grahama1970/acceptance-contract

acceptance-contract은(는) 무엇을 하나요?

Use this before implementation when a brief, ticket, email, README, zip bundle, or evidence packet needs to become executable acceptance criteria.

First command for implementation work:

skills/acceptance-contract/run.sh ensure <zip|directory|file> \
  --out /tmp/acceptance-contract \
  --project-name oai-trial \
  --goal-mode create

ensure is the mechanical guard: it validates an existing acceptance_bundle.json, auto-extracts one when missing, and fails closed when the supplied source bundle has changed since the frozen contract was written. Its JSON receipt includes an acceptance_contract.progress.v1 meter with percent, checks, outstanding, and next_steps. Do not implement from a brief until ensure returns status=PASS and the progress meter says what remains.

Pass the client brief, zip bundle, or deliberately staged spec directory as input. The CLI refuses repository roots by default so implementation files cannot silently become the acceptance source. Use --allow-repo only when the human explicitly asks for a repository-wide contract.

For high-stakes client briefs, run a second-line $ask roundtable review on the brief/zip plus acceptance_bundle.json before implementation. Include WebGPT as one reviewer when available. Ask plainly: "Are these contract requirements correct, and did we miss anything?" Require reviewers to check whether any client obligation is missing from the frozen contract, especially representation classes, typed values, boundary conditions, and disqualifying failure modes. The review is advisory evidence; deterministic gates still own PASS/FAIL. The oai-trial review found that typed-scalar coverage must also require canonical equivalence: formatted policy strings, digit-only numeric scalars, decimal forms, scientific notation, and SQLite numeric values cannot be separate acceptance universes.

What it does

skills/acceptance-contract/run.sh extract <zip|directory|file> \
  --out /tmp/acceptance-contract \
  --project-name oai-trial \
  --goal-mode create

Outputs:

• acceptance_bundle.json — pydantic-validated source of truth
• acceptance_report.json — create_report.report.v1 JSON
• acceptance_report.md — rendered through $create-report
• IMMUTABLE_GOAL.draft.md — draft goal text or amendment proposal

Commands:

• extract always writes a fresh draft bundle/report from the supplied source.
• ensure validates or creates the frozen bundle and rejects stale source hashes.
• validate validates an existing acceptance_bundle.json only and prints the progress meter.
• status reads an existing acceptance_bundle.json and prints only the machine-readable progress meter.

Goal policy

Default behavior is draft, not mutate.

• --goal-mode create writes a new immutable-goal draft.
• --goal-mode amend writes an amendment proposal, not a silent edit.
• --goal-mode none extracts requirements without goal text.

A real immutable goal should be created or amended only after human approval. That rule exists because oai-trial failed when implementation-defined tests stood in for the client brief.

Boundary

This skill extracts clear, source-backed requirements from supplied local files. It does not claim the extracted contract is complete when the source bundle is ambiguous. Ambiguity becomes open_questions[] and a Needs Changes report. It refuses repo roots by default because oai-trial failed when code-shaped checks stood in for the delivered brief.

For Battle, pass the resulting acceptance_bundle.json as the arena acceptance_floor and map each acceptance_cases[].id to one or more generator case ids in the Battle campaign profile's required_case_ids. Those mapped cases are the contract floor that must pass before fuzz or beyond-contract attacks can be credited. Do not make Battle invent the requirements.