derive-quality-is-comprehensively-code-enforced

OUT derived (depth 2)

All derive pipeline quality constraints — structural validation, retraction guards, environment isolation, format contracts, AND minimum-antecedent requirements — are enforced through code-level validation, ensuring no invalid proposals can reach the database regardless of LLM prompt compliance.

Summary

The derive pipeline's quality controls are claimed to be fully enforced in code rather than relying on the LLM to follow instructions correctly, covering everything from structure checks to minimum-antecedent requirements. This is currently marked as not holding, which means at least some quality constraint likely depends on prompt compliance rather than hard validation, leaving a gap where invalid proposals could slip through.

Justifications

SL — Defensive code validation and the prompt/parser round-trip contract provide comprehensive code-level enforcement — but only once the minimum-antecedents rule is moved from prompt instructions to code validation

Antecedents (all must be IN):

  • derive-pipeline-is-defensive — The derive pipeline applies multiple defensive measures: fail-soft validation, Jaccard-based retraction guard, and environment variable stripping to prevent recursive spawning
  • derive-prompt-roundtrips-through-parser — The `### DERIVE` / `### GATE` format is a shared contract between `DERIVE_PROMPT` LLM output, `parse_proposals()` input, and `write_proposals_file()` output, forming a closed serialization loop

Unless (any of these IN defeats this justification):

  • derive-min-antecedents-is-prompt-only — The minimum-2-antecedents rule for derived beliefs is enforced only by the LLM prompt instructions, not validated in code by `validate_proposals`.

Details