docs: add ADR-0014 and provenance chain glossary entries

Record the decision to add INFO as a third skill-audit finding level
(observational, non-actionable, does not affect pass/fail). Add
Provenance chain and INFO (finding level) to CONTEXT.md glossary.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
2026-06-27 09:09:43 +00:00
parent 562527dfc4
commit 8dc5241c1c
2 changed files with 38 additions and 0 deletions

View File

@@ -0,0 +1,32 @@
# Add INFO as a third finding level in skill-audit reports
`skill-audit` shipped with two finding levels: FAIL (blocks shipping) and
SUGGESTION (optional improvement). Provenance validation introduced observations
that are worth surfacing but not actionable: a `references/*.md` file with no
`source_keys` when `sources.md` is present, and a skill-level source slug absent
from upstream research docs. Folding these into SUGGESTION would imply they
should be fixed — but retroactive source backfill after a reference file is
written is unreliable and not expected practice. A third level, INFO, is therefore
introduced: observational, no action implied, never changes the pass/fail verdict.
Counted separately in the result block as `· P info`.
## Considered options
**SUGGESTION with softer language (rejected)** — describe the finding as "worth
noting" rather than "should be fixed." Rejected because SUGGESTION already carries
an established meaning in the report; softening the language creates ambiguity
without changing the semantic level. Downstream consumers (humans, skill-improve)
would need to infer intent from prose rather than a stable token.
**Suppress entirely (rejected)** — omit findings that have no fix. Rejected
because the observations are useful for a human reviewing provenance completeness.
Silent omission loses information without reducing noise.
## Consequences
- Report format gains a third token: FAIL, SUGGESTION, INFO. INFO findings do not
affect pass/fail; counted as `· P info` in the result block.
- `skill-improve` currently ignores anything below FAIL — that behavior remains
correct; INFO findings are not forwarded to it.
- Future soft observations should use INFO rather than SUGGESTION when no fix is
actionable.