Operationalize
Turn repeated, cited expertise into a proposal for a reusable artifact.
- Require cited evidence for the expertise: real occurrences or an explicit
authoritative source, subject to the three-instance floor below when the
proposal abstracts a rule.
- State the triggering situation, desired behavior, inputs, outputs, negative
examples, and evidence.
- Apply the process-artifact creation gate before choosing a shape. A proposed
certificate, ledger, dashboard, matrix, meta-report, readiness review,
speculative check, skill, or workflow must name its concrete consumer, the
subject or release decision it gates, the observed defect class justifying
it, and its deletion condition. Code or process introduced solely to consume
the artifact does not qualify. If any answer is missing, propose no artifact
and redirect to the caller-requested subject. Minimal integrity or recovery
state is allowed only when necessary to prevent a named evidence-loss or
corruption mode.
- Choose the smallest fitting shape: reference, skill, deterministic check, or
caller-owned workflow.
- Search existing capabilities and prefer extension over duplication.
- Provide an activation example, holdout/negative example, owner, and rollback
or deletion condition.
- Return the proposal inline to the caller or an authoring specialist. When
the caller asks for a durable artifact, write it under
.agents/scratch/operationalize/ first and return the path; the proposal
is advisory either way.
Three-instance floor
A rule needs three real occurrences before it may be abstracted. Count only
occurrences that actually happened and can be cited — sessions, diffs,
verdicts, or artifacts that resolve in this repository — not hypothetical
cases or restatements of one event. With one or two occurrences, propose a
quote-anchored reference note instead and stop short of a rule. An explicit
authoritative source may substitute for occurrences only when the proposal
transcribes that source rather than generalizing beyond it. The named failure
mode is premature abstraction: a rule minted from a single vivid incident
that encodes the incident's accidents as policy.
Reapply proof
Every proposed rule carries a reapply proof: a demonstration that the rule,
as written, reproduces the correct decision on at least one of its source
occurrences without extra context. If applying the drafted rule to its own
source moment requires unwritten judgment, the rule is not yet operational —
tighten the wording until the reapply succeeds, or downgrade the proposal to
a reference. When the proposal creates process, the reapply proof must also
show that the creation gate returns the correct create-or-drop decision. No
reapply proof, no rule.
Quote-bank anchors
Tie each rule to its source moments with a quote bank: for every counted
occurrence, a short verbatim quote or command/output excerpt plus a locally
resolving citation (repo path, .agents/ao digest, or session artifact). An
occurrence that cannot be quoted and cited does not count toward the
three-instance floor. Anchors let a later reader test whether the rule still
matches what actually happened, instead of trusting the abstraction.
Boundary
Operationalize does not create tracker work, promote policy, start a factory,
validate its own output, or control another invocation. The proposal is
advisory: adopting it into a skill, deterministic check, reference, or
workflow is a separate, caller-selected step — skill-builder,
workflow-builder, or a fresh RPI — never performed here. The proposal
cannot promote itself, and process-only output earns no capability credit.
1---2name: operationalize3description: Distill repeated, evidence-backed expertise into a proposed skill, check, reference, or workflow artifact. Triggers: "operationalize this", "turn this expertise into a reusable capability".4---5
6# Operationalize
7
8Turn repeated, cited expertise into a proposal for a reusable artifact.
9
101. Require cited evidence for the expertise: real occurrences or an explicit
11 authoritative source, subject to the three-instance floor below when the
12 proposal abstracts a rule.
132. State the triggering situation, desired behavior, inputs, outputs, negative
14 examples, and evidence.
153. Apply the process-artifact creation gate before choosing a shape. A proposed
16 certificate, ledger, dashboard, matrix, meta-report, readiness review,
17 speculative check, skill, or workflow must name its concrete consumer, the
18 subject or release decision it gates, the observed defect class justifying
19 it, and its deletion condition. Code or process introduced solely to consume
20 the artifact does not qualify. If any answer is missing, propose no artifact
21 and redirect to the caller-requested subject. Minimal integrity or recovery
22 state is allowed only when necessary to prevent a named evidence-loss or
23 corruption mode.
244. Choose the smallest fitting shape: reference, skill, deterministic check, or
25 caller-owned workflow.
265. Search existing capabilities and prefer extension over duplication.
276. Provide an activation example, holdout/negative example, owner, and rollback
28 or deletion condition.
297. Return the proposal inline to the caller or an authoring specialist. When
30 the caller asks for a durable artifact, write it under
31 `.agents/scratch/operationalize/` first and return the path; the proposal
32 is advisory either way.
33
34## Three-instance floor
35
36A rule needs three real occurrences before it may be abstracted. Count only
37occurrences that actually happened and can be cited — sessions, diffs,
38verdicts, or artifacts that resolve in this repository — not hypothetical
39cases or restatements of one event. With one or two occurrences, propose a
40quote-anchored reference note instead and stop short of a rule. An explicit
41authoritative source may substitute for occurrences only when the proposal
42transcribes that source rather than generalizing beyond it. The named failure
43mode is premature abstraction: a rule minted from a single vivid incident
44that encodes the incident's accidents as policy.
45
46## Reapply proof
47
48Every proposed rule carries a reapply proof: a demonstration that the rule,
49as written, reproduces the correct decision on at least one of its source
50occurrences without extra context. If applying the drafted rule to its own
51source moment requires unwritten judgment, the rule is not yet operational —
52tighten the wording until the reapply succeeds, or downgrade the proposal to
53a reference. When the proposal creates process, the reapply proof must also
54show that the creation gate returns the correct create-or-drop decision. No
55reapply proof, no rule.
56
57## Quote-bank anchors
58
59Tie each rule to its source moments with a quote bank: for every counted
60occurrence, a short verbatim quote or command/output excerpt plus a locally
61resolving citation (repo path, `.agents/ao` digest, or session artifact). An
62occurrence that cannot be quoted and cited does not count toward the
63three-instance floor. Anchors let a later reader test whether the rule still
64matches what actually happened, instead of trusting the abstraction.
65
66## Boundary
67
68Operationalize does not create tracker work, promote policy, start a factory,
69validate its own output, or control another invocation. The proposal is
70advisory: adopting it into a skill, deterministic check, reference, or
71workflow is a separate, caller-selected step — `skill-builder`,
72`workflow-builder`, or a fresh RPI — never performed here. The proposal
73cannot promote itself, and process-only output earns no capability credit.