Files
acdl/docs/metrics/ai_decision_accuracy.md
T
Jon Chery b054849a99 docs(P4): metrics catalog + NORTH_STAR integration + trust snapshot + no-humans thesis (REQ-186,191..195,204,210..213)
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---
2026-08-04 20:05:06 +00:00

998 B

AI Decision Accuracy — Definition of Success

KPI: AI Decision Accuracy Target: ≥ 99.5% (no rollback, no follow-up incident within 5 min of action)

What this number means: the percentage of AI decisions (confidence- gated policy engine outcomes) that were NOT followed by an apply failure or incident within 5 minutes. A high-confidence decision that later caused an incident does NOT count as accurate.

How it's computed: count(decisions WHERE outcome = 'succeeded' AND no incident within 5min) ÷ total decisions. Correlation via decision_idrun_id → subsequent apply.failed or incident.detected events.

What "good" looks like: ≥ 99.5% means fewer than 1 in 200 decisions cause a secondary failure. The 0.5% allowance is for novel edge cases.

D-122 honesty: Nova's "AI" is the confidence-gated policy engine (confidence_signal + HITL gate), not an LLM planner. The Decision Ledger captures this real decision path — not a fabricated "AI agent."