{ "format": "agent-article-v0", "article_id": "CORE-01", "canonical_url": "/core/core-01", "page_type": "reference", "claim_ids": [], "evidence_ids": [ "EVD-CORE-01-URL-9E1BF2CB709D", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-99E58642FE77", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-23A0B3FA7707", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-38F020DB0F7C", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-477A5A84F49B", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-42858FD02C7F", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-8B736DB3FC69", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-38A393F409CB", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-1483905F87DC", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-0801E1EE8A70", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-C27529936E9E", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-5CDEAC63F9FD", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-D6719E349585", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-3497642EA1C0", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-4DEE6FD4082D", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-09DCD05A1818", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-A44D3FFB1D45", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-CECE4940E179", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-0BD491C9B778", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-8AFE93377B37", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-33D25B306E1A", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-9F7D87FBE987", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-7E6EC8BD95C9", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-9950C767C50F", "EVD-CORE-01-URL-97E61C0D1616", "CORE-01-DOCUMENT-READBACK" ], "unknown_ids": [ "CORE-01-CURRENTNESS" ], "operational_object_ids": [], "provider": [], "models": [], "plans": [], "surfaces": [], "regions": [], "current_status": "UNKNOWN", "observation_status": "UNOBSERVED", "freshness": "UNKNOWN", "last_verified": null, "supersedes": [], "superseded_by": [], "provenance": [ "DOC-083cde4caa627644-CORE-01", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-9E1BF2CB709D", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-99E58642FE77", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-23A0B3FA7707", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-38F020DB0F7C", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-477A5A84F49B", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-42858FD02C7F", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-8B736DB3FC69", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-38A393F409CB", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-1483905F87DC", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-0801E1EE8A70", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-C27529936E9E", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-5CDEAC63F9FD", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-D6719E349585", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-3497642EA1C0", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-4DEE6FD4082D", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-09DCD05A1818", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-A44D3FFB1D45", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-CECE4940E179", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-0BD491C9B778", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-8AFE93377B37", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-33D25B306E1A", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-9F7D87FBE987", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-7E6EC8BD95C9", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-9950C767C50F", "SRC-CORE-01-URL-97E61C0D1616" ], "article_sources": [ { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-9E1BF2CB709D", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "1. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-001; TYPE: RESEARCH; SOURCE / VERSION: Yao et al., “τ-bench,” arXiv:2406.12045 (2024), [", "href": "https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.12045", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-9E1BF2CB709D" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "1. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-001; TYPE: RESEARCH; SOURCE / VERSION: Yao et al., “τ-bench,” arXiv:2406.12045 (2024), [https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.12045" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-99E58642FE77", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "2. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-002; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: LangGraph Persistence docs, [", "href": "https://docs.langchain.com/oss/python/langgraph/persistence", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-99E58642FE77" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "2. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-002; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: LangGraph Persistence docs, [https://docs.langchain.com/oss/python/langgraph/persistence" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-23A0B3FA7707", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "3. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-003; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Workflow Execution / Event History docs, [", "href": "https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-23A0B3FA7707" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "3. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-003; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Workflow Execution / Event History docs, [https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-38F020DB0F7C", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "3. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-003; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Workflow Execution / Event History docs, [https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution](https://docs.temp", "href": "https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution/event", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-38F020DB0F7C" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "3. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-003; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Workflow Execution / Event History docs, [https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution](https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution) ; [https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution/event" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-477A5A84F49B", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "4. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-004; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Prefect States docs / server schema, [", "href": "https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-477A5A84F49B" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "4. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-004; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Prefect States docs / server schema, [https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-42858FD02C7F", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "4. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-004; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Prefect States docs / server schema, [https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states](https://docs.prefect.io/v3/conc", "href": "https://docs.prefect.io/v3/api-ref/python/prefect-server-schemas-states", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-42858FD02C7F" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "4. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-004; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Prefect States docs / server schema, [https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states](https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states) ; [https://docs.prefect.io/v3/api-ref/python/prefect-server-schemas-states" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-8B736DB3FC69", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "5. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-005; TYPE: RESEARCH_REVIEW; SOURCE / VERSION: Goddard, Roudsari, Wyatt, “Automation bias: a systematic review,” Int J Med Inform. 2012, [", "href": "https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3240751/", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-8B736DB3FC69" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "5. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-005; TYPE: RESEARCH_REVIEW; SOURCE / VERSION: Goddard, Roudsari, Wyatt, “Automation bias: a systematic review,” Int J Med Inform. 2012, [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3240751/" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-38A393F409CB", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "6. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-006; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / FAILURE_REPORT; SOURCE / VERSION: langchain-ai/langgraph #8039 (opened 2026-06-10), [", "href": "https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/issues/8039", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-38A393F409CB" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "6. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-006; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / FAILURE_REPORT; SOURCE / VERSION: langchain-ai/langgraph #8039 (opened 2026-06-10), [https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/issues/8039" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-1483905F87DC", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "7. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-007; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / INDEPENDENT_OPERATION; SOURCE / VERSION: langchain-ai/langgraph #7417 (opened 2026-04-05), [", "href": "https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/issues/7417", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-1483905F87DC" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "7. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-007; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / INDEPENDENT_OPERATION; SOURCE / VERSION: langchain-ai/langgraph #7417 (opened 2026-04-05), [https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/issues/7417" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-0801E1EE8A70", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "8. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-008; TYPE: STANDARD; SOURCE / VERSION: W3C, PROV-DM, W3C Recommendation (2013), [", "href": "https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-0801E1EE8A70" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "8. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-008; TYPE: STANDARD; SOURCE / VERSION: W3C, PROV-DM, W3C Recommendation (2013), [https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-C27529936E9E", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "9. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-009; TYPE: OPEN_STANDARD / OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: OpenLineage Object Model / Core Spec 1.53.0, [", "href": "https://openlineage.io/docs/spec/object-model/", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-C27529936E9E" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "9. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-009; TYPE: OPEN_STANDARD / OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: OpenLineage Object Model / Core Spec 1.53.0, [https://openlineage.io/docs/spec/object-model/" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-5CDEAC63F9FD", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "10. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-010; TYPE: OPEN_STANDARD / PROTOCOL; SOURCE / VERSION: A2A Protocol Specification 1.0.0, [", "href": "https://a2a-protocol.org/v1.0.0/specification/", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-5CDEAC63F9FD" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "10. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-010; TYPE: OPEN_STANDARD / PROTOCOL; SOURCE / VERSION: A2A Protocol Specification 1.0.0, [https://a2a-protocol.org/v1.0.0/specification/" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-D6719E349585", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "10. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-010; TYPE: OPEN_STANDARD / PROTOCOL; SOURCE / VERSION: A2A Protocol Specification 1.0.0, [https://a2a-protocol.org/v1.0.0/specification/](https://a2a-proto", "href": "https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/releases/tag/v1.0.1", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-D6719E349585" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "10. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-010; TYPE: OPEN_STANDARD / PROTOCOL; SOURCE / VERSION: A2A Protocol Specification 1.0.0, [https://a2a-protocol.org/v1.0.0/specification/](https://a2a-protocol.org/v1.0.0/specification/) ; repository release v1.0.1 (3303592, 2026-05-26), [https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/releases/tag/v1.0.1" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-3497642EA1C0", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "11. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-011; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: OpenAI Agents SDK Python v0.22.0, tag v0.22.0, release commit 4df9ecf, released 2026-08-", "href": "https://github.com/openai/openai-agents-python/releases", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-3497642EA1C0" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "11. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-011; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: OpenAI Agents SDK Python v0.22.0, tag v0.22.0, release commit 4df9ecf, released 2026-08-19, [https://github.com/openai/openai-agents-python/releases" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-4DEE6FD4082D", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "11. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-011; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: OpenAI Agents SDK Python v0.22.0, tag v0.22.0, release commit 4df9ecf, released 2026-08-", "href": "https://openai.github.io/openai-agents-python/handoffs/", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-4DEE6FD4082D" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "11. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-011; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: OpenAI Agents SDK Python v0.22.0, tag v0.22.0, release commit 4df9ecf, released 2026-08-19, [https://github.com/openai/openai-agents-python/releases](https://github.com/openai/openai-agents-python/releases) ; Handoffs docs, [https://openai.github.io/openai-agents-python/handoffs/" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-09DCD05A1818", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "12. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-012; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: Microsoft Semantic Kernel Handoff Orchestration, [", "href": "https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/semantic-kernel/frameworks/agent/agent-orchestration/handoff", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-09DCD05A1818" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "12. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-012; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: Microsoft Semantic Kernel Handoff Orchestration, [https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/semantic-kernel/frameworks/agent/agent-orchestration/handoff" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-A44D3FFB1D45", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "12. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-012; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: Microsoft Semantic Kernel Handoff Orchestration, [https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sema", "href": "https://github.com/microsoft/semantic-kernel/releases", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-A44D3FFB1D45" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "12. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-012; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: Microsoft Semantic Kernel Handoff Orchestration, [https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/semantic-kernel/frameworks/agent/agent-orchestration/handoff](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/semantic-kernel/frameworks/agent/agent-orchestration/handoff) ; repository Python tag python-1.44.1, release commit 6e10225, released 2026-08-06; comparison .NET tag dotnet-1.80.1, commit d8ec449, released 2026-09-03, [https://github.com/microsoft/semantic-kernel/releases" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-CECE4940E179", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "13. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-013; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / DESIGN_COUNTEREVIDENCE; SOURCE / VERSION: a2aproject/A2A #1313 (opened 2025-12-15), [", "href": "https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/issues/1313", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-CECE4940E179" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "13. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-013; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / DESIGN_COUNTEREVIDENCE; SOURCE / VERSION: a2aproject/A2A #1313 (opened 2025-12-15), [https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/issues/1313" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-0BD491C9B778", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "14. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-014; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / DESIGN_QUESTION; SOURCE / VERSION: a2aproject/A2A #884 (opened 2025-07-18), [", "href": "https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/issues/884", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-0BD491C9B778" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "14. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-014; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / DESIGN_QUESTION; SOURCE / VERSION: a2aproject/A2A #884 (opened 2025-07-18), [https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/issues/884" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-8AFE93377B37", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "15. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-015; TYPE: RISK_FRAMEWORK; SOURCE / VERSION: NIST AI RMF 1.0, NIST AI 100-1 (2023), [", "href": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-8AFE93377B37" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "15. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-015; TYPE: RISK_FRAMEWORK; SOURCE / VERSION: NIST AI RMF 1.0, NIST AI 100-1 (2023), [https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-33D25B306E1A", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "16. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-016; TYPE: RISK_FRAMEWORK; SOURCE / VERSION: NIST AI RMF: Generative AI Profile, NIST AI 600-1 (2024), [", "href": "https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-33D25B306E1A" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "16. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-016; TYPE: RISK_FRAMEWORK; SOURCE / VERSION: NIST AI RMF: Generative AI Profile, NIST AI 600-1 (2024), [https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-9F7D87FBE987", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "17. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-017; TYPE: REGULATION / SCOPE_EXAMPLE; SOURCE / VERSION: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Article 14, [", "href": "https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-9F7D87FBE987" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "17. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-017; TYPE: REGULATION / SCOPE_EXAMPLE; SOURCE / VERSION: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Article 14, [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-7E6EC8BD95C9", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "18. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-018; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Activity Definition docs, [", "href": "https://docs.temporal.io/activity-definition", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-7E6EC8BD95C9" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "18. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-018; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Activity Definition docs, [https://docs.temporal.io/activity-definition" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-9950C767C50F", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "19. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-019; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Retry Policies docs, [", "href": "https://docs.temporal.io/encyclopedia/retry-policies", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-9950C767C50F" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "19. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-019; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Retry Policies docs, [https://docs.temporal.io/encyclopedia/retry-policies" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "EVD-CORE-01-URL-97E61C0D1616", "evidence_class": "RESEARCH", "title": "20. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-020; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: Prefect 3.8.5 release commit 4861750 (2026-09-03), [", "href": "https://github.com/PrefectHQ/prefect/releases", "supports": [], "limit": "元の監査済み資料に記載された参照先です。URLの復元は、資料の最新性や全主張の支持を新たに検証したことを意味しません。", "origin_class": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "SRC-CORE-01-URL-97E61C0D1616" ], "supporting_locators": [ "4. Source manifest", "20. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-020; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: Prefect 3.8.5 release commit 4861750 (2026-09-03), [https://github.com/PrefectHQ/prefect/releases" ], "scope": "4. Source manifest", "provenance_status": "APPROVED_DOCUMENT_REFERENCE_PROJECTED" }, { "id": "CORE-01-DOCUMENT-READBACK", "evidence_class": "IMPL", "title": "原資料との収録照合", "supports": [ "資料単位の本文ハッシュ、段落数、表数を照合しています。" ], "limit": "収録照合は主張の真偽や外部根拠の最新性を追加保証しません。", "origin_class": "DOCUMENT_INGESTION_READBACK", "source_or_experiment_ids": [ "DOC-083cde4caa627644-CORE-01" ], "supporting_locators": [ "18WPldGemks2px0ukhKYINeBMrBwAmlAi", "083cde4caa627644036a2225f1f6ff29b8015bd902614fe1f7a00a997b4eb59c", "packets/CORE-01.md", "6b29ed1df4d94dcc6feccc393ba6df087b17f88a2d01b37adfe109b071324098" ], "scope": "公開指定を受けた資料単位の全文・表・出典。", "provenance_status": "SOURCE_IDENTITY_VERIFIED" } ], "research_sections": [ { "heading": "資料の識別情報", "text": "Source SHA-256 ca5b0390700513c9230a4fc5c373af3e93209f82ed54c021e620f9ef159bf08d" }, { "heading": "Compilation Packet — CORE-01 Operating Contracts for Stateful AI", "text": "PACKET_ID: PKT-GEMINI-A-CORE-01-v0.1\n\n\nPROVIDER: GEMINI cycle / CROSS_PROVIDER core\n\nTARGET_SECTION_ID: CORE-01\n\nTARGET_SECTION_TITLE: Operating Contracts for Stateful AI\n\nWAVE: WAVE-A\n\nCORE_OR_PRODUCT_OR_ORG: ENTERPRISE_AI_CORE\n\nSTATUS: AUDIT_READY_WITH_TRACKED_UNKNOWNS\n\nLAST_UPDATED: 2026-09-05 18:30 JST" }, { "heading": "1. Scope contract", "text": "この章の仕事は、LLMを「会話を返すもの」から「状態を持つ業務に参加するもの」へ移すときに必要な最小契約を定義することである。\n\n含む:\n\n- 一回の応答と継続業務の区別\n\n- state / persistence / session / checkpoint / handoff\n\n- input contract / output contract / completion contract\n\n- side effectの有無の宣言\n\n- evidence / readback\n\n- human gateの位置\n\n- blocked / failed / paused / resumed状態\n\n含まない:\n\n- retrieval・memory・source bindingの詳細定義（CORE-02）\n\n- task decompositionとpipelineの詳細（CORE-03）\n\n- routingの選定則（CORE-04）\n\n- side effect・undo・recoveryの詳細（CORE-05）\n\n- human trust calibration（CORE-09）\n\n- incident response / BCP（CORE-12）\n\n- Gemini固有のhistory、Gem、Workspace、admin、edition、UI、上限（PM-GEMINI）\n\n- 特定組織tenantの可否・設定・実測値（Organization Overlay）" }, { "heading": "2. Required concepts", "text": "| CONCEPT_ID | CANONICAL LABEL | SCOPE NOTE |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| C-STATE | Current task state | 次の実行判断を変える現在値。会話全文とは同一でない |\n| C-PERSISTENCE | Persistence | sessionを越えてstate/artifact/evidenceを再取得できる性質 |\n| C-SESSION | Session | 一続きの実行境界。task lifecycle全体とは限らない |\n| C-CHECKPOINT | Checkpoint | 再開に必要なstateとartifact参照を固定した時点 |\n| C-HANDOFF | Handoff | ownerまたは実行主体の変更時に責任・状態・未完了を移す契約 |\n| C-IO-CONTRACT | Input / output contract | 入力のscope・権威・版と、出力artifact・形式・場所の約束 |\n| C-COMPLETION-CONTRACT | Completion contract | 「完了」を判定する状態・証拠・readback条件 |\n| C-SIDE-EFFECT-DECLARATION | Side-effect declaration | read/draft/write/send/delete等の外部状態変更有無の宣言 |\n| C-EVIDENCE-READBACK | Evidence / readback | 実行主体の自己申告ではなく、成果物または外部最終状態で確かめること |\n| C-HUMAN-GATE | Human gate | 人間の承認・判断・例外処理を置く境界 |" }, { "heading": "3. Required claim ledger", "text": "1. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-001; CANONICAL STATEMENT: 一回の応答イベントと、継続業務のtask stateは同じものではない; EVIDENCE STATE: INTERNAL_OBSERVATION + OSS_PRACTICE; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S020; LangGraph persistence; Temporal Workflow Execution; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND\n\n2. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-002; CANONICAL STATEMENT: stateful AI業務では、次の実行判断を変える現在値を会話本文から独立して取得できなければならない; EVIDENCE STATE: INTERNAL_OBSERVATION + OSS_PRACTICE; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S020; LangGraph checkpointer/store分離; Temporal Event History; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND\n\n3. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-003; CANONICAL STATEMENT: input contractはtask目的だけでなく、権威あるsource、snapshot/version、許可されたscope、開始stateを含む; EVIDENCE STATE: STANDARD/OSS-supported synthesis; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S019/S020/S041/S044/S045/S049; W3C PROV-DM; OpenLineage; A2A Task model; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND_WITH_SYNTHESIS\n\n4. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-004; CANONICAL STATEMENT: output contractは回答文ではなく、要求artifact、保存先、形式、検証方法、更新可否を定義する; EVIDENCE STATE: STANDARD/OSS-supported synthesis; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S005/S019/S040/S044/S045; OpenLineage outputs; A2A Artifact/Part model; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND_WITH_SYNTHESIS\n\n5. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-005; CANONICAL STATEMENT: 完了はモデルの自己申告ではなく、要求artifactの存在と期待する最終状態のreadbackで判定する; EVIDENCE STATE: RESEARCH + OSS_PRACTICE; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S005; τ-bench final database state; Prefect final-state semantics; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND\n\n6. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-006; CANONICAL STATEMENT: checkpointは完了済み・未完了・blocker・artifact location・next actionを分離して保存する; EVIDENCE STATE: INTERNAL_OBSERVATION + OSS_PRACTICE + LIMIT; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S020; LangGraph; Temporal; LangGraph issues #8039/#7417; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND_WITH_LIMIT\n\n7. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-007; CANONICAL STATEMENT: handoffは会話要約ではなく、state、source snapshot、completed/not-done、open questions、next owner、stop condition、readback evidenceを持つ; EVIDENCE STATE: PROTOCOL/OSS-supported synthesis + limit; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S029/S041/S052; W3C PROV-DM; A2A; OpenAI Agents SDK; Semantic Kernel; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND_WITH_LIMIT\n\n8. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-008; CANONICAL STATEMENT: side effectの有無と許可境界は実行前に宣言し、詳細な回復設計はCORE-05へ委譲する; EVIDENCE STATE: INTERNAL_OBSERVATION + OSS_FAILURE_EVIDENCE; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S018; Temporal Activity boundary; LangGraph issues #8039/#7417; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND_WITH_LIMIT\n\n9. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-009; CANONICAL STATEMENT: human gateが存在しても、入力要約・action summary・artifact・最終状態の検証を省略できない; EVIDENCE STATE: RESEARCH-supported limitation; PRIMARY SUPPORT: S012; Goddard et al. systematic review; S018; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND\n\n10. CLAIM_ID: CLM-C01-010; CANONICAL STATEMENT: blocked、failed、paused、unknownを「未完了」の一語へ潰さず、再開条件と次の安全な行動を保持する; EVIDENCE STATE: OSS_PRACTICE + reliability-derived; PRIMARY SUPPORT: Prefect state taxonomy; Temporal execution status; S029/S041/S049; TARGET STATUS: EVIDENCE_BOUND" }, { "heading": "4. Source manifest", "text": "### 4.1 Primary internal sources\n\n| SOURCE_ID | SOURCE | CONTRIBUTION | EXTRACTION STATUS |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| SRC-S005 | S005 ツール実行・エージェントの反復信頼性と最終状態 | repeatability / end-state verification | EXTRACTED_FROM_DRIVE_SOURCE |\n| SRC-S012 | S012 Human-in-the-Loop | human oversightの限界 | EXTRACTED_FROM_DRIVE_SOURCE |\n| SRC-S018 | S018 副作用・承認・Undo・回復可能性 | side-effect declaration / approval / reversibility | EXTRACTED_FROM_DRIVE_SOURCE |\n| SRC-S019 | S019 監査可能性の分解 | evidence / action trace / observability layers | EXTRACTED_FOR_CORE_01 |\n| SRC-S020 | S020 Knowledge / Source-set / History / Memory / Artifact State | state taxonomy / persistence semantics | EXTRACTED_FROM_DRIVE_SOURCE |\n| SRC-S029 | S029 AI Incident Management | failure state / evidence preservation / recovery transition | EXTRACTED_FOR_CORE_01 |\n| SRC-S040 | S040 AI Reliability Engineering | canary / rollback / stateful operation | EXTRACTED_FOR_CORE_01 |\n| SRC-S041 | S041 AI Business Continuity | checkpoint / degraded mode / resume | EXTRACTED_FOR_CORE_01 |\n| SRC-S044 | S044 Prompt / Gem Configuration Management | configuration as production state | EXTRACTED_FOR_CORE_01 |\n| SRC-S045 | S045 Golden Dataset / Eval Versioning | versioned acceptance contract | EXTRACTED_FOR_CORE_01 |\n| SRC-S048 | S048 Index / Knowledge Map Architecture | stable IDs / provenance / change relation | PARTIALLY_EXTRACTED |\n| SRC-S049 | S049 Residual UNKNOWN / TODO Registry | unknown as managed state | EXTRACTED_FOR_CORE_01 |\n| SRC-S052 | S052 UNKNOWN Closure Pass X | multi-agent failure dimensions / proposed handoff packet | EXTRACTED_FOR_CORE_01 |\n| SRC-S055 | S055 Three-Layer Knowledge Mapping | Core/Product/Organization separation | EXTRACTED |\n| SRC-S056 | S056 Existing Book Crosswalk | P1/P5/P9 migration and chapter boundary | EXTRACTED |\n| SRC-S063 | S063 Frozen TOC v0.1 | canonical scope and dependencies | EXTRACTED / FROZEN |\n| SRC-HANDOFF | Work移行引継ぎ | state machine / initial execution contract | EXTRACTED |\n| SRC-LOG-01 | LLM運用辞典(1).md | long-form compilation and four-agent failure observations | EXTRACTED_FOR_CONTEXT |\n| SRC-LOG-02 | 運用辞典二部.md | S063 replacement and Work transition history | EXTRACTED_FOR_CONTEXT |\n\n### 4.2 Bound external evidence records\n\n1. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-001; TYPE: RESEARCH; SOURCE / VERSION: Yao et al., “τ-bench,” arXiv:2406.12045 (2024), [https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.12045](https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.12045); SUPPORTING CLAIM: 会話末のdatabase stateをgoal stateと比較し、pass^kで反復信頼性を測る。CLM-C01-005を直接支持; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: benchmark domainとsimulated userに限定。実組織の全業務へ成功率を外挿しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n2. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-002; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: LangGraph Persistence docs, [https://docs.langchain.com/oss/python/langgraph/persistence](https://docs.langchain.com/oss/python/langgraph/persistence); SUPPORTING CLAIM: checkpointerのthread stateとstoreのcross-thread durable dataを分離。CLM-C01-001/002/006を支持; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: framework実装例であり、Operating Contractの十分条件ではない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n3. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-003; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Workflow Execution / Event History docs, [https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution](https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution) ; [https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution/event](https://docs.temporal.io/workflow-execution/event); SUPPORTING CLAIM: Event Historyはappend-onlyでdurableに保持され、失敗時は最新記録地点からreplay/resumeする。Workflow ID・Run IDを分け、Open/ClosedとRunning/Paused/Completed/Failed等を分離する; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: deterministic replayとActivity境界が必要。履歴上のActivity完了は外部業務受入を意味せず、任意のLLM副作用を自動的にexactly-once化しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n4. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-004; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Prefect States docs / server schema, [https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states](https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states) ; [https://docs.prefect.io/v3/api-ref/python/prefect-server-schemas-states](https://docs.prefect.io/v3/api-ref/python/prefect-server-schemas-states); SUPPORTING CLAIM: state name/type/terminal性を分け、Scheduled/Running/Paused/Failed/Crashed/Completed等を別状態で扱う。stateのdata/resultはartifact側へ分離され得る。CLM-C01-010を支持; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: PrefectのCOMPLETEDは関数return semanticsであり、flow内task失敗やartifactの業務正しさを単独では保証しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n5. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-005; TYPE: RESEARCH_REVIEW; SOURCE / VERSION: Goddard, Roudsari, Wyatt, “Automation bias: a systematic review,” Int J Med Inform. 2012, [https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3240751/](https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3240751/); SUPPORTING CLAIM: automation biasが複数分野で比較的頑健に観測され、人間確認の存在だけでは誤助言追随を排除できない。CLM-C01-009を支持; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: 医療DSS中心で、現代LLM業務UIへ効果量を直接移植しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n6. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-006; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / FAILURE_REPORT; SOURCE / VERSION: langchain-ai/langgraph #8039 (opened 2026-06-10), [https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/issues/8039](https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/issues/8039); SUPPORTING CLAIM: crash recovery時にnode side effectが二重化した再現例。checkpointだけではidempotencyを保証しない; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: open issueの報告であり、全version・全hostの一般挙動とは断定しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n7. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-007; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / INDEPENDENT_OPERATION; SOURCE / VERSION: langchain-ai/langgraph #7417 (opened 2026-04-05), [https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/issues/7417](https://github.com/langchain-ai/langgraph/issues/7417); SUPPORTING CLAIM: 約180秒超のtool callがcheckpointから再配信され、重複実行・費用増となった実運用報告; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: LangGraph Cloud/特定構成の報告。再現範囲を限定する; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n8. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-008; TYPE: STANDARD; SOURCE / VERSION: W3C, PROV-DM, W3C Recommendation (2013), [https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/](https://www.w3.org/TR/prov-dm/); SUPPORTING CLAIM: entity/activity/agent、usage/generation/derivation、responsibility、delegation、plan、timeを区別し、input/output lineageと責任主体の基礎を与える。CLM-C01-003/004/007を部分支持; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: domain-agnostic provenance modelであり、業務上の完了条件、許可scope、handoff受領を規定しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n9. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-009; TYPE: OPEN_STANDARD / OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: OpenLineage Object Model / Core Spec 1.53.0, [https://openlineage.io/docs/spec/object-model/](https://openlineage.io/docs/spec/object-model/); SUPPORTING CLAIM: Job、Run、input/output Dataset、START/COMPLETE/FAIL/ABORT、source location/versionを分離。実行同定とinput/output lineageを支持; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: pipeline observabilityのschemaであり、COMPLETEはbusiness acceptanceやartifact qualityを保証しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n10. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-010; TYPE: OPEN_STANDARD / PROTOCOL; SOURCE / VERSION: A2A Protocol Specification 1.0.0, [https://a2a-protocol.org/v1.0.0/specification/](https://a2a-protocol.org/v1.0.0/specification/) ; repository release v1.0.1 (3303592, 2026-05-26), [https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/releases/tag/v1.0.1](https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/releases/tag/v1.0.1); SUPPORTING CLAIM: Task ID、context ID、status/state/timestamp、artifact、history、metadataを定義し、GetTaskはstatus/artifacts/historyを分けて返す。Messagesはstatus/clarification用で、task outputはArtifactsへ置くことを推奨する。CLM-C01-003/004/007を部分支持; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: historyは任意で全message保存・再配送を保証せず、critical informationの信頼できる配送路とみなせない。v1.0.1はTaskStatus値・HTTP binding等の修正のみで、source authority・business acceptance・receiptは規定しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n11. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-011; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: OpenAI Agents SDK Python v0.22.0, tag v0.22.0, release commit 4df9ecf, released 2026-08-19, [https://github.com/openai/openai-agents-python/releases](https://github.com/openai/openai-agents-python/releases) ; Handoffs docs, [https://openai.github.io/openai-agents-python/handoffs/](https://openai.github.io/openai-agents-python/handoffs/); SUPPORTING CLAIM: handoff()はrecipient、typed input_type、input_filter、on_handoff、is_enabled、history nesting等を設定できる実装例。v0.22.0 releaseはcheckpoint usage isolationとhandoff graph expansionも記録する; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: 実装が渡すpayload/routingと、source authority、completed/not-done、scope認可、receiver receipt、business readbackは別契約。release pinは実装snapshotの識別で、全機能の導入versionやCore充足を意味しない; FRESHNESS: release/docs checked 2026-09-05\n\n12. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-012; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: Microsoft Semantic Kernel Handoff Orchestration, [https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/semantic-kernel/frameworks/agent/agent-orchestration/handoff](https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/semantic-kernel/frameworks/agent/agent-orchestration/handoff) ; repository Python tag python-1.44.1, release commit 6e10225, released 2026-08-06; comparison .NET tag dotnet-1.80.1, commit d8ec449, released 2026-09-03, [https://github.com/microsoft/semantic-kernel/releases](https://github.com/microsoft/semantic-kernel/releases); SUPPORTING CLAIM: OrchestrationHandoffsでsource→targetと条件説明を定義し、response/human callbackとruntimeを別に持つ。Python/.NETのmaintained implementation snapshotを固定する; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: docs自身がAgent Orchestrationをexperimentalと明記。routing、callback、runtimeはsource snapshot、completed/not-done、scope、receipt、business readbackを自動付与しない; FRESHNESS: release/docs checked 2026-09-05\n\n13. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-013; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / DESIGN_COUNTEREVIDENCE; SOURCE / VERSION: a2aproject/A2A #1313 (opened 2025-12-15), [https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/issues/1313](https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/issues/1313); SUPPORTING CLAIM: MessageとArtifactの境界が曖昧で実装が分岐するというmaintainer ecosystem内の問題提起; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: closed/consolidated proposalであり、全A2A implementationの不具合を意味しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n14. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-014; TYPE: OSS_ISSUE / DESIGN_QUESTION; SOURCE / VERSION: a2aproject/A2A #884 (opened 2025-07-18), [https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/issues/884](https://github.com/a2aproject/A2A/issues/884); SUPPORTING CLAIM: supervisor/clientとserverのどちらがcontext IDを管理するかという実装上の不明瞭さを示す; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: 未解決相談を規範としない。context ownershipを契約で明示すべき理由としてのみ使う; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n15. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-015; TYPE: RISK_FRAMEWORK; SOURCE / VERSION: NIST AI RMF 1.0, NIST AI 100-1 (2023), [https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1](https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.100-1); SUPPORTING CLAIM: riskを影響と可能性で捉え、優先度をcontextに応じて変え、最高riskでは安全に停止する。human gate強度のdecision dimensionsを支持; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: frameworkはrisk toleranceを規定せず、組織・分野・use case固有と明記する。普遍的な金額・人数閾値の根拠にはしない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n16. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-016; TYPE: RISK_FRAMEWORK; SOURCE / VERSION: NIST AI RMF: Generative AI Profile, NIST AI 600-1 (2024), [https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1](https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.AI.600-1); SUPPORTING CLAIM: risk tier、deployment approval threshold、human oversight roles、human/automated evaluation、停止計画を組織risk toleranceへ結ぶ; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: suggested actionsであり一律必須値ではない。閾値は組織が定義・再評価する; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n17. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-017; TYPE: REGULATION / SCOPE_EXAMPLE; SOURCE / VERSION: Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, Article 14, [https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj](https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj); SUPPORTING CLAIM: high-risk AIのoversightをrisk、autonomy、contextに比例させ、能力/限界理解、automation bias認識、override/reverse、安全停止を求める具体例; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: EU法のhigh-risk対象へ限る。Article 14(5)の二人確認は限定類型であり、全企業AI taskの普遍条件へ拡張しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n18. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-018; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Activity Definition docs, [https://docs.temporal.io/activity-definition](https://docs.temporal.io/activity-definition); SUPPORTING CLAIM: Activityの外部requestにはWorkflow Run ID + Activity IDをidempotency keyとして使える。retry attempt間で安定し、実行間で一意になるため、C3のretry/idempotency条件を具体化する; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: TemporalはActivityを複数回実行し得る。observed as completed exactly onceでも部分処理が複数回起こり得るため、外部sinkのdedup/readbackは別途必要; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n19. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-019; TYPE: OSS_PRACTICE; SOURCE / VERSION: Temporal Retry Policies docs, [https://docs.temporal.io/encyclopedia/retry-policies](https://docs.temporal.io/encyclopedia/retry-policies); SUPPORTING CLAIM: Activityは既定でretry policyを持つ一方、Workflow Executionは既定でretryしない。失敗しやすいAPI/LLM呼出しはActivityへ置くという実装境界を示す; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: 既定値やpolicyはworkflow設計で上書き可能。retry設定の存在だけでは業務上のidempotency、authorization、readbackを保証しない; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n20. EVIDENCE_ID: EXT-C01-020; TYPE: OSS_IMPLEMENTATION_DOC + RELEASE_PIN; SOURCE / VERSION: Prefect 3.8.5 release commit 4861750 (2026-09-03), [https://github.com/PrefectHQ/prefect/releases](https://github.com/PrefectHQ/prefect/releases) ; state schema/docs, [https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states](https://docs.prefect.io/v3/concepts/states); SUPPORTING CLAIM: 現行3.xのstateはrich objectで、typeがorchestration logic、nameが表示用、terminal判定とresult/artifact参照を別に持つ。実装releaseも再監査用にpinした; COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT: 3.8.5はPrefect実装snapshotであり、LLM業務artifactの内容・source authority・business acceptanceを保証しない。stateがCompletedでも別taskの失敗や受入不成立を隠し得る; FRESHNESS: checked 2026-09-05\n\n### 4.3 Direct extraction from the S-log\n\n| SOURCE_ID | DIRECTLY EXTRACTED PROPOSITION | BOUND CLAIMS | BOUNDARY |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| SRC-S005 | 一度の成功ではなくfinal system stateと反復成功を測る。first-pass、pass^k、unauthorized action、partial/silent failure、idempotencyを分離する | 005, 008 | S005の数値はτ-bench等の対象domainに限定 |\n| SRC-S012 | Human-in-the-LoopをApproval、Verification、Correction、Exception Handling、Goal/Policy Setting、Incident Responseへ分解する | 009 | 人間監督が常に悪化するとはしない。効果はtask/UI/workload依存 |\n| SRC-S018 | action controlをpreview、pre-action confirmation、policy approval、post-action undo、external repair、irreversible/partialへ時間軸分解する | 003, 008, 009 | Gemini固有のCalendar/Tasks/Keep/Studio capabilityはPM-GEMINIへ送る |\n| SRC-S020 | conversation history、artifact state、source-set、knowledge、external state store、personal memoryを別mechanismとして扱う | 001, 002, 003, 006, 007 | Gemini固有のmemory/Project/Gem availabilityはPM-GEMINIへ送る |\n| SRC-S019 | auditをadoption、conversation、source/retrieval、action/tool、external-stateへ分解。run ID、actor/surface/config版、declared/evidenced source、input/artifact版、requested/executed action、before/after、approval、test、incident、rollbackをexecution envelope候補とする | 003, 004, 005, 007, 008 | Gemini Reports/Vault/DLP等の製品実装はPM-GEMINI。取得不能traceを推測で生成しない |\n| SRC-S029 | incident lifecycleでcontainment前後のstateとevidenceを保存し、recoveryを再現test・関連workflow regression・staged restartで検証。root causeをFACT/SUPPORTED/PLAUSIBLE/UNKNOWNへ分離 | 005, 006, 007, 008, 010 | incident taxonomy・severity weightの詳細はCORE-12。ここではstate/evidence transitionだけ採る |\n| SRC-S040 | modelだけでなくprompt/source/permission/tool/eval/state schema/observabilityをrelease componentとして扱い、known-good manifest、stop condition、owner、rollback/fallbackを記録 | 003, 004, 005, 006, 008 | canary/SLO/error budgetとrelease engineeringの詳細はCORE-10/CORE-06へ委譲 |\n| SRC-S041 | provider failover用state packetにgoal/phase/completed/pending/rejected decisions/constraints/source versions/last verified output/open incidents/action boundaries/owner/next action/freshnessを外部化 | 002, 003, 006, 007, 010 | outage/fallback/RTO/RPOの詳細はCORE-12。provider固有statusはPMへ送る |\n| SRC-S044 | prompt単体でなくsource/model/tool/permission/schema/policy/evalを複合configuration releaseとし、snapshot/diff/identity/lineage/role/eval link/rollback/reconstructionを保持 | 003, 004, 006, 007 | Gemini Gem/Vertexの具体versioning availabilityはPM-GEMINI。外部registry利用可否はORG |\n| SRC-S045 | acceptance結果はdataset/task distribution/expectation/scorer/judge/rubric/target config/source snapshot/environment/pass policyの版に依存。runtime successとeval error/stale test/business passを分離 | 004, 005, 010 | eval system全体はCORE-07。ここではcompletion contractへのversioned参照を採る |\n| SRC-S049 | UNKNOWNを公開schema限界、環境確認要、実機試験要、volatile再確認、不可避provenance限界等へ分け、evidence、freshness、owner、next test、closure criterionを持つ | 003, 006, 007, 010 | 個々のGemini UNKNOWNはPM/ORGへ送り、Coreには管理状態schemaだけを残す |\n| SRC-S052 | 実在見出しはUNKNOWN Closure Pass X。multi-agent項でhandoff completeness/state loss/duplicate work/stale propagation/unowned task/termination agreementを測定対象とし、TASK_IDからREADBACK_EVIDENCEまでのhandoff packetを提案 | 006, 007, 010 | S063内の「Book Integration Map」という説明は誤っているため採らず、Drive正本paragraph 8048–8067の実在内容へ帰属する |" }, { "heading": "5. Counterevidence and limits", "text": "| ID | COUNTEREVIDENCE / LIMIT | EFFECT ON CLAIM |\n| --- | --- | --- |\n| CE-C01-001 | 会話履歴、memory、長文context、providerのproject機能が一部stateを保持する場合がある | 「会話はstateにならない」と全否定しない。明示的再取得・更新・検証可能性が不足する場合を区別する |\n| CE-C01-002 | 短いread-only taskでは外部ledgerやcheckpointが運用負荷を上回り得る | risk・duration・side-effect・handoff有無によって契約強度を段階化する |\n| CE-C01-003 | human approvalはautomation bias、warning fatigue、approval deceptionで形骸化し得る | human gateを最終保証とせず、trusted summaryとreadbackを併置する |\n| CE-C01-004 | 外部workflow engineを使っても、source snapshotやartifact semanticsが誤れば正しい状態機械にならない | orchestrationの存在とoperating contractの充足を分ける |\n| CE-C01-005 | checkpoint/replay実装でも、crash境界や長時間tool callでside effectが重複する報告がある | checkpointをexactly-once保証とみなさず、idempotency key、deduplication、before/after readbackを要求する |\n| CE-C01-006 | workflow frameworkのCOMPLETEDは、関数が例外なくreturnしたことを指し、業務成果の正しさと一致しない場合がある | runtime stateとbusiness acceptance stateを二層化する |\n| CE-C01-007 | PROV、OpenLineage、A2Aはそれぞれprovenance、pipeline lineage、agent interoperabilityを扱うが、単独でOperating Contractの十分条件を定義しない | 標準fieldをそのまま転記せず、標準由来fieldと辞典の合成fieldを識別する |\n| CE-C01-008 | A2A issue #1313ではMessageとArtifactの意味境界が曖昧で、同じ結果が複数shapeに実装され得る | 「artifact配列がある」だけでhandoff成功とせず、成果物のdurability、ID、type、version、location、acceptanceを契約する |\n| CE-C01-009 | A2A仕様はtask historyが任意で、一部messageが保存・再配送されないことを明記する | critical stateを会話historyだけへ埋め込まず、first-class fieldまたはversioned artifact参照にする |\n| CE-C01-010 | A2Aのcontext ID ownershipには公開issueで実装上の疑問が残る | task ID、context ID、run IDを同一視せず、生成主体とauthorityを実装profileで明記する |" }, { "heading": "6. UNKNOWN register", "text": "1. UNKNOWN_ID: UNK-C01-001; QUESTION: あらゆるstateful AI業務に共通する最小Operating Contract fieldはどこまでか; WHY IT MATTERS: fieldを増やしすぎず再開・監査を成立させる; CURRENT EVIDENCE: S020/S052、W3C PROV、OpenLineage 1.53.0、A2A、OpenAI Agents SDK、Semantic Kernelに部分集合。普遍的十分条件は未発見; CLOSURE ROUTE: 未抽出S019/S029/S041/S044/S045/S049→schema v0.2の模擬task比較→他provider実装で反証; TEMPORARY POLICY: schema v0.2を標準由来/合成/条件付きへ分け、最小性は閉じない\n\n2. UNKNOWN_ID: UNK-C01-002; QUESTION: checkpoint/handoff completenessをprovider-neutralに測る最小testは何か; WHY IT MATTERS: provider比較と長期task回帰に必要; CURRENT EVIDENCE: S052、四院失敗観測、workflow OSS、A2A、公開issueに加え、local mockでclean-process blind resume、history欠落、commit後crash、dedup retry、receipt、readbackを6/6 PASS; CLOSURE ROUTE: 同じtest profileをGemini/GPT/Claude/Grokおよび実workflow engineで再実行; TEMPORARY POLICY: Core testのlocal baselineは確定。provider/runtime適合はProduct Mappingで閉じるまで残す\n\n3. UNKNOWN_ID: UNK-C01-003; QUESTION: human gateをどのrisk classで必須にするか; WHY IT MATTERS: 承認過多と事故防止の両立; CURRENT EVIDENCE: S012/S018/S025/S051/S054、automation-bias review、NIST AI RMF 1.0/GAI Profile、EU AI Act Article 14; CLOSURE ROUTE: CORE-05でside-effect classを精緻化し、sector ruleと組織risk toleranceへmapping; TEMPORARY POLICY: Coreはrisk/autonomy/context、影響、可逆性、不確実性、外部scopeをdecision dimensionsとして固定。数値・業種・承認者閾値はORG/専門章へ" }, { "heading": "7. Product volatility boundary", "text": "CORE-01には固定値のPRODUCT_VOLATILE claimを置かない。次はPM-GEMINIへ送る。\n\n- Geminiの会話履歴、memory、Gems、Workspace side panel等の具体的state/persistence\n\n- model名、context/file上限、UI、rollout、edition\n\n- background execution、automation、agent/action、approval UI\n\n- native audit event、retention、export、version history\n\nOrganization固有の「AI Studio / Workspace Studio / NotebookLMがblocked」等はORG-01/ORG-05へ送り、Google製品一般の非対応へ昇格しない。" }, { "heading": "8. Operating Contract schema v0.2", "text": "SOURCE BASISはfieldの由来を示す。STANDARD-BASEDは標準と同じ概念を持つこと、CORE SYNTHESISは複数sourceと失敗観測から本辞典が要求することを意味する。前者も標準準拠を自動認定する表示ではない。\n\n1. GROUP: Identity; FIELD: CONTRACT_VERSION; REQUIRED WHEN: 全materialized contract（OC-0を含む）; MEANING: schemaとpolicyの版。旧fixtureでOC-1へ寄せていたが、契約そのものを識別するため全tier必須へ修正; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS + re-audit\n\n2. GROUP: Identity; FIELD: TASK_ID; REQUIRED WHEN: OC-2以上、または非同期task; MEANING: lifecycleを通じて不変の仕事ID; SOURCE BASIS: A2A / CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n3. GROUP: Identity; FIELD: RUN_ID; REQUIRED WHEN: retry、再実行、side effect、監査対象; MEANING: 同じtask内の実行attemptを識別; SOURCE BASIS: OpenLineage\n\n4. GROUP: Identity; FIELD: CONTEXT_ID; REQUIRED WHEN: 複数task/messageを同一文脈へ束ねる時; MEANING: task間文脈の識別子と生成主体; SOURCE BASIS: A2A + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n5. GROUP: Identity; FIELD: EXECUTION_ACTOR; REQUIRED WHEN: 監査対象、handoff、external action; MEANING: 実行agent/model/surface/account/roleを識別; SOURCE BASIS: W3C Agent + S019\n\n6. GROUP: Identity; FIELD: RUN_TIME_WINDOW; REQUIRED WHEN: 非同期、監査、side effect、incident; MEANING: runの開始・終了・観測時刻; SOURCE BASIS: W3C time / OpenLineage + S019\n\n7. GROUP: Configuration; FIELD: CONFIG_RELEASE_REF; REQUIRED WHEN: prompt/source/model/tool/schema/policyが版管理される時; MEANING: 複合実行構成のrelease IDまたはmanifest参照; SOURCE BASIS: S040/S044\n\n8. GROUP: Intent; FIELD: OBJECTIVE; REQUIRED WHEN: 全task; MEANING: 何を変える、作る、判断する仕事か; SOURCE BASIS: W3C Plan + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n9. GROUP: Intent; FIELD: COMPLETION_CRITERIA; REQUIRED WHEN: 全materialized task; MEANING: 観測可能なbusiness acceptance条件。OC-0では回答存在・scope等の軽量条件でよい; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n10. GROUP: Intent; FIELD: ACCEPTANCE_CONTRACT_REF; REQUIRED WHEN: 反復eval、release gate、複数verifier; MEANING: dataset/scorer/rubric/pass policy/source snapshot等の版ed contract; SOURCE BASIS: S045\n\n11. GROUP: Control; FIELD: ALLOWED_ACTIONS; REQUIRED WHEN: 全task; MEANING: read/draft/write/send/delete等の許可境界; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n12. GROUP: Control; FIELD: PROHIBITED_ACTIONS; REQUIRED WHEN: 全task; MEANING: 明示的に行ってはならない操作; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n13. GROUP: Control; FIELD: AUTHORIZATION_SCOPE; REQUIRED WHEN: 外部tool、非read action、trust boundary、agent handoff; MEANING: principal、resource、operation、期限、承認条件; SOURCE BASIS: A2A security + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n14. GROUP: Control; FIELD: SIDE_EFFECT_PROFILE; REQUIRED WHEN: 外部stateを変えるtask; MEANING: primary/secondary effect、commit point、reversibility、blast radius; SOURCE BASIS: S018/S029 + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n15. GROUP: Control; FIELD: RETRY_IDEMPOTENCY_POLICY; REQUIRED WHEN: retry可能なside effect。Temporal Activityはat-least-onceになり得るためC3で必須; MEANING: retry単位、idempotency key/dedup、reconciliation、上限; SOURCE BASIS: S005/S018/S041 + EXT-C01-018/019\n\n16. GROUP: Input; FIELD: AUTHORITATIVE_INPUTS; REQUIRED WHEN: source-backed task、またはOC-1以上のartifact task。外部sourceなしは明示的な空集合/NOT_APPLICABLE; MEANING: 正本entity/sourceと対象scope; SOURCE BASIS: W3C Entity/Usage + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n17. GROUP: Input; FIELD: SOURCE_AUTHORITY_RULE; REQUIRED WHEN: source衝突・複数版が起こり得る時; MEANING: どのsource/versionを優先するか; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n18. GROUP: Input; FIELD: INPUT_ENTITY_VERSION_SNAPSHOT; REQUIRED WHEN: mutable source、またはOC-2以上で外部sourceを使う時; MEANING: entity ID、version/hash/revision、取得時点; SOURCE BASIS: W3C PROV / OpenLineage\n\n19. GROUP: State; FIELD: CURRENT_STATE; REQUIRED WHEN: OC-2以上; MEANING: 次の実行判断を変える現在値; SOURCE BASIS: A2A TaskStatus + workflow practice\n\n20. GROUP: State; FIELD: RUNTIME_STATUS; REQUIRED WHEN: 非同期、workflow/agent実行; MEANING: submitted/working/failed等の実行状態; SOURCE BASIS: A2A / OpenLineage\n\n21. GROUP: State; FIELD: BUSINESS_ACCEPTANCE_STATUS; REQUIRED WHEN: artifactまたは外部stateを受け入れるtask。対象外はNOT_APPLICABLEを明示; MEANING: verifying/accepted/rejected等の業務受入状態; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS + EXT-C01-004/020\n\n22. GROUP: Output; FIELD: EXPECTED_ARTIFACTS; REQUIRED WHEN: artifactを作るtask; MEANING: 成果物の役割と期待数; SOURCE BASIS: OpenLineage / A2A + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n23. GROUP: Output; FIELD: ARTIFACT_DESCRIPTOR; REQUIRED WHEN: artifactを作るtask; MEANING: ID、type、format/media type、location、version/hash; SOURCE BASIS: A2A Part/Artifact + W3C Entity\n\n24. GROUP: Output; FIELD: OUTPUT_LINEAGE; REQUIRED WHEN: source変換・合成・監査対象; MEANING: generated-by、derived-from、responsible agent/run; SOURCE BASIS: W3C PROV / OpenLineage\n\n25. GROUP: Output; FIELD: UPDATE_MODE; REQUIRED WHEN: 既存artifactを変更する時; MEANING: create/append/replace/supersedeと上書き可否; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n26. GROUP: Verification; FIELD: EXECUTION_EVIDENCE; REQUIRED WHEN: OC-3以上、監査対象、incident、cross-boundary handoff; MEANING: declared/evidenced source、requested/executed action、trace、before/after; SOURCE BASIS: S019/S029\n\n27. GROUP: Verification; FIELD: APPROVAL_EVIDENCE; REQUIRED WHEN: human gateがある時; MEANING: approver、対象critical fields、decision、時刻、条件; SOURCE BASIS: S019/S044 + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n28. GROUP: Verification; FIELD: READBACK_EVIDENCE; REQUIRED WHEN: artifactまたは外部stateを変えるtask; MEANING: 検証方法、観測値、時点、verifier; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS; τ-bench practice\n\n29. GROUP: Progress; FIELD: CHECKPOINT_ID_TIME; REQUIRED WHEN: session越え、retry、handoff; MEANING: 再開地点、version、確定時刻; SOURCE BASIS: workflow practice + W3C time\n\n30. GROUP: Progress; FIELD: COMPLETED_UNITS; REQUIRED WHEN: OC-2以上; MEANING: 受入済みのbounded unitsと証拠; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n31. GROUP: Progress; FIELD: NOT_DONE; REQUIRED WHEN: OC-2以上; MEANING: 未着手・未完成・検証待ち; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n32. GROUP: Progress; FIELD: DECISIONS_AND_REJECTED_ALTERNATIVES; REQUIRED WHEN: 過去判断が次の選択を制約する時; MEANING: 採否、理由、根拠。却下案の無限再提案を防ぐ; SOURCE BASIS: S041 + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n33. GROUP: Progress; FIELD: OPEN_UNKNOWNS; REQUIRED WHEN: 不明点がある時。無い場合も空集合を記録; MEANING: 未確定事項、影響、closure route; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n34. GROUP: Progress; FIELD: BLOCKERS; REQUIRED WHEN: 全OC-2以上（blockerなしも空集合を記録）; MEANING: 原因のevidence、影響、解除条件、迂回可否; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n35. GROUP: Handoff; FIELD: HANDOFF_FROM; REQUIRED WHEN: owner/control transfer; MEANING: 渡し手とそのrole; SOURCE BASIS: W3C Agent/Delegation + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n36. GROUP: Handoff; FIELD: NEXT_OWNER; REQUIRED WHEN: owner/control transfer; MEANING: 受け手と必要capability; SOURCE BASIS: agent SDK practice + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n37. GROUP: Handoff; FIELD: HANDOFF_REASON; REQUIRED WHEN: owner/control transfer; MEANING: なぜ、どの条件で移すか; SOURCE BASIS: OpenAI Agents SDK typed input example\n\n38. GROUP: Handoff; FIELD: HISTORY_POINTER_OR_CURATED_HISTORY; REQUIRED WHEN: 過去interactionが次判断を変える時; MEANING: 必要部分へのversioned参照。全文転送を既定にしない; SOURCE BASIS: A2A + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n39. GROUP: Handoff; FIELD: HANDOFF_RECEIPT; REQUIRED WHEN: trust boundary、非同期、high-impact。単一process内の低risk transferはNOT_APPLICABLEを明示; MEANING: 受け手がtask ID、snapshot、artifact、scopeを検証した記録; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS + A2A delivery limit\n\n40. GROUP: Continuation; FIELD: NEXT_ACTION; REQUIRED WHEN: OC-2以上; MEANING: 次回が再説明なしで実行できる一手; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n41. GROUP: Continuation; FIELD: STOP_CONDITION; REQUIRED WHEN: 全task; MEANING: 完了、停止、承認要求、escalation条件; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n42. GROUP: Continuation; FIELD: RECOVERY_OR_FALLBACK_REF; REQUIRED WHEN: continuity要件、OC-3以上、business critical; MEANING: 回復、degraded/manual routeと失われるcapabilityへの参照; SOURCE BASIS: S029/S040/S041\n\n43. GROUP: Evidence; FIELD: EVIDENCE_LABELS; REQUIRED WHEN: 全materialized contract; MEANING: observed/spec/research/inference/unknown等; SOURCE BASIS: CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n44. GROUP: Evidence; FIELD: LAST_UPDATED; REQUIRED WHEN: OC-2以上; MEANING: state freshnessと更新主体; SOURCE BASIS: W3C time + CORE SYNTHESIS\n\n### 8.1 Field-source crosswalk audit\n\n1. OPERATIONAL NEED: input/output由来; W3C PROV: entity、usage、generation、derivation、agent責任; OpenLineage 1.53.0: Job/Runとinput/output Dataset、source version; Temporal: Event History上のcommand/activity結果; Prefect 3: state data/resultはartifact側へ分離され得る; A2A spec 1.0.0: artifactとpartは持つがsource authorityは自由metadata; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: framework依存; CORE-01 DECISION: entity/version/lineageをfirst-class化し、authority ruleは合成field\n\n2. OPERATIONAL NEED: task/run/context識別; W3C PROV: activity/agent IDは表せる; OpenLineage 1.53.0: job namespace/name、run ID; Temporal: Workflow ID、Namespace、Run ID; Prefect 3: flow/task runとstate history; A2A spec 1.0.0: task ID、context ID; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: agent/transfer target; CORE-01 DECISION: TASK/RUN/CONTEXTを別IDにし、必要条件を分ける\n\n3. OPERATIONAL NEED: 実行状態; W3C PROV: activity start/end; OpenLineage 1.53.0: STARTとterminal events; Temporal: Open/Closed、Running/Paused/Completed/Failed、append-only event; Prefect 3: state name/type/terminal、Scheduled/Running/Failed/Crashed等; A2A spec 1.0.0: detailed TaskStateとtimestamp; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: routing/control transfer + runtime; CORE-01 DECISION: RUNTIME_STATUSとして採用するがbusiness acceptanceと分離\n\n4. OPERATIONAL NEED: 成果物; W3C PROV: entityとして表現可能; OpenLineage 1.53.0: output Dataset; Temporal: workflow result/eventは業務artifactを定義しない; Prefect 3: state result/dataをartifact tableへ置ける; A2A spec 1.0.0: Artifact、Part、media type、filename/URL; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: message/contextとdurable storeの実装差; CORE-01 DECISION: ARTIFACT_DESCRIPTORをdurable output契約にする\n\n5. OPERATIONAL NEED: plan/objective; W3C PROV: Plan entityとactivity association; OpenLineage 1.53.0: job metadata/documentation; Temporal: workflow definition/commands; Prefect 3: flow/task function definition; A2A spec 1.0.0: task metadataへ拡張可能; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: handoff description/tool schema; CORE-01 DECISION: OBJECTIVEは必須、plan/procedure参照は必要時にinputへ含める\n\n6. OPERATIONAL NEED: authorization; W3C PROV: responsibility/delegationは表せる; OpenLineage 1.53.0: 観測schemaが中心; Temporal: Activity実装側の認可へ委譲; Prefect 3: task/flow stateは認可scopeを規定しない; A2A spec 1.0.0: auth/security schemeはある; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: enablement/filter/callbackはあるがfield値認可は別途必要; CORE-01 DECISION: AUTHORIZATION_SCOPEを合成fieldとして保持\n\n7. OPERATIONAL NEED: completion/acceptance; W3C PROV: domain acceptanceは規定外; OpenLineage 1.53.0: terminal run state; Temporal: Workflow/Activity terminalはbusiness acceptanceでない; Prefect 3: return値でCompletedになり得る; A2A spec 1.0.0: completed terminal state; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: transfer成功は成果受入と別; CORE-01 DECISION: runtimeとbusiness acceptanceを二層化しreadback必須\n\n8. OPERATIONAL NEED: retry/idempotency; W3C PROV: 規定外; OpenLineage 1.53.0: run eventの観測; Temporal: Activityはretryされ得て、Run ID+Activity ID keyを推奨; Prefect 3: retry/state historyは業務dedupを保証しない; A2A spec 1.0.0: protocolはpolicyを規定しない; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: framework/toolごとに異なる; CORE-01 DECISION: C3でretry policy、dedup、readbackを必須化\n\n9. OPERATIONAL NEED: handoff completeness; W3C PROV: communication/delegationは表せる; OpenLineage 1.53.0: owner transferは中心外; Temporal: child workflow/signalは責任移管の業務packetでない; Prefect 3: callback/runtimeは移送・受領を規定しない; A2A spec 1.0.0: status/artifacts/history/metadata; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: typed input、filter、reason、target、directed edges; CORE-01 DECISION: completed/not-done/unknowns/receiptを合成し、標準だけで十分としない\n\n10. OPERATIONAL NEED: critical history; W3C PROV: bundle/collectionは表せる; OpenLineage 1.53.0: additive event観測; Temporal: Event HistoryはdurableだがMemoはcritical stateに不適; Prefect 3: state historyは観測用でbusiness sourceではない; A2A spec 1.0.0: historyは任意で全message保存を保証しない; Agent/workflow OSS handoff: input filter/history nestingが可能; CORE-01 DECISION: critical stateをhistory外のfirst-class fieldへ置く\n\nこのcrosswalkでCLM-C01-003/004/007の構成要素は外部schemaへ部分的に結び付いた。ただし、どの標準も本章の全fieldを規定していないため、EVIDENCE_BOUNDではなくWITH_SYNTHESISまたはWITH_LIMITを維持する。UNK-C01-001は未解決である。\n\n### 8.1.1 Requiredness re-audit (2026-09-05)\n\n今回の再監査では、標準のfield存在をそのまま「全task必須」と数えず、契約をmaterializeする最低限（M0）と、業務形状が発生した時だけ必須となる条件付き集合（C1〜C4）へ分けた。W3C PROVはentity/activity/agent、usage/generation/derivation、responsibility/delegation、timeを与えるが、business completion・authorization・handoff receiptは規定しない。TemporalはEvent HistoryとWorkflow/Run識別、Activity retryを実装するが、Activityは複数回実行され得る。Prefectはstateのname/type/terminalとresult/artifactを分ける。A2Aはtask/context/status/artifactを持つが、historyとmessage配送はcritical stateの耐久層ではない。OpenAI Agents SDKとSemantic Kernelはhandoff先、条件、payload、callback/runtimeを提供するが、source authority、completed/not-done、受領照合、business readbackを自動付与しない。\n\n1. PROFILE: M0 MATERIALIZED; REQUIRED FIELD SET: CONTRACT_VERSION, OBJECTIVE, COMPLETION_CRITERIA, ALLOWED_ACTIONS, PROHIBITED_ACTIONS, STOP_CONDITION, EVIDENCE_LABELS; RE-AUDIT DECISION: 全materialized contractで必須。read-onlyではALLOWED_ACTIONS=[read,draft]、禁止集合や停止条件は空にせず明示する; EVIDENCE / FAILURE ENVELOPE: W3C Plan/timeの不足をCore synthesisで補う。OC-0へTASK/CHECKPOINTを強制しない（R-01/R-03）\n\n2. PROFILE: C1 SOURCE / ARTIFACT; REQUIRED FIELD SET: source-backedまたはOC-1以上: AUTHORITATIVE_INPUTS; artifact task: EXPECTED_ARTIFACTS, ARTIFACT_DESCRIPTOR, BUSINESS_ACCEPTANCE_STATUS, READBACK_EVIDENCE; RE-AUDIT DECISION: sourceなしの一回回答へsource snapshotを強制しない。ただしartifactを要求した時はmessageやreturn値だけでなくdescriptor/readbackを必須化; EVIDENCE / FAILURE ENVELOPE: A2AはoutputをArtifactへ置くことを推奨し、Prefectはstate dataをartifact側へ分離し得る。COMPLETEDだけでは受入不可（EXT-C01-004/010/020）\n\n3. PROFILE: C2 RESUMABLE; REQUIRED FIELD SET: TASK_ID, CURRENT_STATE, CHECKPOINT_ID_TIME, COMPLETED_UNITS, NOT_DONE, OPEN_UNKNOWNS, BLOCKERS, NEXT_ACTION, LAST_UPDATED; RE-AUDIT DECISION: session越え、長時間、retry、担当交代のいずれかで必須。critical stateをhistory/messageだけへ置かない; EVIDENCE / FAILURE ENVELOPE: Temporal Event History/A2A task stateは再開を支えるが、A2A historyは任意・非信頼、Temporal memoもcritical state向きでない（EXT-C01-003/010）\n\n4. PROFILE: C3 SIDE-EFFECTING; REQUIRED FIELD SET: RUN_ID, EXECUTION_ACTOR, RUN_TIME_WINDOW, AUTHORIZATION_SCOPE, SIDE_EFFECT_PROFILE, RETRY_IDEMPOTENCY_POLICY, EXECUTION_EVIDENCE, READBACK_EVIDENCE, RECOVERY_OR_FALLBACK_REF; RE-AUDIT DECISION: 外部state変更またはretry可能なactionで必須。TemporalのActivity retryは「観測上の完了一回」と「実行一回」を分けるため、idempotency/dedup/readbackを落とせない; EVIDENCE / FAILURE ENVELOPE: Temporal Activity docsはRun ID+Activity IDのkeyを例示する一方、部分処理の複数回実行を警告（EXT-C01-018/019）。既存LangGraph issueも同じfailure envelopeを示す\n\n5. PROFILE: C4 HANDOFF / TRUST BOUNDARY; REQUIRED FIELD SET: transfer時: HANDOFF_FROM, NEXT_OWNER, HANDOFF_REASON; trust boundary・非同期・high-impact時: HANDOFF_RECEIPT; historyが次判断に必要な時だけHISTORY_POINTER_OR_CURATED_HISTORY; RE-AUDIT DECISION: handoff先と理由はtransferごとに必須。receiptは受け手がtask/contract/source/artifact/scopeを照合した時だけ成立し、history全文は必須にしない; EVIDENCE / FAILURE ENVELOPE: OpenAI Agents SDK/Semantic Kernelはrouting/payload/callbackを実装するが受領・業務受入は別契約。A2Aはmessageとartifactを区別し、critical message配送を保証しない（EXT-C01-010/011/012）\n\n6. PROFILE: REFERENCE-ONLY / CONDITIONAL; REQUIRED FIELD SET: CONFIG_RELEASE_REF, ACCEPTANCE_CONTRACT_REF, SOURCE_AUTHORITY_RULE, INPUT_ENTITY_VERSION_SNAPSHOT, CONTEXT_ID, OUTPUT_LINEAGE, DECISIONS_AND_REJECTED_ALTERNATIVES; RE-AUDIT DECISION: versioned config、mutable source、反復eval、context grouping、source変換、判断制約が発生した時だけ参照を要求。巨大なtop-level必須表へ昇格しない; EVIDENCE / FAILURE ENVELOPE: PROV/OpenLineageのlineageとA2A contextは有用だが、適用scopeを越えて全taskへ外挿しない\n\nこの判定で、旧schema v0.2のOC-0へ寄せていたAUTHORITATIVE_INPUTS/EXPECTED_ARTIFACTS/BUSINESS_ACCEPTANCE_STATUSをM0から外し、CONTRACT_VERSIONをOC-0から外さない形へ修正した。これは「最小集合が証明された」という意味ではない。representative fixtureでprofileのfalse-acceptとover-contractを検出しただけであり、UNK-C01-001はBOUNDED_UNKNOWNとして維持する。\n\n### 8.2 Nested record minima v0.1\n\ntop-level fieldを増殖させないため、複数値は次の構造recordへ畳む。空値を推測で補完せず、UNKNOWNまたはNOT_AVAILABLEと理由を記録する。\n\n| RECORD | MINIMUM MEMBERS |\n| --- | --- |\n| ARTIFACT_DESCRIPTOR | artifact_id, role, type, format_or_media_type, location, version_or_digest, generated_by_run, derived_from_inputs, update_mode |\n| EXECUTION_EVIDENCE | declared_sources, evidenced_sources, requested_actions, executed_actions, trace_ref, before_state_ref, after_state_ref, incident_link |\n| SIDE_EFFECT_PROFILE | primary_effect, secondary_effects, commit_point, reversibility, blast_radius, recovery_ref |\n| RETRY_IDEMPOTENCY_POLICY | retry_unit, max_attempts, idempotency_key_or_dedup, pre_retry_readback, uncertain_state_action, reconciliation |\n| READBACK_EVIDENCE | verifier, method, observed_at, observed_target, observed_version_or_state, result, limitations |\n| UNKNOWN_ITEM | unknown_id, claim_or_question, status, current_evidence, evidence_level, last_checked_at, stale_after, owner, next_test_or_readback, closure_criterion |\n| HANDOFF_RECEIPT | receiver, received_at, accept_or_reject, task_contract_checked, source_snapshot_checked, artifacts_checked, authorization_checked, discrepancies |\n\nUNKNOWN_ITEM.statusは少なくとも PUBLIC_SCHEMA_LIMIT、ENVIRONMENT_REQUIRED、EMPIRICAL_TEST_REQUIRED、VOLATILE_RECHECK、IRREDUCIBLE_PROVENANCE_LIMIT、BLOCKED、CLOSED_WITH_EVIDENCEを区別する。S049由来のtaxonomyをprovider-neutralに用いるが、製品ごとの個別UNKNOWNはProduct MappingまたはOrganization Overlayに置く。\n\n### 8.3 Contract strength tiers v0.2\n\n| TIER | USE WHEN | MINIMUM CONTRACT | ADDITIONAL CONTROL |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| OC-0 EPHEMERAL | 一回完結・read-only・再開不要 | objective / allowed inputs / answer format | 根拠表示。外部stateを変更しない |\n| OC-1 ARTIFACT | 保存成果物を作るが単一session中心 | OC-0 + authoritative inputs / expected artifact / completion criteria / readback | artifact existence・形式・scopeを検証 |\n| OC-2 RESUMABLE | session越え、長時間、担当交代 | OC-1 + task ID / current state / checkpoint / completed / not-done / unknowns / next action | source snapshotとartifact versionを固定 |\n| OC-3 SIDE_EFFECTING | toolで外部stateを変更、retryあり | OC-2 + action scope / before-state / idempotency key or dedup rule / after-state / recovery semantics | checkpointをexactly-once保証とみなさない |\n| OC-4 HIGH_IMPACT | 社外送信、機密、金銭、大量変更、不可逆 | OC-3 + human-at-commit / independent verification / blast radius / escalation / stop condition | approval対象のcritical fieldsと反証材料を提示 |\n\nこのtierは業務riskを確定する規格ではなく、契約を一律最大化して軽作業を潰さないための初期分類である。閾値・業種別強度はCORE-05およびOrganization Overlayで検証する。\n\n### 8.4 Checkpoint / handoff packet matrix\n\n1. RECORD: CHECKPOINT; TRIGGER: session終了、pause、retry前、bounded unit完了; REQUIRED CORE: task/contract version、current state、input snapshot、completed/not-done、artifact descriptors、unknowns/blockers、next action、timestamp; ADDITIONAL FIELDS: config/eval refs、decision log、recovery refを条件付き追加; RECEIVER VERIFICATION: source revision、artifact location/version、next actionを再取得; INVALID WHEN: 会話要約だけ、未検証作業をcompleted扱い、freshness不明\n\n2. RECORD: HANDOFF; TRIGGER: owner/agent/provider/controlの変更; REQUIRED CORE: checkpoint全field; ADDITIONAL FIELDS: from/to owner、reason、authorization scope、curated history/pointer、stop condition; RECEIVER VERIFICATION: task/contract/source/artifact/scopeを照合してreceipt; INVALID WHEN: next owner不明、critical stateがhistoryだけ、receipt欠落\n\n3. RECORD: INCIDENT FREEZE; TRIGGER: unsafe/unknown external state、重大regression; REQUIRED CORE: last known-good checkpoint、runtime/business state、before/after evidence; ADDITIONAL FIELDS: incident link、containment、uncertain action、recovery test、stop authority; RECEIVER VERIFICATION: 証拠保全と副作用停止を確認; INVALID WHEN: 原因推測でstateを書換え、retry前readbackなし\n\n4. RECORD: CONTINUITY PACKET; TRIGGER: provider/surface/dependency failure、長期停止; REQUIRED CORE: handoff packetのprovider-neutral部分; ADDITIONAL FIELDS: degraded/manual route、loss in fallback、open incidents、RTO/RPO class; RECEIVER VERIFICATION: fallback側でsource/tool/capability差を照合; INVALID WHEN: chat全文だけを別providerへ投入、lossを非表示\n\n### 8.5 Completion / readback matrix\n\n1. WORK TYPE: read-only answer; RUNTIME SIGNAL: response emitted; BUSINESS COMPLETION EVIDENCE: required question/scopeを満たし、根拠がsourceへ結び付く; READBACK TARGET: response assertionsとsource span; REMAINING STATE WHEN EVIDENCE FAILS: BUSINESS_VERIFYINGまたはBUSINESS_REJECTED\n\n2. WORK TYPE: artifact create; RUNTIME SIGNAL: file/object create call returned; BUSINESS COMPLETION EVIDENCE: artifact descriptor、存在、形式、scope、version/digest; READBACK TARGET: durable artifact location; REMAINING STATE WHEN EVIDENCE FAILS: BUSINESS_VERIFYING; missingならBUSINESS_REJECTED\n\n3. WORK TYPE: artifact update; RUNTIME SIGNAL: update call returned; BUSINESS COMPLETION EVIDENCE: expected diff、new version、old version preservation/overwrite policy; READBACK TARGET: artifact revisionとcontent diff; REMAINING STATE WHEN EVIDENCE FAILS: BUSINESS_VERIFYING、source衝突ならBLOCKED\n\n4. WORK TYPE: external state change; RUNTIME SIGNAL: tool/API/UI reports success; BUSINESS COMPLETION EVIDENCE: target resourceのexpected final state、unauthorized secondary effect無し; READBACK TARGET: source-of-truth system; REMAINING STATE WHEN EVIDENCE FAILS: UNKNOWN_CAUSEならretry禁止、FAILEDならrecovery\n\n5. WORK TYPE: retry/replay; RUNTIME SIGNAL: workflow resumed; BUSINESS COMPLETION EVIDENCE: idempotency/dedup成立、外部effectが一回分; READBACK TARGET: external sinkとaction ID; REMAINING STATE WHEN EVIDENCE FAILS: RECONCILINGまたはhuman escalation\n\n6. WORK TYPE: human approval; RUNTIME SIGNAL: approval event exists; BUSINESS COMPLETION EVIDENCE: approved critical fieldsと実行対象が一致し、実行後readbackも通る; READBACK TARGET: approval record + final state; REMAINING STATE WHEN EVIDENCE FAILS: APPROVAL_GRANTED / BUSINESS_VERIFYING\n\n7. WORK TYPE: handoff; RUNTIME SIGNAL: control transfer invoked / notification 2xx; BUSINESS COMPLETION EVIDENCE: receiver receiptとtask/source/artifact/scope照合; READBACK TARGET: receiver-side contract record; REMAINING STATE WHEN EVIDENCE FAILS: HANDOFF_PENDING / HANDOFF_REJECTED\n\n8. WORK TYPE: workflow/agent terminal; RUNTIME SIGNAL: COMPLETED event; BUSINESS COMPLETION EVIDENCE: versioned acceptance contractのhard gatesとartifact readbackがPASS; READBACK TARGET: eval record + artifact/external state; REMAINING STATE WHEN EVIDENCE FAILS: RUNTIME_COMPLETED_BUSINESS_VERIFYING\n\n### 8.6 Human-gate placement baseline\n\n1. ACTION CLASS: low-risk read-only / private draft; DEFAULT GATE: no commit gate; sampled verification; REVIEWER MUST SEE: sources、UNKNOWN、output scope; POST-GATE EVIDENCE: source/format checks; SAFE FALLBACK: manual answer/draft\n\n2. ACTION CLASS: internal reversible write; DEFAULT GATE: risk-based pre-commit preview; REVIEWER MUST SEE: target、before/after diff、reversibility、affected scope; POST-GATE EVIDENCE: artifact revision/readback; SAFE FALLBACK: draft-only or restore prior version\n\n3. ACTION CLASS: external send/share/publish; DEFAULT GATE: human-at-commit; REVIEWER MUST SEE: recipient/audience、exact payload、attachments、sensitivity、secondary effects; POST-GATE EVIDENCE: sent/shared state、recipient/scope readback; SAFE FALLBACK: save draft; manual send\n\n4. ACTION CLASS: financial/legal/HR/safety or large-batch change; DEFAULT GATE: independent authorized approval; segregation where required; REVIEWER MUST SEE: authoritative source、critical fields、counterevidence、blast radius、rollback/fallback; POST-GATE EVIDENCE: independent verification and audit record; SAFE FALLBACK: prohibit autonomous commit; deterministic/manual path\n\n5. ACTION CLASS: irreversible or uncertain-state retry; DEFAULT GATE: stop-and-escalate before another action; REVIEWER MUST SEE: last confirmed state、uncertainty、possible duplicate/harm、repair options; POST-GATE EVIDENCE: reconciliation or explicit risk acceptance; SAFE FALLBACK: no retry; isolate and repair\n\nこの表は初期baselineであり、業種法令・組織policy・金額・人数等の普遍的閾値を確定しない。UNK-C01-003を維持し、詳細なside-effect risk classはCORE-05、組織固有承認者はOrganization Overlayへ送る。\n\n### 8.7 Alternative implementation routes\n\n| ROUTE | FIT | STRENGTH | LOSS / LIMIT |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| one-shot/manual | OC-0、低risk、再開不要 | 最小運用負荷 | persistence/handoff無し。外部action禁止 |\n| human-maintained ledger | UI-only、外部engine不可 | source/state/decisionをprovider外へ保持 | update漏れ・転記誤り・human load |\n| provider-native history/project | short-to-medium continuity | setupが軽くUXと統合 | export、version、backend、cross-provider portabilityに上限 |\n| deterministic workflow engine | repeated structured task | explicit state/retry/trace | business semanticsとsource authorityは別契約が必要 |\n| read-only/draft-only degraded route | capability/permission/incident時 | blast radiusを抑える | automation/action、live data、速度を失う場合 |\n| external state/lineage store + agent layer | OC-2〜4、multi-agent/provider | portable state/provenance/acceptanceを持ちやすい | infrastructure、security、schema運用、costが増える |" }, { "heading": "9. State taxonomy v0.2", "text": "bareなCOMPLETEDは、engine終了と業務受入を混同するため保存しない。少なくともruntime、business acceptance、handoffを別axisにする。\n\n| AXIS | STATE | DEFINITION | MUST NOT BE CONFUSED WITH |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Runtime | NOT_STARTED | 契約はあるが実作業未着手 | PREPARED |\n| Runtime | ACTIVE | bounded unitを実行中 | 「読む予定」だけの状態 |\n| Runtime | PAUSED | stateと再開条件を保存して中断 | FAILED |\n| Runtime | BLOCKED | 外部条件が満たされず進めない | UNKNOWN_CAUSE |\n| Runtime | FAILED | executionが失敗し、terminalまたはrecovery待ち | BUSINESS_REJECTED |\n| Runtime | CANCELED | 明示的に取消されterminal | FAILED |\n| Runtime | RUNTIME_COMPLETED | engine/agentが処理終了を報告 | BUSINESS_ACCEPTED |\n| Business acceptance | BUSINESS_VERIFYING | artifact/external stateはあるがreadback未完 | BUSINESS_ACCEPTED |\n| Business acceptance | BUSINESS_ACCEPTED | versioned completion criteriaとreadbackを満たす | modelの自己申告、人間承認だけ |\n| Business acceptance | BUSINESS_REJECTED | acceptance criteria未達 | runtime failureだけ |\n| Approval | APPROVAL_PENDING | critical fields提示済みでdecision待ち | HANDOFF_PENDING |\n| Approval | APPROVAL_GRANTED | 指定scope/条件への承認が記録済み | execution済み、BUSINESS_ACCEPTED |\n| Approval | APPROVAL_DENIED | 承認されずaction禁止 | execution failure |\n| Handoff | HANDOFF_PENDING | transfer開始済みだがreceiver receipt未確認 | HANDOFF_ACCEPTED |\n| Handoff | HANDOFF_ACCEPTED | receiverがtask/source/artifact/scopeを照合し受領 | business completion |\n| Handoff | HANDOFF_REJECTED | receiverが不整合を示して受領拒否 | task failure |\n| Reconciliation | RECONCILING | duplicate/uncertain external stateを照合・修復中 | safe-to-retry |\n| Lifecycle | SUPERSEDED | 新state/versionへ置換済み | DELETED |\n| Diagnosis | UNKNOWN_CAUSE | 観測差はあるが原因未確定 | BLOCKED_BY_ORG等の推測原因 |" }, { "heading": "10. Acceptance tests", "text": "### TST-C01-01 Bounded resume\n\n- 3段階taskを用意し、stage 1完了後にsessionを終了する。\n\n- checkpointだけを別実行主体へ渡す。\n\n- stage 1を再実行せずstage 2から開始できるか確認する。\n\n- source version、artifact location、not-done、next actionが復元できることをpass条件とする。\n\n### TST-C01-02 Conflicting current state\n\n会話本文には旧state、state fileには新stateを置く。authority ruleに従い新stateを採用し、衝突を記録し、旧工程を再実行しないことをpass条件とする。\n\n### TST-C01-03 False completion / readback\n\n実行主体が「保存済み」と返してもartifactを作らない条件を注入する。artifact存在・内容・最終状態のreadbackが無い限りBUSINESS_VERIFYINGからBUSINESS_ACCEPTEDへ遷移しないことを確認する。runtime failureならFAILED、成果条件不成立ならBUSINESS_REJECTEDとして分ける。\n\n### TST-C01-04 Handoff completeness\n\nstate、input snapshot、completed、not-done、open questions、next owner、stop condition、output location、readback evidenceの一項目ずつを欠落させる。次担当が誤って完了扱い・再実行・範囲拡張するかを測る。\n\n### TST-C01-05 Blocked-task state\n\n一つのsubtaskをpermissionでblockし、独立して進められる別taskを残す。blockerを保存しつつ、許可範囲内の別taskへ移り、原因を推測で確定しないことをpass条件とする。\n\n### TST-C01-06 Duplicate-work prevention\n\ncompleted listとartifact readbackがある状態で同じ指示を再投入する。既済み工程を再生成せず、NEXT_ACTIONだけを進めることを確認する。\n\n### TST-C01-07 Crash/replay side-effect duplication\n\n- 外部sinkへ一意なrecordを作るtool stepを用意する。\n\n- toolの外部commit後、checkpoint確定前にprocess failureまたはtimeoutを注入する。\n\n- resume/retryし、同一record・通知・費用が重複しないか検査する。\n\n- idempotency_key、deduplication、before/after readbackの有無を変えて比較する。\n\n- checkpointが存在するだけではPASSにせず、外部最終状態が一回分であることをPASS条件とする。\n\n### TST-C01-08 Runtime completion versus business completion\n\nworkflow engineがCOMPLETEDを返す一方、要求artifactが欠落・誤形式・旧versionとなる条件を注入する。runtime stateをRUNTIME_COMPLETED、成果受入をBUSINESS_VERIFYINGとして分離し、artifact readbackが通るまでbusiness completionを成立させない。\n\n### TST-C01-09 Critical-state loss from optional history\n\n- 次工程に必須のsource revision、未完了unit、stop conditionを会話messageだけへ置く条件を作る。\n\n- A2A互換のtask historyから一部messageを省略し、stream切断・再接続も注入する。\n\n- critical fieldが失われた場合はFAILとする。\n\n- 同じ値をfirst-class contract fieldまたはversioned artifact参照へ置き、history無しでも安全に再開できることをPASS条件とする。\n\n### TST-C01-10 Message/artifact ambiguity and handoff receipt\n\n同じ最終出力を、status message、standalone message、artifactの三shapeで返すfixtureを用意する。受け手がdurable artifact ID/type/version/locationを識別し、task ID・input snapshot・scopeと照合したHANDOFF_RECEIPTを残せる場合だけPASSとする。表示できたことやHTTP 2xxだけをbusiness acceptanceに数えない。\n\n### 10.11 Schema field-ablation execution record\n\nTEST_RUN_ID: CORE-01-ABLATION-RUN-001\n\nEXECUTED_AT: 2026-09-05 11:55 JST\n\nFIXTURE: tests/CORE-01_contract_ablation_v0.1.json\n\nFIXTURE_SHA256: b393f4dcb3770b99dd4ab6aef32cf2e827827184b5d33ad1dd4a3b20ea714dd4\n\nMETHOD: local deterministic schema/semantic validation; no network write or external side effect\n\n1. FIXTURE: F-01; INJECTION: minimum OC-0; EXPECTED: PASS; ACTUAL: PASS; PRIMARY SIGNAL: task/run/checkpointを一回完結read-onlyへ強制しない\n\n2. FIXTURE: F-02; INJECTION: OC-0へTASK/RUN/CHECKPOINT/RECEIPTを過剰付与; EXPECTED: PASS_WITH_WARNINGS; ACTUAL: PASS_WITH_WARNINGS; PRIMARY SIGNAL: 最小契約と最大契約を同一化しない\n\n3. FIXTURE: F-03; INJECTION: mutable sourceだがsnapshot欠落; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; PRIMARY SIGNAL: INPUT_ENTITY_VERSION_SNAPSHOT欠落を検出\n\n4. FIXTURE: F-04; INJECTION: authority/current state/next actionをhistoryだけへ格納; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; PRIMARY SIGNAL: first-class critical state欠落を検出\n\n5. FIXTURE: F-05; INJECTION: side-effect retryからidempotency policyを除去; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; PRIMARY SIGNAL: RETRY_IDEMPOTENCY_POLICY欠落を検出\n\n6. FIXTURE: F-06; INJECTION: source/config/eval版付きcomplete handoff; EXPECTED: PASS; ACTUAL: PASS; PRIMARY SIGNAL: 条件付きfieldを含む受渡し成立\n\n7. FIXTURE: F-07; INJECTION: trust-boundary handoffでreceipt欠落; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; PRIMARY SIGNAL: HANDOFF_RECEIPT欠落を検出\n\n8. FIXTURE: F-08; INJECTION: runtime completed、readback failed、business accepted; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; PRIMARY SIGNAL: false business completionを検出\n\n9. FIXTURE: F-09; INJECTION: UNKNOWN itemからclosure criterionを除去; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; PRIMARY SIGNAL: 閉じ方のないUNKNOWNを検出\n\n10. FIXTURE: F-10; INJECTION: complete OC-4; EXPECTED: PASS; ACTUAL: PASS; PRIMARY SIGNAL: side effect、retry、approval、readbackを併置\n\n11. FIXTURE: F-11; INJECTION: status messageをdurable artifactとして扱う; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; PRIMARY SIGNAL: location/versionのないmessageを成果物扱いしない\n\n12. FIXTURE: F-12; INJECTION: versioned configだがrelease ref欠落; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; PRIMARY SIGNAL: CONFIG_RELEASE_REF欠落を検出\n\nRESULT: 12/12 expected match; PASS 3、PASS_WITH_WARNINGS 1、FAIL 8。これはfixtureに対するrule整合試験であり、全業務に対するfield最小性や特定providerの実装適合を証明しない。UNK-C01-001は閉じない。process-levelのlocal mockは§10.12へ進め、実engine/provider間handoffはProduct Mapping test profileとして残す。\n\n### 10.12 Provider-neutral local integration execution record\n\nTEST_RUN_ID: CORE-01-MOCK-INTEGRATION-RUN-001\n\nEXECUTED_AT: 2026-09-05 15:29 JST\n\nEXECUTABLE: tests/CORE-01_mock_integration_v0.1.js\n\nEXECUTABLE_SHA256: 8c955b300a9994593374abc008fd24f41e7e0ff651a54e41a8900aa84f89fa37\n\nMETHOD: Node.js child process + temporary local filesystem mock; network requestなし、実SaaS副作用なし\n\n| TEST | INJECTION / OBSERVATION | RESULT | CONTRACT SIGNAL |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| IT-C01-01 | history無しのcheckpointだけを環境変数も空の別Node processへ渡す | PASS | source revision、artifact digest、next actionを復元しstage 2へ進める |\n| IT-C01-02 | mock sink commit直後、checkpoint更新前にchildをexit 86でcrash | PASS | crash後もsink recordが一件存在することをreadback |\n| IT-C01-03 | 同一idempotency keyでretry | PASS | duplicateを検出しsink recordは一件のまま |\n| IT-C01-04 | receiver expectationへ誤ったsource revisionを注入 | PASS | receiptをsource_revision_mismatchでreject |\n| IT-C01-05 | task/contract/source/artifact/authorizationを一致 | PASS | receiptをaccept |\n| IT-C01-06 | retry後にmock sinkを再取得しpayload digestを照合 | PASS | 実行主体の成功申告でなく外部最終状態で完了判定 |\n\nRESULT: 6/6 PASS。これによりQ-C01-001のprovider-neutral local baselineは、単なるschema存在確認から実行可能testへ進んだ。ただしlocal filesystem mockは、provider API、network retry、実workflow engine、実SaaSのtransaction semanticsを代表しない。同じtest intentを各Product Mappingのadapterへ移植し、live結果をCoreへ遡及監査する。\n\n### 10.13 Requiredness re-audit execution record\n\nTEST_RUN_ID: CORE-01-FIELD-REQUIREDNESS-REAUDIT-RUN-001\n\nEXECUTED_AT: 2026-09-05 18:30 JST\n\nFIXTURE: tests/CORE-01_field_requiredness_reaudit_v0.2.json\n\nRUNNER: tests/CORE-01_field_requiredness_reaudit_v0.2.js\n\nMETHOD: local deterministic profile validation; no provider request, network write, or external side effect\n\n1. TEST: R-01; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: OC-0 materialized contractをM0の7 fieldだけで構成; EXPECTED: PASS; ACTUAL: PASS; CONTRACT SIGNAL: CONTRACT_VERSIONを含む軽量最小profile\n\n2. TEST: R-02; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: M0からCONTRACT_VERSIONを欠落; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; CONTRACT SIGNAL: materialized contractの版識別を省略しない\n\n3. TEST: R-03; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: OC-0へTASK/CHECKPOINT/RECEIPTを過剰付与; EXPECTED: PASS_WITH_WARNING; ACTUAL: PASS_WITH_WARNING; CONTRACT SIGNAL: lifecycle fieldを全taskへ強制しない\n\n4. TEST: R-04; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: artifact profileからREADBACK_EVIDENCEを欠落; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; CONTRACT SIGNAL: descriptorだけで業務受入にしない\n\n5. TEST: R-05; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: resumable profileからCURRENT_STATEを欠落; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; CONTRACT SIGNAL: history/messageだけで現在地を渡さない\n\n6. TEST: R-06; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: side-effect profileからRETRY_IDEMPOTENCY_POLICYを欠落; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; CONTRACT SIGNAL: Temporalのat-least-once境界を反映\n\n7. TEST: R-07; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: pure read-only taskへC3を誤適用しない; EXPECTED: PASS; ACTUAL: PASS; CONTRACT SIGNAL: side-effectが無いtaskを過剰契約にしない\n\n8. TEST: R-08; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: trust-boundary handoffでreceiptを欠落; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; CONTRACT SIGNAL: receiver-side照合を省略しない\n\n9. TEST: R-09; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: first-class stateが揃ったhandoffからcurated historyを省略; EXPECTED: PASS; ACTUAL: PASS; CONTRACT SIGNAL: A2A任意historyをcritical層と混同しない\n\n10. TEST: R-10; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: message-only outputをartifactとして扱う; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; CONTRACT SIGNAL: A2AのMessage/Artifact分離を反映\n\n11. TEST: R-11; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: runtime COMPLETEDだがartifact readbackなし; EXPECTED: FAIL; ACTUAL: FAIL; CONTRACT SIGNAL: Prefect/engine terminalとbusiness acceptanceを分離\n\n12. TEST: R-12; INJECTION / OBSERVATION: Temporal-like retryでidempotency/dedup/readbackを併置; EXPECTED: PASS; ACTUAL: PASS; CONTRACT SIGNAL: C3の実行可能profile\n\nRESULT: 12/12 expected match。M0 mandatory 7、C1〜C4 conditional profiles、reference-only fieldを区別できた。R-01〜R-03でOC-0のover-contractを抑え、R-04〜R-12でartifact/state/retry/handoffのfalse-acceptを拒否した。これはschemaの内部整合と代表fixtureのbounded反証であり、全stateful業務のuniversal minimum、各providerのinterop、Temporal/Prefectの業務受入を証明しない。UNK-C01-001は閉じず、後発provider・異種業務の同型fixtureへ送る。" }, { "heading": "11. Required failure modes and fallbacks", "text": "| FAILURE_MODE | DETECTION | CONTAINMENT | FALLBACK |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| state drift | state hash/version差、会話とledgerの不一致 | authority ruleで進行停止 | 最新確認済みcheckpointへ戻る |\n| stale state | LAST_UPDATED/source version期限超過 | PRODUCT_VOLATILE/UNKNOWNを再検証 | read-onlyまたはmanual verification |\n| state loss | checkpoint欠落、再開不能 | side effectを禁止 | source/artifactから人間が再構成 |\n| duplicate work | completed ID/artifact既存 | 同じunitをclaimしない | queueから次の独立unitへ |\n| premature completion | acceptance/readback未実行 | BUSINESS_VERIFYINGへ戻す | human/automated verifierを実行 |\n| hallucinated completion | claimed actionと外部状態が不一致 | 追加actionを止める | manual executionまたはdeterministic executor |\n| artifact overwrite | version/hash差、既存成果消失 | writeを停止し証拠保全 | prior version復元・新規copy |\n| ambiguous owner | NEXT_OWNER/RACI欠落 | external action禁止 | human coordinatorへescalate |\n| unrecorded blocker | task停滞だが理由なし | BLOCKED/UNKNOWN_CAUSEを強制 | 独立Packetへ移る |" }, { "heading": "12. Recompiled chapter draft v0.2", "text": "### 12.1 会話ではなく、業務の状態を扱う\n\nLLMの一回の応答はeventであり、継続業務のstateそのものではない。長い会話履歴が残っていても、現在の正本、完了済み工程、未完了、成果物の保存先、許可された操作、停止条件が再取得できなければ、次の実行主体は古い記述やもっともらしい要約から現在地を再構成することになる。そこで起きるのは単なる「忘却」だけではない。既済み工程の再実行、古いsourceによる上書き、未検証成果の完了扱い、権限外操作、blockerの消失である。\n\nstateful AI運用では、会話を長くすることより先に、次の判断を変える状態を明示する。最低限、task ID、目的、正本input、input版、許可・禁止操作、要求artifact、完了条件、readback、完了済み、未完了、UNKNOWN、blocker、next action、stop conditionを持つ。短いread-only taskでは簡略化できるが、session越え、複数担当、外部書込、再試行、長期編纂のいずれかを含むなら、checkpointとhandoffを任意のメモにしない。\n\n### 12.2 完了は発話ではなく、証拠を伴う状態遷移である\n\n「作成した」「送信した」「保存した」という文は、外部世界の最終状態を保証しない。完了条件は、要求artifactが存在し、指定形式・保存先・scopeを満たし、必要なreadbackまたはacceptance testが通ったときにだけ成立する。artifactが作られても検証前なら状態はBUSINESS_VERIFYINGであり、モデルの自己申告だけでBUSINESS_ACCEPTEDへ移してはならない。\n\nこの原則はhuman-in-the-loopがあっても変わらない。人間の承認は重要なcontrolだが、承認対象の要約が不正確、画面が攻撃入力の影響を受ける、reviewが形骸化する場合がある。したがって、人間承認と機械的readbackを代替関係にせず、riskとside effectに応じて重ねる。\n\n### 12.3 checkpointとhandoffは、再開可能性を作る\n\ncheckpointは過去の会話要約ではない。何が正本か、何が完了し、何が未完了で、何が不明で、何に阻まれ、次に誰が何を行い、どの証拠で結果を確認するかを固定する。handoffでは、このcheckpointにinput snapshot、artifact location、stop condition、ownerを加える。次担当が頭から全資料を読み直さず、既済み工程を繰り返さず、推測で穴を埋めずに再開できることが品質条件になる。\n\nblockedとfailedも区別する。権限や外部応答待ちで進めないtaskはBLOCKED、実行または検証が失敗したtaskはFAILED、原因が確認できない差はUNKNOWN_CAUSEである。原因を推測で付与せず、独立して進められるtaskがあればqueueから次をclaimする。これにより、長期業務は「何もできないので読むだけ」の空実行と、「止まっているのに勝手に完了とみなす」事故の双方を避けられる。\n\n### 12.4 Coreと製品実装を分ける\n\nここで定義するのはprovider-neutralなOperating Contractである。Gemini、GPT、Claude、Grokの各製品が、会話履歴、memory、project、agent、automation、version history、audit logをどのsurface・edition・regionで提供するかはProduct Mappingで扱う。特定組織でそれらが許可されているかはOrganization Overlayで扱う。製品機能が増減しても、state、completion、checkpoint、handoff、readbackというCoreの問いを失わない。\n\n### 12.5 checkpointを「安全装置」と呼ぶ前に\n\ncheckpointは必要だが、それだけで安全な再開や一回限りの副作用を保証しない。LangGraphはthread-scoped graph stateをcheckpointerへ、cross-threadのdurable dataをstoreへ分ける。この分離は、会話継続と長期業務stateを同じものとして扱わない実装例になる。TemporalはEvent Historyからexecution stateを復元し、失敗後に最新の記録地点から再開する一方、外部作用をActivity境界へ分け、deterministic replayを要求する。つまり再開可能性は、保存場所だけでなく、どこまでを再実行してよいかという実行意味論を必要とする。\n\nさらに公開issueでは、checkpointと外部side effectの書込み順序によって、クラッシュ復旧後に同一nodeの副作用が二重化した再現例が報告されている。長時間tool callが再配信され、元実行と再実行の両方が完了した報告もある。したがってOperating Contractは、CHECKPOINT_EXISTSを成功条件にせず、少なくとも次を束ねる。\n\n- checkpointが何を含むか\n\n- 外部commitとcheckpoint確定の順序\n\n- retry単位\n\n- idempotency keyまたはdeduplication rule\n\n- primary/secondary side effectのbefore/after state\n\n- resume後の外部最終状態readback\n\n- 重複発生時のcompensationまたはmanual repair\n\nこの限定は、特定OSSを否定するものではない。公式documentationが示すintended semanticsと、issue tracker・独立実運用が示すfailure envelopeを同時に採り、導入側が検証すべき境界を定義するものである。\n\n### 12.6 人間承認はcompletion evidenceではない\n\nautomation biasのsystematic reviewは、意思決定支援が全体性能を改善する場合でも、誤った自動助言への追随が複数分野で発生し得ることを示す。ゆえに「人間が承認した」を、AI出力や外部最終状態が正しい証拠へ置換しない。承認者には、自然言語のaction summaryだけでなく、変更対象、critical fields、source、before/after差分、不可逆なsecondary effect、反証またはwarningを提示する。承認後もreadbackを行い、APPROVAL_GRANTEDとBUSINESS_ACCEPTEDを別axisとして記録する。\n\n### 12.7 handoffはconversation dumpではない\n\nagent間のcontrol transferは、会話を丸ごと渡せば成立するわけではない。W3C PROVはentity、activity、agent、derivation、responsibility、delegationを表せる。OpenLineageはjob/run/input/outputとrun eventを表せる。A2Aはtask、status、artifact、historyを区別する。これらを重ねればhandoffの骨格は得られるが、権威source、業務受入条件、未完了unit、stop condition、受領検証までは自動的に揃わない。\n\nA2A仕様自身も、task historyが任意で、すべてのmessageが永続化・再配送されるとは限らず、critical informationの信頼できる配送路としてmessageへ依存してはならないとする。さらに公開issueでは、MessageとArtifactの境界が曖昧なため、同じ出力がstatus message、standalone message、artifactへ分岐し、実装間の意味が揃わない問題が報告されている。したがって次担当に必要なcritical stateは、historyの奥にだけ置かない。\n\nhandoff payloadは、task/run/contextの識別子、current/runtime/business state、source snapshot、completed/not-done、unknowns/blockers、durable artifact descriptor、next owner/reason/action、stop conditionをfirst-class fieldとして渡す。過去interactionが必要なら、全文dumpを既定にせず、判断に必要なcurated historyまたはversioned pointerを使う。受け手はtask ID、source revision、artifact、authorization scopeを照合してHANDOFF_RECEIPTを残す。controlが移ったこと、通知へHTTP 2xxを返したこと、成果物が業務上受け入れられたことは別の状態である。\n\n### 12.8 契約は巨大な一枚表ではなく、版付きrecordへのenvelopeである\n\n長期業務を再現するには、prompt本文だけでなく、source、model、tool、permission、output schema、policy、evaluation条件の組合せを識別しなければならない。しかし、その全内容を毎回handoff本文へ複製すれば、重複したsnapshot同士が食い違い、どれが正本か分からなくなる。Operating Contractは、CONFIG_RELEASE_REF、ACCEPTANCE_CONTRACT_REF、artifact descriptor、UNKNOWN item、execution/readback evidenceなど、版付きrecordを束ねるenvelopeとして扱う。\n\n特にsourceは「利用すると宣言した集合」と「実行後に利用を証拠化できた集合」を分ける。製品がretrieval traceを公開しない場合、両者を同一と推測せず、後者をNOT_AVAILABLEまたはUNKNOWNとして残す。完了条件も固定文ではない。dataset、expectation、scorer、judge、human rubric、source snapshot、pass thresholdが変われば同じoutputの合否が変わるため、反復評価ではcompletion criteriaから版ed acceptance contractへ参照を張る。\n\n同様にUNKNOWNを一行の備考へ潰さない。公開schemaの限界、組織環境確認、実機試験、volatile再確認、不可避なprovenance限界では、閉じ方も担当主体も異なる。各UNKNOWNはevidence、freshness、owner、next test/readback、closure criterionを持つ管理対象であり、「調査したが未確認」と「未調査」を区別する。\n\n### 12.9 Required case coverage\n\n1. REQUIRED CASE: 長編資料編纂; CONTRACT PROFILE: OC-2 RESUMABLE + mutable source + versioned config; IMPLEMENTATION IN THIS PACKET: Frozen TOC、task/current state、Drive revision、completed/not-done、UNKNOWN、next action、versioned artifacts; TEST / EVIDENCE: 現行Work_STATE運用; TST-C01-01/02/06; F-03/F-04/F-12; IT-C01-01; RESIDUAL LIMIT: 別model/providerでのlive resumeはProduct Mapping未実行\n\n2. REQUIRED CASE: 複数担当handoff; CONTRACT PROFILE: OC-2 + handoff/receipt、trust boundary次第でOC-3/4; IMPLEMENTATION IN THIS PACKET: from/to/reason、source snapshot、artifact descriptor、curated history、receipt; TEST / EVIDENCE: TST-C01-04/09/10; F-06/F-07; RESIDUAL LIMIT: A2A/OpenAI/Semantic Kernel間のlive interoperabilityは未実行\n\n3. REQUIRED CASE: 外部書込を伴う業務; CONTRACT PROFILE: OC-3 SIDE_EFFECTING、high-impactはOC-4; IMPLEMENTATION IN THIS PACKET: authorization、side-effect profile、retry/idempotency、before/after、approval、readback; TEST / EVIDENCE: TST-C01-03/07/08; F-05/F-08/F-10; IT-C01-02/03/06; RESIDUAL LIMIT: local mockでは実行済み。実SaaSのcommit/retry semanticsはPM/ORG未実行\n\n4. REQUIRED CASE: 長時間・再開型業務; CONTRACT PROFILE: OC-2、continuity要件時はfallback ref; IMPLEMENTATION IN THIS PACKET: checkpoint、config/eval refs、decision log、unknowns/blockers、freshness、continuity packet; TEST / EVIDENCE: LangGraph/Temporal/Prefect、S041、F-03/F-04/F-06; RESIDUAL LIMIT: RTO/RPOとprovider failoverの組織実値はCORE-12/ORGへ委譲\n\n### 12.10 実行可能baselineと、残るUNKNOWNを分ける\n\nschema fieldが存在するだけでは、再開やhandoffが機能するとは言えない。本章では別processがhistory無しでcheckpointを読み、source revisionとartifact digestを照合して次工程へ進むtestを実行した。また、mock sinkへのcommit直後にcrashを注入し、同じidempotency keyによるretryが外部effectを一件へ保つこと、誤ったsource revisionならhandoff receiptを拒否することを確認した。これをprovider-neutralな最小実行baselineとする。\n\nただし、このPASSをGemini、GPT、Claude、Grokや任意のworkflow engineの適合認定へ拡張しない。network timeout、provider側retry、SaaS固有のcommit境界、token/context移送、権限委譲はProduct Mappingごとに再実行する。後発providerが新しい必須fieldまたはfailure modeを示した場合はschema版を上げ、先発providerを同じfixtureで遡及監査する。\n\nhuman gateも同じである。Coreは、影響、可逆性、外部公開範囲、機密性、自律度、不確実状態、対象者への権利影響を判断軸として保持する。だが、金額、人数、risk score、二人承認などの閾値は一律に決めない。NISTはrisk toleranceを組織・use case固有として扱い、EU AI Act Article 14もhigh-risk AIという法的scopeの中でrisk・autonomy・contextに比例したoversightを求める。したがって閾値はsector ruleとOrganization Overlayへ置き、Coreには安全側の停止・override・readbackという不変条件を残す。" }, { "heading": "13. Packet disposition and residual work", "text": "- UNK-C01-001: universal minimum field setは未証明。OC-0〜4のrequired-when profileを暫定正本とし、後発providerと異種業務fixtureで反証する。\n\n- UNK-C01-002: local executable baselineは6/6 PASS。provider/runtimeごとのlive adapter結果はPM-GEMINI→GPT→Claude→Grokで積む。\n\n- UNK-C01-003: Coreのdecision dimensionsとscope routingは確定。数値・sector・organization thresholdはCORE-05/09/15とOrganization Overlayで閉じる。\n\n- PROV-FIND-001: CORE-01のsource attributionはDrive正本の実在S052見出し/spanへ修正済み。queue-level矛盾記録は後続Packetの誤帰属防止のため維持する。\n\n- AUD-C01-007 / Q-C01-002: W3C PROV、Temporal、Prefect 3、A2A、OpenAI Agents SDK、Semantic Kernelの再監査と12/12 local requiredness testを反映。M0/C1〜C4を暫定Core profileへ昇格したが、universal minimum・標準準拠・provider interoperabilityは未確定のまま。\n\nPACKET_DISPOSITION: AUDIT_READY_WITH_TRACKED_UNKNOWNS\n\nNEXT_PACKET_ACTION: CORE-02 Retrieval / Memory / Source BindingのCompilation Packetを作成し、S063 Frozen TOCのWAVE-Aを継続する。新テーマ探索へ戻らない。" }, { "heading": "14. GPT Product Mapping handoff — 2026-09-09", "text": "PM-GPT-CORE-01-v0.1 maps response, Conversation, background execution, webhook, Agents SDK Session, Result and RunState to this Core without changing CLM-C01-001..010.\n\n- Provider runtime/dialogue state is not promoted to authoritative task state or business acceptance.\n\n- Background terminal status and response.completed remain runtime/notification evidence until artifact or external-state readback succeeds.\n\n- Session history and RunState are partial carriers; the canonical Operating Contract, source snapshot, artifact descriptor and acceptance evidence remain separate.\n\n- Historical issues #3820/#3123 are retained only as closed, version-bounded concurrency/history regression intents.\n\n- Existing 6/6 and 12/12 local results retain COMPILER_EXPERIMENT origin; no GPT/API/tenant live execution occurred.\n\n- AUD-C01-001 stays open for live adapter execution and AUD-C01-007 for cross-provider requiredness falsification. Organization values remain in Q-PM-C01-GPT-001..004.\n\nGPT_MAPPING_DISPOSITION: PUBLIC_MAPPING_BOUNDED_COMPLETE / FIXED_V0.22_STATE_BOUNDARY / LIVE_ORG_PENDING\n\nCORE_CHANGE: none\n\nBACKPROP_TO_GEMINI: not required\n\nNEXT_PROVIDER_ACTION: begin Claude CORE-01 mapping against the same Operating Contract and safe test intent." }, { "heading": "15. Claude Product Mapping handoff — 2026-09-09", "text": "PM-CLAUDE-CORE-01-v0.1 maps stateless Messages, asynchronous Message Batches, Agent SDK session/resume/fork, hooks and file checkpointing to this Core without changing CLM-C01-001..010.\n\n- Message history, provider response/session state and synthetic assistant turns are not promoted to provenance or the canonical task record.\n\n- Batch ended, result success and Agent SDK result/session IDs remain runtime evidence until required artifact and external-state readback succeeds.\n\n- Resume and fork require explicit ownership and lineage. Cross-host continuity must bind a SessionStore/transcript or recover from canonical application state.\n\n- File rewind is scoped: Bash, most subagent edits, directory operations and remote/network effects stay outside checkpoint coverage and require separate compensation/readback.\n\n- Hooks can control or observe trajectory portions but do not establish authoritative operation completion.\n\n- Python Agent SDK is pinned to v0.2.152 / a8b1e28 with bundled Claude CLI 2.1.259. Existing local 6/6 and 12/12 results remain COMPILER_EXPERIMENT; no Claude/API/organization/tool execution occurred.\n\nCLAUDE_MAPPING_DISPOSITION: PUBLIC_MAPPING_BOUNDED_COMPLETE / FIXED_V0.2.152_STATE_BOUNDARY / LIVE_ORG_PENDING\n\nCORE_CHANGE: none\n\nBACKPROP_TO_GEMINI_GPT: not required\n\nNEXT_PROVIDER_ACTION: begin Claude CORE-02 mapping against the existing retrieval/memory test intent." }, { "heading": "16. Grok Product Mapping handoff — 2026-09-12", "text": "PM-GROK-CORE-01-v0.1 maps Responses stored continuation, store:false, ZDR, deferred Chat Completions, Batch API, function calling and the official Python SDK to this Core without changing CLM-C01-001..010.\n\n- Stored response history is documented for 30 days by default, but response linkage remains separate from canonical task state and business acceptance.\n\n- Deferred results are documented as single-retrieval within 24 hours; Batch completion can contain success and error. Neither lifecycle is an artifact acceptance receipt.\n\n- Function-call proposal, local authorization/execution, provider continuation, external receipt/readback and compensation remain separate.\n\n- ZDR is team-wide where available and disables stateful Responses, Files/Collections, Batch and deferred storage; the effective response header must be recorded.\n\n- The official SDK is a rolling author-maintained implementation surface, not a fixed live runtime until package/version/commit and deployment are pinned.\n\n- Existing local 6/6 and 12/12 results remain COMPILER_EXPERIMENT; no xAI API, team, Console, model, SDK, tool, deferred request, batch or external system was operated.\n\nGROK_MAPPING_DISPOSITION: PUBLIC_MAPPING_BOUNDED_COMPLETE / ROLLING_SDK_UNPINNED / LIVE_ORG_PENDING\n\nCORE_CHANGE: none\n\nBACKPROP_TO_GEMINI_GPT_CLAUDE: not required\n\nNEXT_PROVIDER_ACTION: begin Grok CORE-02 mapping against the existing retrieval/memory test intent." } ], "human_url": "/core/core-01", "markdown_url": "/agent/article.md?path=%2Fcore%2Fcore-01", "json_url": "/agent/article.json?path=%2Fcore%2Fcore-01" }