Create AI Constitution Document
Repository continuity composition
For repository-scoped work, compose maintain-repository-continuity in
Resume mode before selecting work. After an authorized repository change
passes domain validation, compose Refresh and Verify immediately before
presenting the pull request, and include the reconciled root CONTINUITY.md in
the same change. A policy-permitted no-change or exemption result must be
documented instead of fabricating an edit.
- Contribute: AI participation rules, oversight boundaries, cited policy, validation, and unresolved approvals
- Never claim: That a proposed policy is approved or grants new agent authority
Purpose
Create or update AI_CONSTITUTION.md in conformance with architecture-ai-constitution.
The document must answer:
Under what rules, authority, and oversight may AI systems participate in this work?
Use this skill when
- the canonical document does not exist
- the existing document is incomplete or inconsistent
- upstream architecture changed materially
- the repository architecture system is being established or repaired
- a repeatable, validated authoring workflow is needed
Do not use this skill for
- system prompt disguised as constitution
- granting authority based on capability
- provider-specific rules
- requiring private chain-of-thought
Required inputs
- governing specification and version
- required upstream architecture documents
- applicable policies and decisions
- existing repository evidence
- known conflicts, assumptions, and open questions
Missing evidence must be recorded rather than invented.
Workflow
- inventory current and expected AI use cases
- read identity, epistemology, and applicable policies
- classify actions by impact and reversibility
- define human authority and approval boundaries
- define honesty, evidence, privacy, security, and least-privilege rules
- define instruction precedence and escalation
- test against ambiguous, destructive, and high-impact scenarios
- remove provider-specific prompt and model details
Output contract
Produce:
AI_CONSTITUTION.md
- governing specification identifier and version
- assumptions and unresolved questions
- validation results
- downstream review recommendations
Constraints
- Preserve canonical terminology.
- Separate evidence, inference, proposal, and decision.
- Do not invent organizational intent or authority.
- Do not silently resolve contradictions.
- Do not claim completion when required inputs are missing.
- Keep implementation detail outside the document unless the specification
explicitly requires it.
Validation
Use:
references/validation-checklist.md
and the acceptance criteria in:
architecture-ai-constitution
Completion criteria
1---2name: create-ai-constitution-document3description: Creates or updates AI_CONSTITUTION.md from repository evidence and policy. Use when a project needs to define, repair, or review the rules and oversight under which AI systems may participate in its work.4license: MIT5---67# Create AI Constitution Document89<!-- aether-continuity-disposition: reader-writer -->1011## Repository continuity composition1213For repository-scoped work, compose `maintain-repository-continuity` in14**Resume** mode before selecting work. After an authorized repository change15passes domain validation, compose **Refresh** and **Verify** immediately before16presenting the pull request, and include the reconciled root `CONTINUITY.md` in17the same change. A policy-permitted no-change or exemption result must be18documented instead of fabricating an edit.1920- **Contribute:** AI participation rules, oversight boundaries, cited policy, validation, and unresolved approvals21- **Never claim:** That a proposed policy is approved or grants new agent authority2223## Purpose2425Create or update `AI_CONSTITUTION.md` in conformance with `architecture-ai-constitution`.2627The document must answer:2829> Under what rules, authority, and oversight may AI systems participate in this work?3031## Use this skill when3233- the canonical document does not exist34- the existing document is incomplete or inconsistent35- upstream architecture changed materially36- the repository architecture system is being established or repaired37- a repeatable, validated authoring workflow is needed3839## Do not use this skill for4041- system prompt disguised as constitution42- granting authority based on capability43- provider-specific rules44- requiring private chain-of-thought4546## Required inputs4748- governing specification and version49- required upstream architecture documents50- applicable policies and decisions51- existing repository evidence52- known conflicts, assumptions, and open questions5354Missing evidence must be recorded rather than invented.5556## Workflow57581. inventory current and expected AI use cases592. read identity, epistemology, and applicable policies603. classify actions by impact and reversibility614. define human authority and approval boundaries625. define honesty, evidence, privacy, security, and least-privilege rules636. define instruction precedence and escalation647. test against ambiguous, destructive, and high-impact scenarios658. remove provider-specific prompt and model details6667## Output contract6869Produce:7071- `AI_CONSTITUTION.md`72- governing specification identifier and version73- assumptions and unresolved questions74- validation results75- downstream review recommendations7677## Constraints7879- Preserve canonical terminology.80- Separate evidence, inference, proposal, and decision.81- Do not invent organizational intent or authority.82- Do not silently resolve contradictions.83- Do not claim completion when required inputs are missing.84- Keep implementation detail outside the document unless the specification85 explicitly requires it.8687## Validation8889Use:9091 references/validation-checklist.md9293and the acceptance criteria in:9495 architecture-ai-constitution9697## Completion criteria9899- [ ] The governing specification is identified.100- [ ] Required upstream evidence has been read.101- [ ] The document answers its primary question.102- [ ] Responsibilities and non-responsibilities are respected.103- [ ] Assumptions and unresolved questions are visible.104- [ ] Structural, semantic, relationship, and evidence checks pass.105- [ ] Downstream review needs are reported.