blue/.blue/docs/rfcs/0037-single-source-protocol-authority.draft.md
Eric Garcia 02901dfec7 chore: batch commit - ADRs, RFCs, dialogues, spikes, and code updates
ADRs:
- Update 0008-honor, 0009-courage, 0013-overflow, 0015-plausibility
- Add 0017-hosted-coding-assistant-architecture

RFCs:
- 0032: per-repo AWS profile configuration (draft)
- 0033: round-scoped dialogue files (impl + plan)
- 0034: comprehensive config architecture (accepted)
- 0036: expert output discipline (impl)
- 0037: single source protocol authority (draft)
- 0038: SDLC workflow discipline (draft)
- 0039: ADR architecture greenfield clarifications (impl)
- 0040: divorce financial analysis (draft)
- 0042: alignment dialogue defensive publication (draft)

Spikes:
- Read tool token limit on assembled dialogues
- RFC ID collision root cause
- Expert agent output too long
- Judge writes expert outputs
- Blue MCP server on superviber infrastructure
- Playwright MCP multiple window isolation

Dialogues: 16 alignment dialogue records

Code:
- blue-core: forge module enhancements
- blue-mcp: env handlers and server updates
- alignment-expert agent improvements
- alignment-play skill refinements
- install.sh script

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-01-30 16:28:31 -05:00

97 lines
4.6 KiB
Markdown

# RFC 0037: Single-Source Protocol Authority
| | |
|---|---|
| **Status** | Draft |
| **Date** | 2026-01-26 |
| **Dialogue** | [Remove SKILL.md / build_judge_protocol Redundancy](/tmp/blue-dialogue/remove-skill-protocol-redundancy/dialogue.md) |
| **Depends On** | RFC 0033 (round-scoped dialogue files), RFC 0036 (expert output discipline) |
---
## Summary
The alignment dialogue system had two sources of truth describing the same workflow: `SKILL.md` (315-line skill file) and `build_judge_protocol()` in `dialogue.rs` (Rust function generating runtime JSON). This RFC strips SKILL.md to a thin entry point (73 lines) and establishes `build_judge_protocol()` as the sole authority for all runtime behavior.
## Problem
`SKILL.md` and `build_judge_protocol()` both contained:
- Round workflow steps (7-step process)
- Agent prompt template structure
- File architecture (scoreboard.md, tensions.md, round-N.summary.md)
- Artifact writing instructions
- Context instructions for round 1+
- Scoring dimensions and convergence criteria
When one changed, the other had to change. They had already drifted — SKILL.md lacked artifact writing instructions while the protocol included them, causing the Judge to skip writing scoreboard.md, tensions.md, and round-N.summary.md.
**Root cause**: SKILL.md tried to be both a discovery document and a runtime specification.
## Analysis (from 5-Expert Alignment Dialogue)
The dialogue explored three approaches and reached 5/5 convergence on Approach C (validated redundancy). However, post-dialogue review overruled that conclusion: **we don't need to build for human operators**. SKILL.md is not read by humans browsing documentation — it's loaded by the skill system at invocation time, immediately before `blue_dialogue_create` returns the Judge Protocol.
This makes Approach A (strip SKILL.md) correct. The dialogue's concern about "orphaning human operators" was based on a false premise.
## Solution
### Strip SKILL.md to Entry Point
SKILL.md retains only:
- **Frontmatter** — name, description (required by skill system)
- **Usage** — invocation syntax and parameters
- **How It Works** — 3-line summary: call `blue_dialogue_create`, get protocol, follow it
- **Expert Selection** — pastry names and tier distribution
- **Blue MCP Tools** — tool names and one-line descriptions
- **Key Rules** — 3 rules (don't participate, spawn parallel, follow protocol)
- **The Spirit of the Dialogue** — philosophy (unique to SKILL.md, not in protocol)
SKILL.md does NOT contain:
- Round workflow steps
- Agent prompt template (or any description of it)
- File architecture diagram
- Artifact writing instructions
- Context instructions for round 1+
- Scoring dimensions or formulas
- Convergence criteria
- `.dialogue.md` format specification
All of the above live exclusively in `build_judge_protocol()`.
### Authority Hierarchy
| Source | Role | Contains |
|--------|------|----------|
| `build_judge_protocol()` | Runtime protocol | Everything: workflow, prompts, file paths, scoring, convergence |
| `SKILL.md` | Thin entry point | Invocation syntax, parameters, "call blue_dialogue_create and follow the protocol" |
There is no overlap to validate. No sync test needed.
## What Changed
- **SKILL.md**: 315 lines → 73 lines. Removed all workflow, scoring, file architecture, template details, and `.dialogue.md` format specification.
- **No code changes**: `build_judge_protocol()` is unchanged. It was already correct.
- **No new tests**: No validation test needed — there's nothing to validate when there's no duplication.
## What Does NOT Change
- **Runtime behavior** — `build_judge_protocol()` output is unchanged
- **File architecture** — RFC 0033 round-scoped files unchanged
- **Agent prompt template** — RFC 0036 structural template unchanged
- **Scoring** — ALIGNMENT = Wisdom + Consistency + Truth + Relationships, unbounded
## Risks
**SKILL.md may be too thin for an LLM that hasn't seen the protocol yet.** The Judge reads SKILL.md before calling `blue_dialogue_create`. If SKILL.md provides zero context about what to expect, the Judge may not know to call `blue_dialogue_create` in the first place. **Mitigation**: SKILL.md retains the "How It Works" section with the 3-step flow (create → receive protocol → follow it), which is sufficient orientation.
## Test Plan
- [ ] Run alignment dialogue with stripped SKILL.md — verify Judge follows protocol correctly
- [ ] Verify artifact files (scoreboard.md, tensions.md, round-N.summary.md) still written
- [ ] Run `cargo test` — existing tests pass (protocol unchanged)
---
*"Right then. Let's get to it."*
— Blue