Content Articulation Proposal

Articulation Proposal

Review advisory proposals against exact inspection evidence. A proposal may come from built-in Joint inference or one explicitly selected replacement provider. This atomic skill proposes or edits candidates; it never authors joints or selects a provider fallback.

When to Use

Use after content-articulation-inspection and before candidate selection. If the outer reasoner did not select a proposal provider, retain not_requested and skip this leaf.

Limitations

• Articulation v1 supports only native-ready revolute and prismatic joints.
• Candidate ID, endpoints, motion type, and native readiness are immutable in an agent decision edit. Undeclared pass-through fields from Joint are also immutable.
• Provider proposals are advisory. They never constrain or substitute for the outer-authored canonical graph.
• A selected replacement provider requires a preparation whose proposal status is not_evaluated; not_requested and already-available modes fail closed.
• Selected-leaf data binds only artifact-json; trusted direct calls may use the mutually exclusive artifact-json or http-json adapters. A failed provider never falls back to Joint inference, the classic controller, or the other adapter.
• Every provider attempt requires a fresh --output-dir. An existing output directory fails closed so a retry cannot overwrite or mix attempt evidence.
• Every invoked attempt writes a typed terminal receipt while its create-only storage remains writable. Provider, transport, HTTP, invalid-response, input-drift, and local-publication failures are not unavailable or pass; local faults are never attributed to the provider. Irrecoverable terminal storage failure poisons the root as infrastructure failure. The root binds every retained regular output and self-validates after sealing.

Prerequisites

Read the observation-bound candidate document and usd-cli evidence. Verify their digests before reasoning about a candidate.

Instructions

1. If a replacement provider was selected, invoke exactly one public proposal leaf and retain its provider, capability, non-secret provider/service alias, adapter, configuration, implementation, preparation, evidence digests, and complete prior-terminal lineage.
2. Review each candidate in canonical order.
3. Compare moving parts, fixed parent, axis, limits, confidence, and unresolved reasons against hierarchy, properties, picks, and focused renders.
4. Keep rejected candidates in the complete decision set.
5. Hand advisory findings, never proposal authority, to content-articulation-review.

Command Reference

Invoke an exact external-provider payload without Joint inference:

content-workflow-cli articulation propose \
  --preparation path/to/selected-pending-preparation.json \
  --output-dir path/to/proposal-leaf \
  --intent "Suggest articulation candidates from the exact evidence." \
  --provider-adapter artifact-json \
  --provider-id replacement-provider \
  --capability-id articulation-proposal-v1 \
  --provider-payload path/to/provider-domain-proposal.json

Use --provider-adapter http-json with an explicit credential-free --provider-url, --provider-endpoint-alias, and optional --provider-token-env for a live endpoint. The command emits the exact request, native payload, v2 EmbeddedArticulationProviderProposal, and a separately written proposal-bound preparation. Pass that bound preparation to the normal embedded run. No authoring command belongs to this skill.

Replace a prior terminal attempt only from a new root and bind the exact lineage:

content-workflow-cli articulation propose \
  --preparation path/to/selected-pending-preparation.json \
  --output-dir path/to/replacement-attempt \
  --intent "Retry through the explicitly selected provider." \
  --provider-adapter artifact-json \
  --provider-id replacement-provider \
  --capability-id articulation-proposal-v1 \
  --provider-payload path/to/provider-domain-proposal.json \
  --replaces-terminal-receipt path/to/prior/articulation_proposal_attempt_terminal.json \
  --replacement-reason "The explicit provider payload was corrected."

content-workflow-cli articulation validate-attempt \
  --terminal-receipt path/to/replacement-attempt/articulation_proposal_attempt_terminal.json

Common Workflows

For a drawer bank, review every prismatic candidate separately even when their evidence and axes look similar.

Output Format

The replacement-provider leaf produces ArticulationProposalProviderAttemptPublication; its v2 proposal binds exact provider, capability, and readable non-secret provider/service alias provenance plus preparation/evidence/request digests, and its terminal receipt binds the complete attempt or exact partial outputs after a storage/readback failure. publication_failure identifies a local create-only storage/readback fault. ArticulationProposalProviderPublication remains an import/deserialization-only frozen compatibility shape; the current leaf does not emit it. Semantic review still produces the complete outer-owned canonical graph. See agentic/docs/articulation_preparation_attempt_contract.md.

Troubleshooting

Reject rather than promote unsupported or contradictory proposal facts. An invoked-attempt failure with a written receipt exits 1 and prints its identity as JSON on stderr. Exit 2 covers pre-invocation contract errors and irrecoverable terminal-storage failures that leave a poisoned root; interruptions preserve a terminal when storage permits and re-raise. Every path stops without fallback. Preserve the failed root; a retry uses the replacement flags above. Gather new evidence in a new run when immutable inputs are wrong.