A body of knowledge, and the record of its verification status. The two halves are one destination on purpose: a paper without a status is an assertion, and a status without a paper is a badge.
Four shelves. Presented as a technical report series: title, version, status, freeze date, abstract. Specification grade is not implementation status, and this page never conflates the two.
Establishes the interaction barrier: prompt authorship is an implementation vocabulary, and requiring it reproduces the same exclusion the command line produced before the graphical interface. Argues the transfer from prompt engineering to intent engineering, in which the prompt becomes an internal serialization format rather than the program.
Establishes the access barrier: English authorship, foreign payment instruments and dollar pricing are prerequisites no architecture has removed. Develops the language-free canonical representation and the evidence base for the Intent Understanding Layer, drawn from the kirana and informal-credit domain.
Establishes the trust barrier: acceptance of what cannot be inspected is faith, not verification. Moves the burden of proof to the runtime through observable construction — decision objects, rendered narration and session replay. Version 1.0 is gated on WAR-TRACE-003.
| Doctrine | Subject | Status | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Doctrine 001 | Observe · Understand · Influence | Proposed | — |
| Doctrine 002 | Intent, never language | Proposed | — |
| Doctrine 003 | Trust is a property of the runtime | Proposed | — |
| Doctrine 004 | The Entry Doctrine — context precedes intent | Ratified · frozen | 24 July 2026 |
Doctrine 004, The Entry Doctrine, is the one ratified governance artifact in the corpus. It is also the reason this website has no intent box: it draws the line between an entry surface, where a human's first sentence enters the runtime, and an evidence surface, which is what wesimplifai.com is.
| ID | Scope | Grade | Implementation status |
|---|---|---|---|
| WAR-SPEC-001 | Intent Graph (WAR-IR) — the canonical representation | RFC-2119 |
SPECIFIED
Specified; pre-prototype · row 1 |
| WAR-SPEC-002 | Intent Understanding Layer — the seven-stage pipeline | RFC-2119 |
SPECIFIED
Specified; pre-prototype · row 2 |
| WAR-SPEC-003 | Planner and per-provider compilers | RFC-2119 |
SPECIFIED
Specified; pre-prototype · row 3 |
| WAR-SPEC-004 | Clarification Engine and Build Along™ | RFC-2119 |
SPECIFIED
Specified; pre-prototype · row 4 |
| WAR-SPEC-005 | Confidence propagation | RFC-2119 |
SPECIFIED
Specified; pre-prototype · row 5 |
A capability pack is a versioned, conformance-tested unit of business function. It is the unit of composition, of reuse, and — eventually — of a third-party ecosystem. Each must clear a nine-point bar before it is declared frozen. The capability registry is not open; it is a 2027–28 item and nothing about it is published here.
Intent → Build Along™ → blueprint → generated homepage → Artifact Center. Organisation-aware, persistent, downloadable. Runs on WAR in production today.
Structured objectives → provider routing → live web-grounded research → cited artifact. Runs on WAR in production today.
The verification status of everything above.
Fifteen rows. Every claim, its evidence source, its status today, and the specific gate it must pass before we may describe it as current.
WAR-TRACE-001 — a complete end-to-end worked trace of a Hinglish kirana build request, following one utterance from language through the graph, the plan and the compiler to a verified artifact.
Running it surfaced five defects in the specifications it was tracing. It is a complete worked trace on paper — not an execution log.
Three buckets. Only Today uses present-tense verbs; only In development carries dates. The roadmap and the Claims Register must never disagree, and where they would, the register wins.
What comes next →Four shelves are full. Four others were considered and are not here, and we would rather say why than let the gap look accidental.
Verification Reports. Conformance suites exist in the repository, but a shelf under that name implies systematic or third-party verification that does not exist. It would assert more than the Claims Register does, which inverts the whole discipline.
Engineering Journal and Change Logs. A public changelog on a pre-launch runtime is a maintenance commitment we are not yet making, and it would leak build status continuously. A dated log of what actually shipped is a stronger addition later, because it is retrospective and therefore checkable.
Architecture Decision Records. Real, and worth publishing — but they reference unshipped work and are governance-internal today. Deferred one release.
Research Notes. This shelf opens when there are three notes to put on it.
