Jon Chery
b054849a99
P4 (Wave 3, docs) — REQ-186, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 204, 210, 211, 212, 213 New docs: - docs/METRICS.md — canonical KPI catalog (grounded/derived/deferred) - docs/metrics/*.md — 13 per-KPI definition-of-success docs (D-127) - docs/METRICS_DEFERRED_ROADMAP.md — 8 deferred metrics + hot-path plan + re-eval triggers (REQ-210) - docs/NO_HUMANS_THESIS.md — thesis defensibility brief (REQ-213) New tools: - core/metrics/trust_snapshot.py — 5 trust metrics + chain-integrity verdict + snapshot hash (REQ-211) - scripts/check_north_star_diff.sh — CI check for NORTH_STAR strategic section changes (REQ-204) Modified: - .ciagent/config.json — strategic_direction_file: .ciagent/NORTH_STAR.md (REQ-186) ---ci--- project: acdl phase: 4 milestone: v1.17 status: execute ---/ci---
1.1 KiB
Touchless Resolution Rate — Definition of Success
KPI: Touchless Resolution Rate Target: ≥ 99% across production estates (Post-Pilot)
What this number means: the percentage of platform runs that complete end-to-end without an operational HITL block. An operational HITL block is a confidence-driven escalation (the AI's confidence was too low to proceed). Attestation gates (qa/prod/dr sign-offs) are NOT counted as escalations — they are designed controls, not autonomy failures.
How it's computed: runs WHERE hitl_block = 0 AND environment = 'dev'
÷ total runs (dev environment only, where attestation gates don't apply).
For production estates: runs WHERE hitl_block = 0 ÷ total runs
excluding attestation-gate sign-offs.
What "good" looks like: ≥ 99% means fewer than 1 in 100 runs require human intervention due to low confidence. The 1% allowance is for genuine edge cases (novel failure modes, blast-radius exceedances).
What would be "gamer metrics": counting attestation gates as "touchless" (they're not — they're human by design) or counting only dev runs (cherry-picking the easiest environment).