Capability Evaluation, Certification, Promotion, and Retirement
Define how a capability earns, retains, loses, and exits production eligibility.
A focused view of boundaries, contracts, state, authority, failure paths, and tradeoffs drawn from this chapter.
Reconstruct and defend this chapter’s architecture.
Reconstruct the architecture, name each boundary, and defend the tradeoffs.
Open the source exercise
Create a lifecycle for a code-modification skill. Promote it from one repository to an organization-wide low-risk lane. Then introduce a tool vulnerability and a model regression. Show separate containment, impact analysis, migration, and restoration decisions.
4. Tradeoffs and alternatives
Frequent recertification improves freshness and consumes evaluation capacity. Use risk-based expiration and event-triggered reevaluation for dependency, model, permission, policy, or threat changes. Automatic demotion contains harm quickly; automatic promotion risks scaling a biased result. Keep promotion human-authorized for material scope increases.
5. Current Mission Control Implementation
The current material defines evaluations, canaries, policy gates, promotion and demotion concepts, model-route lifecycle, evidence, and Factory Versions. It does not yet demonstrate a uniform certification object or end-to-end revocation propagation for every capability type.
The curriculum therefore supports the decision model but cannot claim a complete capability certification service. Reviewers should expect implementation evidence for lifecycle APIs, evaluation lineage, active-use inventory, and revocation drills before treating the capability as operationally proven.
Review this chapter.
Challenge a claim, boundary, missing failure mode, unclear term, or unsupported evidence statement.
- Claim
- Boundary
- Failure
- Evidence