randommonicle Enforce invariants in the build
Three-repo convergence. A file declaring itself "the ONLY place model names appear" had zero importers and pinned stale model ids — dead code that looked authoritative. A safety carve-out ("never auto-N/A the lifts section") was enforced only by the absence of a line and regressed silently for five weeks. A design guarantee ("only field X crosses the boundary") had no code behind it. The counter-example that proves the pattern: a config kept honest by a byte-identical unit test never drifted.
The rule
When prose asserts an invariant, ask: can a violation exist without failing the build? If yes, back the invariant with a mechanism — a test, a constraint, a trigger, a lint rule — or delete the assertion. A documented lesson is not a control; only a mechanical step prevents recurrence.
How to apply
- Grep any file that declares its own authority. "The single source of truth for X" is verified by counting its importers; zero importers means the claim is not just false but misleading — dead code that pins external identifiers is worse than ordinary dead code.
- A deliberate duplicate needs a byte-identical test so divergence is a red build, not a discovery.
- A safety carve-out needs a named, tested rule. Encode "never auto-X" as a function
(
autoNaCandidates()style) plus a test asserting the unsafe state cannot occur — never as the absence of a line someone can helpfully add back. - "These must match" needs a drift check — a zero-rows query, a checksum, a CI comparison — per blast-radius-grep's denormalisation rule.
- On finding an unenforced invariant in existing code, add the mechanism in the same change or flag it per flag-deferred-items; do not add another sentence of prose.
What this skill does not do
It does not track deferred work (flag-deferred-items) and does not write the tests themselves (prove-it-can-fail governs their integrity). It converts assertions into mechanisms.
Why
Prose invariants rot precisely because they look official: the next reader assumes the rule is enforced somewhere and edits accordingly. Every incident in the evidence survived weeks of competent review. Evidence: ASH LESSONS_LEARNED 2026-06-10 (lifts carve-out), 2026-07-19 (models.ts); PropOS Session 17 ("a lesson is not a control"); ICC L-020.