Align

Semantic Rigidity Gate

This skill determines whether a node has a uniquely interpretable meaning in the graph.

Alignment does not evaluate completeness or quality. It eliminates semantic ambiguity that would cause reasoning divergence.

[!IMPORTANT] A node is aligned only if its meaning has exactly one causal role. If multiple interpretations are possible, alignment fails.

Core Principle

Validation ensures the graph can exist. Alignment ensures the graph means only one thing.

If alignment fails → different agents may derive different conclusions.

Alignment verifies determinism of interpretation, not properties of the node alone.

Alignment guarantees that traversal meaning is path-independent.

0. Precondition

The node MUST pass validate.

If validation fails → STOP

1. Semantic Topology from Schema

After confirming validate PASS, the agent MUST read docgraph.toml to derive the semantic topology used for alignment.

docgraph.toml is the sole normative source. If unread, the agent MUST stop.

The agent MUST map schema elements into interpretation constraints:

• Node type → causal role candidates (e.g., UC=Intent, FR=Responsibility, MOD=Realization, ADR=Rationale)
• Relation type (r.type) → allowed causal questions (Why/What/How/Boundary/Justification)
• Which relations define "peerhood" for horizontal comparison

Alignment MUST only judge determinism using this schema-derived topology. If the mapping cannot be established, alignment MUST fail (unknown semantics).

2. Role Determinism

The node must belong to exactly one abstraction level:

• Intent (why)
• Responsibility (what)
• Realization (how)
• Constraint (boundary)
• Rationale (justification)

If the node can be interpreted as more than one → FAIL

The role must be inferable from relations, not from description wording. If role changes when ignoring prose, alignment fails.

3. Vertical Determinism

Parent and child relations must not redefine the node's role.

Invalid cases:

• Parent treats node as requirement, child treats it as implementation
• Node alternates abstraction level depending on traversal direction

Result: FAIL

4. Semantic Collision

The graph must not provide multiple answers to the same causal question.

Invalid cases:

• synonymous responsibilities split across nodes
• overlapping definitions describing identical behavior
• two nodes satisfy the same parent relation
• peer boundaries depend on interpretation

Result: FAIL

Minimal Tooling (Observation Only)

Alignment MUST use docgraph for observation. Tools materialize evidence; they do not drive exploration.

docgraph describe

Inspect the target node and its immediate inbound/outbound relations.

docgraph describe <ID>

docgraph query (bounded)

Use bounded queries only to detect ambiguity patterns, never to discover new intent.

Typical checks:

• Competing parents (multiple "Why" justifications)

docgraph query "MATCH (p)-[r]->(n) WHERE n.id='<ID>' RETURN p.id, p.type, r.type"

• Competing children (multiple "How" realizations that imply different roles)

docgraph query "MATCH (n)-[r]->(c) WHERE n.id='<ID>' RETURN c.id, c.type, r.type"

• Peer collision (potential synonyms within the same type)

docgraph query "MATCH (m:<TYPE>) RETURN m.id, m.title"

[!CAUTION] Queries MUST be bounded (1-hop or limited results). If multi-hop traversal is required, switch to reasoning.

What Alignment Does NOT Check

Alignment does not enforce:

• completeness
• coverage
• implementation presence
• formatting quality
• directory structure

Alignment Report

Target

• Node: [ID]

Determinism Results

Final Decision

PASS → Node meaning is uniquely defined FAIL → Node meaning is ambiguous

FINAL DECISION: [PASS/FAIL]

Converted and distributed by TomeVault — claim your Tome and manage your conversions.