Design Artifact Decomposition
Purpose
Do not jump directly from a TDD to a task list.
First convert the TDD into an explicit registry of design artifacts:
Requirement
→ Verified Gap
→ Verified TDD Decision
→ Design Artifact Registry
The registry is the source of truth for detailed-design coverage.
Inputs
- authoritative requirement
- verified gap analysis
- VERIFIED technical design
- TDD verification report
- current repository
- test design if already available
Artifact Types
Use the smallest meaningful technology-neutral type:
- CLASS / INTERFACE
- MODULE / COMPONENT
- API CONTRACT
- DATA MODEL
- CONFIGURATION
- PERSISTENCE
- INTEGRATION
- RUNTIME FLOW
- STATE MACHINE
- ERROR HANDLING
- SECURITY
- OBSERVABILITY / AUDIT
- TEST SUPPORT
- MIGRATION / COMPATIBILITY
- DOCUMENTATION
- OTHER
Do not force Java/REST concepts onto non-Java/non-REST systems.
1. Extract TDD Decisions
Assign stable IDs:
TD-001, TD-002, ...
Every material design decision must be represented.
2. Derive Artifacts
Assign:
DA-001, DA-002, ...
Each artifact must represent one cohesive implementation/design responsibility.
Do not create artifacts merely because a file exists. Do not merge unrelated responsibilities only to reduce artifact count.
2A. Proposed Unit Ownership Closure
Before finalizing artifact boundaries, enumerate all implementation-significant PROPOSED units from the VERIFIED TDD.
For each unit assign exactly one ownership disposition:
DEDICATED_ARTIFACT
or
SUBORDINATE_TO:<ART-ID>
SUBORDINATE_TO is valid only when the owning artifact responsibility explicitly includes the
subordinate unit. Do not hide a distinct implementation responsibility inside an unrelated
artifact merely to avoid another ART ID.
Create:
| Proposed Unit | TDD Evidence | Responsibility | Ownership Disposition | Owning ART-ID | Why Ownership Is Valid | Covered? |
|---|
Required threshold:
PROPOSED_UNIT_OWNERSHIP_COVERAGE = 100%
If any significant proposed unit has no valid explicit owner:
ARTIFACT_DECOMPOSITION_INCOMPLETE
Do not proceed to DD generation.
Boundary Rule
Artifact decomposition is responsibility-based, not "one class = one artifact".
A dedicated artifact is warranted when a unit has materially independent responsibility, contract, lifecycle, dependency boundary, failure semantics, state/config ownership, or verification obligation.
A subordinate unit is acceptable only when that ownership is explicit.
3. Existing vs Proposed
For each artifact classify:
- EXISTING_MODIFIED
- PROPOSED_NEW
- EXISTING_UNCHANGED_REFERENCE
For existing artifacts verify source anchors. For proposed artifacts state the proposed ownership/location without pretending it exists.
4. Dependency Graph
Record dependencies:
DA-A requires DA-B
Classify dependency:
- API/CONTRACT
- DATA
- RUNTIME
- CONFIGURATION
- BUILD
- TEST
- MIGRATION
- ORDERING
Detect obvious circular dependency in the proposed implementation order. If architectural circularity is intentional, explain it rather than hiding it.
5. Design Artifact Registry
For every artifact, the registry must explicitly record its owned proposed units, including subordinate units.
Recommended field:
Owned Proposed Units:
- <primary unit>
- <explicit subordinate unit>
The registry is the canonical owner map used by DD, WBS, and later verification.
Required table:
| Artifact ID | Name | Type | Requirement IDs | Gap IDs | TDD Decision IDs | Existing/Proposed | Source Anchor / Proposed Location | Dependencies | DD Status | DD Verification | Notes |
|---|
Initial statuses:
DD Status = NOT_STARTED
DD Verification = NOT_VERIFIED
6. Coverage Matrix
Create:
| Requirement ID | Gap ID | TDD Decision ID | Artifact IDs | Covered? | Evidence |
|---|
No verified TDD decision may be orphaned.
7. Completion Gate
Proposed Unit Ownership Completion
Before ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_READY:
- every implementation-significant proposed unit has exactly one owner
- every subordinate unit is explicitly named under the owning artifact
- no proposed unit is owned only by implication
- ownership coverage = 100%
Otherwise:
ARTIFACT_DECOMPOSITION_INCOMPLETE
Before ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_READY:
[ ] every material verified TDD decision has artifact coverage
[ ] every artifact maps backward to TDD/requirement/gap
[ ] existing source anchors are verified where applicable
[ ] proposed artifacts are explicitly marked
[ ] dependencies are recorded
[ ] no obvious implementation-relevant TDD decision is hidden in prose
[ ] no source-resolvable HIGH/CRITICAL decomposition ambiguity remains
Statuses:
- ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_READY
- ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_PARTIAL
- ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_BLOCKED
- ARTIFACT_DECOMPOSITION_INCOMPLETE
Output
Use the active workflow-declared registry output path. Do not invent or reuse a legacy shared registry filename.
emitted_statuses:
- ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_READY
- ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_PARTIAL
- ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_BLOCKED
- ARTIFACT_DECOMPOSITION_INCOMPLETE
4.0 Registry Evidence Contract
ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_READY is invalid unless the artifact contains BOTH:
Proposed Unit Inventory
| Proposed Unit | Type | TDD Evidence | Implementation-Significant? | Reason |
|---|
This inventory is unit-centric, not artifact-centric.
Proposed Unit Ownership Closure
| Proposed Unit | Ownership Disposition | Owning ART-ID | Explicit Responsibility Text | Coverage |
|---|
Required:
inventory rows >= 1 when TDD proposes implementation units
ownership rows == inventory rows
coverage = 100%
unowned units = 0
An artifact list that merely maps ART IDs to themselves is NOT an ownership closure.
Do not emit ARTIFACT_REGISTRY_READY without these tables.