diff --git a/.ciagent/GRILL.md b/.ciagent/GRILL.md index 4e235ce..b27db0b 100644 --- a/.ciagent/GRILL.md +++ b/.ciagent/GRILL.md @@ -1,207 +1,200 @@ # CIAgent Grill Report -## Run: 2026-08-12 (mode: interactive, focus: all axes) — v1.23 Nova Deck Cleanup & Python PPTX +## Run: 2026-08-12 (mode: self-grill, focus: all axes) — v1.24 Consumer Guide Accuracy & Env-Promotion Lifecycle Enforcement -### Overall Verdict: PROCEED-WITH-REVISIONS (confidence: 0.78) +### Overall Verdict: PROCEED (confidence: 0.82) -The plan is fundamentally sound — the empirical checks (image format, Marp -`
` passthrough, versioning, test-inversion completeness) all pass. But -four binding revisions restructure the wave/phase plan and expand the -"penetrate" purge scope. Two axes were escalated-but-resolved (the empirical -verifications de-risked P2 and P3). The plan proceeds with the revisions -below. +The plan is sound. The user directive is clear and binding. The code +integration points are confirmed by inspection. Two binding revisions +applied (both low-risk doc clarifications). No escalations. --- -### Per-Axis Findings +## Axis 1: Feasibility -#### Axis 1 — Scope / over-reach: PASS (conf 0.80) -Building a whole new `render_pptx.py` + markdown parser is significant for a -"deck cleanup" milestone, but REQ-269 explicitly mandates it, the milestone -is NFR docs/render/test-only (no runtime impact), and the dual-PPTX value -(MARP image-of-slide + python structured/editable) is a real deliverable, not -gold-plating. The G-003 split (P3a/P3b) mitigates the parser-complexity risk. -The plan stays in scope; it does not reach into the deck's 4-beat narrative -arc (out-of-scope section confirms). +**Challenge:** Can `run_platform.sh` Step 0b actually run `terraform +destroy` against the prior env's state without the prior env's AWS +credentials? -#### Axis 2 — Hidden dependencies (P3/P4 "zero file overlap"): REVISE → G-002 (conf 0.85) -The "zero file overlap" claim is true for EDITS but false for VERIFICATION. -P3's `render_pptx.py` parsing logic depends on the deck markdown structure -that P4 is simultaneously trimming; P4's verify step runs `render_slides.sh` -that P3 is mid-editing. **Binding revision G-002:** serialize P3→P4. +**Response:** In the same-account case (the scaffold today, per +`core/environments/dev.json`), yes — the deploy role has access to the +shared state bucket and the resources are in the same account. The +`terraform init -reconfigure` re-points to the prior env's state key +within the same bucket. Cross-account is explicitly out of scope +(D-205). **Confidence: 0.85.** -#### Axis 3 — Test inversion risk: PASS (conf 0.92) -The plan's test-update list (Finding 5 / P5 tasks) is complete and accurate. -Empirically confirmed all affected tests: -- `test_marp_deck_not_using_default_theme` (line 66-74: invert — we now USE - `theme: default`) ✓ plan mentions -- `test_marp_deck_uses_sp_theme` (line 55-64: rewrite to assert inline `style:` - block) ✓ plan mentions -- `test_theme_css_*` trio (lines 275, 284, 295: retarget to inline `style:`) ✓ -- `test_html_embeds_theme` (line 353: `--sp-red` → `#D6002A`) ✓ plan mentions -- `test_source_md_*` pair (lines 240, 266: delete — plain `.md` gone) ✓ -- `test_render_slides_script_renders_marp` (line 92: still produces `.pptx` - via marp-cli for the fallback PPTX) — ✓ plan handles -- No latent assertions missed. The plan's enumeration is thorough. +**Challenge:** Does `deletion_protection: false` injection work the same +way as decommission Step 2? -#### Axis 4 — Image-inlining correctness: PASS (conf 0.95) -Empirically verified the rendered HTML at -`docs/presentations/nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.html` uses plain -`` and -`` — standard `` tags -inside Marp's SVG `` wrapper. Zero `xlink:href` occurrences. -The `inline_images.py` regex (`` HTML blocks) plus edge cases -(tables with `**bold**` R/A cells, nested bullets, `class:tall` image alt -text) plus two python-pptx constraints (no CSS font fallback — single -`font.name`; blank layout has no bullets — must inject `` XML). -Finding 3 confirmed the APIs exist but the parser is non-trivial. With P3 -on the serial critical path (G-002), an overflow blocks everything. -**Binding revision G-003:** split P3 into P3a (inline_images + render_slides.sh -+ pyproject — low-risk mechanical) and P3b (render_pptx.py + parser + the -attach_release_asset.py extension — high-risk). +**Verdict:** FEASIBLE. -#### Axis 6 — Benefit callout `
` in Marp: PASS (conf 0.95) -Empirically verified by rendering a minimal test deck through -`@marp-team/marp-cli@4.5.0` (the pinned version): `
text
` -passes through verbatim into the rendered `
`. Marpit's `html: true` -option is on by default; no sanitization of styling divs. The `.benefit` class -in the inline `style:` block will apply. P2's restyle approach is valid. -**P0 risk cleared.** +## Axis 2: Scope -#### Axis 7 — "penetrate" removal completeness: REVISE → G-001 (conf 0.85) -CRITICAL gap. The plan's verify step `grep -ri penetrat docs/presentations/` -misses `docs/scope.md` (line 16: "Nova never penetrates the PDLC") and -`docs/vision.md` (line 18: "It does not penetrate upstream product or -software development lifecycles") — the repo's two core strategic docs. The -term also appears in every `.ciagent/` file (PLAN, REQUIREMENTS, RESEARCH, -CLARIFY, ROADMAP, PROJECT, PERSONAS, NORTH_STAR). The deck does not link out -to these docs, but they are audience-reachable via the repo. -**Binding revision G-001:** purge "penetrate" (and derivatives) from the -entire repo — `docs/` AND `.ciagent/`. P4's verify step becomes -`grep -ri penetrat docs/ .ciagent/` returns nothing. `test_no_penetrate_term` -asserts the same. The deleted plain `.md` (P1) already removes its -occurrence; `docs/scope.md` + `docs/vision.md` reworded in P4; all -`.ciagent/` files reworded across the relevant phases (the phase that owns -each file's edit window). +**Challenge:** Is 4 phases (P1-P3 + P4) the right size, or is this +over-scoped? -#### Axis 8 — Wave 3 parallelization feasibility: REVISE → G-002 (conf 0.85) -Resolved by G-002 (serialize P3→P4). Wave 3 is no longer parallel. P3's -`render_slides.sh` is stable before P4 runs its verify render; P3's parser -is tested against the current (untrimmed) deck before P4 trims it. +**Response:** 15 requirements across 3 execution phases is +well-scoped. P1 (7 REQs, all docs/test) is the largest by count but the +smallest by effort (text edits + test assertions). P2 (6 REQs, feat) is +the core implementation. P3 (2 REQs, test) is coverage. P4 is final +review. This is a tight, coherent milestone. **Confidence: 0.88.** -#### Axis 9 — Phase count vs. value: REVISE → G-004 (conf 0.80) -G-003 split P3 (→8 phases); G-004 merges P5+P6 to compensate. P6 -(final-review-ship) for an NFR docs-only milestone is largely ceremonial — -the review/audit/ship work folds into P5's final commits. **Binding revision -G-004:** merge P5+P6. Net phase count returns to 7. +**Challenge:** Should the cross-account destroy be in scope? -#### Axis 10 — Versioning: PASS (conf 0.95) -`git tag --list 'v1.22.*'` returns nothing — no conflicts. The v1.21.x line -(v1.21.0..v1.21.6) is the precedent; v1.23 tags v1.22.0..v1.22.6 per the -revised phase plan (G-003 split shifts tag numbers; G-004 merge keeps the -final at v1.22.6). +**Response:** No. The scaffold is single-account. Adding cross-account +would require assuming the prior env's role, which needs a trust policy +the scaffold doesn't have yet. Deferring is pragmatic. The Out of Scope +section documents this. **Confidence: 0.85.** + +**Verdict:** PROPERLY-SCOPED. + +## Axis 3: Cost / ROI + +**Challenge:** Is the env-transition feature worth the complexity? + +**Response:** Yes. The user identified a real orphaned-resources risk +that violates the platform's full-lifecycle-management mission. The +fix is a ~80-line Python module + a shell block. The alternative +(blocking env edits, forcing Shape B) contradicts the user's directive. +The ROI is high: closes a real lifecycle gap with minimal code. +**Confidence: 0.90.** + +**Verdict:** JUSTIFIED. + +## Axis 4: Correctness + +**Challenge:** The `detect_prior_env` query — is querying by +`contractId#submittedAt` SK prefix correct for finding the last-applied +env? + +**Response:** The `nova-contracts` table has PK `consumerRepo` and SK +`contractId#submittedAt`. To find the last record for a given +contractId, we query by PK `consumerRepo` + SK `begins_with +"contractId#"` + FilterExpression `status = "submitted"` (or +`#LAST_APPLIED`), sort by `submittedAt` desc, take the first. This is +correct DynamoDB pattern. The `record_applied_env` step writes a new +item with SK `contractId#LAST_APPLIED#` so the detect step +can filter by `begins_with "contractId#LAST_APPLIED#"`. **Confidence: +0.85.** + +**Challenge:** What if the DynamoDB table doesn't exist in local/CI +mode? + +**Response:** The detect step catches `ClientError` / `EndpointNotFound`, +logs a warning, and returns `None` (no prior env). The pipeline proceeds +normally. This is the conservative path — no false-positive destroys. +**Confidence: 0.90.** + +**Verdict:** CORRECT. + +## Axis 5: Testing + +**Challenge:** Can the env-transition behavior be tested without live +AWS? + +**Response:** Yes. `test_env_transition.py` uses moto for DynamoDB +(mock_aws pattern from `test_contract_ingestor.py:74-110`). +`test_run_platform_env_transition.py` uses shell-text assertions +(pattern from `test_pipeline.py:79-95`). No live AWS needed. +**Confidence: 0.92.** + +**Verdict:** TESTABLE. + +## Axis 6: Security + +**Challenge:** Does the destroy step introduce a risk of destroying the +wrong resources? + +**Response:** The destroy targets the prior env's state key +(`spike/{id}/{prior_env}/terraform.tfstate`). The state key is +deterministic and env-scoped. The destroy can only affect resources in +that state file. The `deletion_protection=false` injection is scoped to +the destroy step only — the new env's apply runs with the default +`deletion_protection=true`. **Confidence: 0.88.** + +**Challenge:** Could a malicious consumer trigger a destroy of another +consumer's resources? + +**Response:** No. The DynamoDB query is scoped by PK `consumerRepo` +(the consumer's own repo identity). The destroy runs under the +consumer's ABAC-scoped deploy role, which can only touch resources +tagged `nova:owner=`. A consumer cannot query or destroy +another consumer's stack. **Confidence: 0.90.** + +**Verdict:** SECURE. + +## Axis 7: Maintainability + +**Challenge:** Is the `core/env_transition.py` module a clean +abstraction or a one-off? + +**Response:** It's a reusable module with two functions +(`detect_prior_env`, `record_applied_env`) that encapsulate the +DynamoDB query logic. It can be extended for cross-account destroy in a +future milestone. The shell Step 0b is a thin orchestrator. This is +maintainable. **Confidence: 0.85.** + +**Verdict:** MAINTAINABLE. + +## Axis 8: Docs consistency + +**Challenge:** Will the consumer guide be internally consistent after +P1? + +**Response:** The 5 fixes address all known inconsistencies: field +table ↔ schema, Step 2 ↔ Step 4, Step 5 ↔ environments doc, Step 8 ↔ +per-env section, reference table ↔ sample contracts. The test updates +assert both shapes are documented. A manual end-to-end read in P1's +verification step catches any remaining inconsistency. **Confidence: +0.88.** + +**Verdict:** CONSISTENT. + +## Axis 9: Adversarial + +**Challenge:** What if the consumer edits `environment:` AND changes +other inputs simultaneously? Does the destroy-then-apply still work? + +**Response:** Yes. The destroy step re-resolves the contract with +`environment_override=prior_env` — the other input changes are +irrelevant to the destroy (it destroys whatever is in the prior env's +state). The new apply resolves with the new env + new inputs. The two +operations are independent. **Confidence: 0.85.** + +**Challenge:** What if the prior env's state was already manually +destroyed (e.g., via decommission)? + +**Response:** `terraform destroy` against an empty state is a no-op +(exits 0). The detect step still detects the prior env from DynamoDB, +but the destroy is a no-op. The apply proceeds. This is correct +behavior — no false failure. **Confidence: 0.88.** + +**Verdict:** ROBUST. --- -### Binding Decisions +## Binding revisions applied -| ID | Decision | Confidence | Rationale | -|----|----------|-----------|----------| -| G-001 | Purge "penetrate" (and derivatives) from the entire repo — `docs/` AND `.ciagent/`, not just `docs/presentations/`. P4 verify: `grep -ri penetrat docs/ .ciagent/` returns nothing. `test_no_penetrate_term` asserts the same. `docs/scope.md:16` + `docs/vision.md:18` reworded in P4; all `.ciagent/` files reworded in the phase that owns each file's edit window. | 0.85 | The term appears in the repo's two core strategic docs (audience-reachable) and all internal metadata. REQ-272 says "removed from all presentation files"; the user confirmed a full-repo purge (politically loaded term). The plan's `docs/presentations/`-only grep is a gap. | -| G-002 | Serialize P3→P4. Wave 3 is no longer parallel. P3 completes (stable `render_slides.sh` + tested parser against the current deck) before P4 trims the deck + purges "penetrate" (per G-001). C8's parallelization rationale is overruled. | 0.85 | "Zero file overlap" is true for edits but false for verification: P3's parser depends on the deck structure P4 is trimming; P4's verify render depends on P3's `render_slides.sh` being stable. The interaction risk is the failure mode. | -| G-003 | Split P3 into P3a (inline_images.py + render_slides.sh inline-images step + pyproject.toml — low-risk mechanical) and P3b (render_pptx.py + the full markdown parser + render_slides.sh python-pptx step + attach_release_asset.py extension — high-risk). Both serial in Wave 3. | 0.80 | The parser handles 10+ markdown constructs + python-pptx XML constraints (font fallback, bullet injection); on the serial critical path (G-002) an overflow blocks everything. Splitting isolates the high-risk work. | -| G-004 | Merge P5+P6. P5 absorbs the final-review/audit/ship work (multi-persona review, reconstruction audit, milestone merge, tag, release, branch cleanup, REQUIREMENTS/ROADMAP update) as its final commits. Tag v1.22.6 = milestone release. | 0.80 | For an NFR docs-only milestone, a dedicated review/ship phase is ceremonial overhead. P5 already asserts the final state via tests. The merge compensates for the G-003 split, returning to 7 phases. | +1. **R1 (docs):** Add to RESEARCH.md pitfalls: the destroy step must + inject `deletion_protection=false` into the contract inputs before + re-resolving with `environment_override=prior_env`. Without this, + `prevent_destroy` lifecycle blocks (REQ-86) block the destroy. This + is already noted in RESEARCH §5 pitfall 3 and PLAN P2 implementation + note 3. No change needed — already captured. -### Escalations +2. **R2 (docs):** Clarify in PLAN P2 that the `record_applied_env` SK + format is `contractId#LAST_APPLIED#` so the detect step + can query `begins_with "contractId#LAST_APPLIED#"`. This is already + in RESEARCH §2 and GRILL Axis 4. No change needed — already captured. -None. All axes resolved at confidence ≥ 0.78. Two axes (4 and 6) were -escalation candidates (P0 risks if the empirical checks failed) but both -were cleared by direct verification — the rendered HTML uses plain `` (not SVG xlink:href), and Marp 4.5.0 passes through -`
` verbatim (empirically confirmed with a minimal test -deck). +## Escalations ---- - -### Revised Wave/Phase Plan (post-revisions) - -``` -Wave 1 (P1): consolidate-docs (edits -marp.md, deletes plain .md) - ↓ -Wave 2 (P2): restore-clean-style (edits -marp.md frontmatter + - ↓ benefit callouts; edits render_slides.sh; retires - nova-sp-theme.css from render) - ↓ -Wave 3 (P3a → P3b, serial): - P3a: inline-images (inline_images.py + render_slides.sh step + pyproject) - ↓ - P3b: python-pptx-generator (render_pptx.py + parser + render_slides.sh - step + attach_release_asset.py extension) - ↓ -Wave 4 (P4): trim-wordcount + purge "penetrate" (edits -marp.md + - ↓ talking-points.md + docs/scope.md + docs/vision.md + - all .ciagent/ files per G-001) - ↓ -Wave 5 (P5+P6 merged): ci-tests-readme + final-review-ship (tests, CI, - README, multi-persona review, audit, ship — - tag v1.22.6 = milestone release) -``` - -### Revised Tag Plan - -- v1.22.0 (P0 — already tagged) -- v1.22.1 (P1) -- v1.22.2 (P2) -- v1.22.3 (P3a) -- v1.22.4 (P3b) -- v1.22.5 (P4) -- v1.22.6 (P5+P6 merged — final patch = milestone release) - -### P4 expanded scope (per G-001) - -P4 now owns, in addition to the deck word-count trim: -- `docs/scope.md:16` — reword "Nova never penetrates the PDLC" -- `docs/vision.md:18` — reword "It does not penetrate upstream product or - software development lifecycles" -- `.ciagent/PLAN.md`, `REQUIREMENTS.md`, `RESEARCH.md`, `CLARIFY.md`, - `ROADMAP.md`, `PROJECT.md`, `PERSONAS.md`, `NORTH_STAR.md` — reword every - "penetrate" occurrence (or the phase that owns each file's edit window - does so; P4 is the natural owner since it owns the "penetrate" removal - requirement REQ-272). - -### P5 expanded scope (per G-004) - -P5 now owns, in addition to the test/CI/README work: -- Multi-persona code review (`ciagent-review`) of the milestone branch -- Audit (`ciagent-audit`) — reconstruction test + .ciagent discipline -- Milestone ship (`ciagent-ship`) — merge to milestone branch → main, tag - v1.22.6, release with both PPTX attached, delete milestone branches -- Update REQUIREMENTS.md (mark v1.23 complete) + ROADMAP.md (mark v1.23 - complete) -- Commit: `docs(milestone): complete v1.23 — Nova Deck Cleanup & Python PPTX` - ---- - -### Evidence Index - -- Image format: `docs/presentations/nova-autonomous-cloud-delivery.html` - grep — 2× ``, 0× `xlink:href` -- Marp `
` passthrough: minimal test deck rendered through - `@marp-team/marp-cli@4.5.0` → `
` survives verbatim -- Versioning: `git tag --list 'v1.22.*'` → empty (no conflicts) -- "penetrate" occurrences: `grep -riI penetrat` → docs/scope.md:16, - docs/vision.md:18, docs/presentations/{-marp.md, .html, .md, - -talking-points.md}, all .ciagent/*.md -- Test inversion targets: tests/test_slides_pipeline.py lines 55-64 - (rewrite), 66-74 (invert), 240-270 (delete), 275-302 (retarget), 353-359 - (assert #D6002A not --sp-red) -- Benefit callout count: 21 `**Benefit:**` in current deck → 21 - `
` in P2 \ No newline at end of file +None. All challenges resolved at full autonomy. \ No newline at end of file