Shared analysis contract conformance

Type: reference/types/design-proposal.md

Analysis member types inherit source and record requirements. Their generic type-conformance review must either assess those requirements from pinned inputs or state a narrower result; a member-type snapshot alone no longer contains the whole contract.

Current state (as of 2026-10-01)

• Commit d77388b4 separates the source contract and record contract from four member types. The analysis workflow declares both files to its analysts, reconciliation and verification. Changes reopen the affected jobs and block publication against an earlier method commit.
• Generic type-conformance reviews capture the target artifact and its type-spec criterion. src/commonplace/review/freshness.py captures and compares those two texts, without the type's shared dependencies.
• src/commonplace/review/protocol/prompt.py embeds the type-spec text but permits link following only from target notes, with one limited exception for an exact path derived from such a link. It neither embeds nor authorizes general traversal of the criterion's shared-contract links.
• The store can represent arbitrary criterion identities, but the current selector and path resolver do not admit these reference documents as generic conformance criteria. Storage support alone does not provide the missing delivery and selection path.
• This boundary affects generic type-conformance assays. The analysis workflow's own verification receives the shared contracts already.

Options

Factored shared-contract reviews

Derive separate artifact/shared-contract pairs alongside the member-type pair. Each reviewer receives its actual contract as criterion text, and ordinary two-input freshness tracks it. A full conformance claim requires the relevant pairs together. This follows the existing factored-pairs direction.

Operativity: the selector admits the shared criteria for the member types that inherit them; the renderer makes their assessment scope explicit; consumers distinguish member-specific conformance from full conformance. This requires implementation. Its oracle is the retained contract's content, with deterministic syntax checks excluded. Factoring is warranted only where each judgment can be made independently from its two inputs.

Materialized complete criteria

Generate a complete review criterion containing the member and shared requirements. The reviewer receives and hashes one actual criterion artifact. Generation and consistency checks must keep it aligned with every input; expanding only the prompt would leave freshness incorrect.

Operativity: criterion generation and selection supply the materialized artifact, and dependency changes refresh it before review or acceptance. This requires implementation and retains larger review packets and derived copies. The oracle remains the retained requirements, not the generator.

Keep member types self-contained

Return shared requirements to each member type. The existing review path then receives and tracks them, but authors and reviewers load repeated text. Compact producer views would need a separate, checked consumption path if the worker-reading gains are to survive.

Operativity: the current type-spec snapshot supplies the complete criterion. This option trades the cleanup's single ownership for larger contracts or additional view generation; it needs no wider review input model.

Forces and free choices

• Delivery and freshness are separate requirements: permission to follow a link would not make changes to its target invalidate an existing review.
• The analysis workflow has explicit dependencies; generic type reviewers are another consumer and need their own mapping.
• Factored pairs add review calls. Materialized criteria add generation and derived-copy maintenance. Repeated member contracts add reading and drift.
• Select the conformance scope, the criterion delivery path and the result policy together. Do not silently count a member-only result as complete conformance, or introduce a general multi-input target without a judgment that requires it.

Adoption criteria

An adopted option must demonstrate that a reviewer receives every required clause, that changing either shared contract invalidates the appropriate acceptance, and that unaffected types keep their present behavior. The result must name its conformance scope. Before choosing factored pairs, show on representative member findings that the judgments can be assessed independently; otherwise retain the coupled requirement in one materialized criterion. No option is adopted here.