is bound to the authorization and cannot promote corpus policy.
- Conductor performs no routine project-state or production mutation.
- Independent verification reproduces positive and adversarial fixtures.
Non-goals¶
- Real-estate execution and decisive reuse/extend/new outcome (M4).
- Learning candidate promotion (M5).
- Second-organization portability (M6).
- Unattended GitHub credentials unless separately approved as necessary.