External Capability Intake and Recertification Lab
Qualify a synthetic external tool through ownership, provenance, data use, security, service, side effect, cost, incident, exit, certification, publication, drift, revocation, and recertification controls.
A focused view of boundaries, contracts, state, authority, failure paths, and tradeoffs drawn from this chapter.
Qualify a synthetic external tool through ownership, provenance, data use, security, service, side effect, cost, incident, exit, certification, publication, drift, revocation, and recertification controls.
Execute the existing Markdown instructions and retain the required output and evidence.
Jump to validation criteria1. Capability scenario
Implement or mock a repository publication tool supplied by a fictional third party. It accepts synthetic data only. Define owner, provider, version, purpose/non-purpose, schemas, identity, authorization, tenancy, data classes, destinations, side effect, idempotency, timeout, retry, rate, concurrency, observability, redaction, SLO, cost, dependency, incident terms, deprecation, revocation, data return/deletion, and exit path.
2. Intake review
Record source and build provenance, component inventory, licenses, security and privacy assessment, credential and network design, subprocessors/data-use assumptions, service limits, incident notification, business owner, technical owner, and independent reviewer. Resolve the exact artifact digest; a moving version label is insufficient.
3. Certification tests
- Validate input, output, and every error class.
- Deny unauthorized identity, tenant, repository, destination, data class, expired grant, and prohibited purpose.
- Repeat an idempotency key and prove one effect.
- Time out after a mock effect, reconcile, and avoid blind retry.
- Exercise rate, concurrency, dependency outage, and cost limits.
- Verify redacted telemetry, full restricted audit, effect receipt, rollback or accepted irreversibility, and evidence binding.
- Revoke the exact version and prove registry selection, cached resolution, active calls, dependent workflows, and evidence react according to policy.
4. Supplier-change injection
Change one output default, data destination, dependency, and rate behavior without changing the visible version label. Drift detection must quarantine the capability and identify affected systems. Produce a new exact version, compatibility analysis, targeted threat review, representative regression and failure tests, updated cost/SLO, and a named recertification decision.
5. Required evidence
Retain intake manifest; ownership and supplier review; artifact provenance and digest; contract; credentials and policy decisions; all positive/negative tests; tool calls and mock receipts; costs; drift signal; quarantine and revocation events; dependency impact; new-version comparison; human decisions; exit/deletion test; cleanup; and retained gaps.
6. Scoring rubric
| Area | Pass |
|---|---|
| Contract completeness | Every required field has an owner and test |
| Security | Unauthorized scope and data destinations fail closed |
| Side-effect safety | Duplicate and unknown results reconcile correctly |
| Supply chain | Exact artifact and dependencies are attributable |
| Drift | Silent behavioral change triggers quarantine and impact analysis |
| Lifecycle | Publication, deprecation, revocation, recertification, and exit work |
| Evidence | Independent reviewer reproduces the qualification decision |
7. Cleanup and nonclaim
Revoke synthetic credentials, retire versions, remove mock external data, execute the exit/deletion procedure, and retain allowed evidence. Certification applies only to the exact version, environment, scope, and observation window.
Curriculum maturity is not implementation proof.
This chapter defines architecture or practice. It does not by itself prove a corresponding production implementation.
Review this chapter.
Challenge a claim, boundary, missing failure mode, unclear term, or unsupported evidence statement.
- Claim
- Boundary
- Failure
- Evidence