GitHub

FDLC Specification / 06Proposed

A machine-readable contract for governed software work.

The FDLC Specification will formalize portable artifact semantics, state transitions, authority, evidence, and extension points. V0 publishes the shape—not a false standard.

Current state
Pre-standardization
Protocol objects
11
Compatibility
Not yet claimable
Inspect the proposed shapeSee the implementation evidence →
Proposed Pre-standardization draft

No stable FDLC schema is released yet. Mission Control’s implemented domain model is the primary reference, and compatibility must be designed rather than declared.

Autonomous execution and artifact protocol

Eleven durable protocol objects.

These nouns make one bounded execution inspectable from initial Intent through governed Learning. Implementations may add records without weakening their semantics or transition requirements.

  1. 01IntentExpand

    What outcome matters?

    Named outcome, constraints, owner, and risk
  2. 02SpecificationExpand

    What must be true?

    Versioned requirements, boundaries, and acceptance criteria
  3. 03PlanExpand

    How will the factory achieve it?

    Approved decomposition, sequence, risk, and verification strategy
  4. 04Work OrderExpand

    What bounded unit is authorized?

    Scope, risk, authority, and verification contract
  5. 05AttemptExpand

    What exactly ran?

    Identity, lease, versions, environment, and trace
  6. 06EvidenceExpand

    What was observed?

    Attributable artifacts bound to the exact candidate
  7. 07VerificationExpand

    Does the evidence satisfy the specification?

    Independent checks against exact criteria
  8. 08ApprovalExpand

    May this consequence proceed?

    Authorized, attributable, reasoned decision
  9. 09ReleaseExpand

    What was promoted?

    Exact artifact, current policy, and rollback readiness
  10. 10OutcomeExpand

    Did the intended result hold in reality?

    Observed technical, operational, and user result
  11. 11Learning SignalExpand

    What should change in the factory?

    Attributable outcome and a controlled improvement proposal
Associated objectsAcceptance CriterionAgent IdentityDelegationExecution LeaseTaskCandidate

Entity semantics

What a later versioned contract would need to define.

Every object needs portable meaning before independent implementations can safely exchange it. These cards describe the proposed contract surface. They are not a released V1 schema.

fdlc://v1/intent

Intent

What outcome matters?

Required proof
Named outcome, constraints, owner, and risk
Mission Control
Mission
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/specification

Specification

What must be true?

Required proof
Versioned requirements, boundaries, and acceptance criteria
Mission Control
Mission Spec
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/plan

Plan

How will the factory achieve it?

Required proof
Approved decomposition, sequence, risk, and verification strategy
Mission Control
Approved Plan
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/work-order

Work Order

What bounded unit is authorized?

Required proof
Scope, risk, authority, and verification contract
Mission Control
WorkOrder + Tasks
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/attempt

Attempt

What exactly ran?

Required proof
Identity, lease, versions, environment, and trace
Mission Control
WorkflowRun / Attempt
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/evidence

Evidence

What was observed?

Required proof
Attributable artifacts bound to the exact candidate
Mission Control
Evidence Envelopes + artifacts
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/verification

Verification

Does the evidence satisfy the specification?

Required proof
Independent checks against exact criteria
Mission Control
Verification Run + receipts + Quality Gate
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/approval

Approval

May this consequence proceed?

Required proof
Authorized, attributable, reasoned decision
Mission Control
Plan approval + WorkOrder acceptance
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/release

Release

What was promoted?

Required proof
Exact artifact, current policy, and rollback readiness
Mission Control
PR currentness + separate release records
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/outcome

Outcome

Did the intended result hold in reality?

Required proof
Observed technical, operational, and user result
Mission Control
Production feedback + outcome records
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics
fdlc://v1/learning-signal

Learning Signal

What should change in the factory?

Required proof
Attributable outcome and a controlled improvement proposal
Mission Control
LearningSignal + governed promotion
Identifier
Stable and globally unique within its authority domain
Lifecycle
Explicit states and permitted transitions
Evidence
Exact subject, provenance, freshness, and integrity
Extension
Namespaced without changing canonical semantics

Versioning model

Stable routes. Explicit evolution.

Versioned namespaces would make breaking changes visible. No V1 schema is released, and compatibility must not be claimed from these placeholders.

/specification/v1
/specification/v1/intent
/specification/v1/specification
/specification/v1/plan
/specification/v1/work-order
/specification/v1/attempt
/specification/v1/evidence
/specification/v1/verification
/specification/v1/approval
/specification/v1/release
/specification/v1/outcome
/specification/v1/learning-signal

Use what exists today

Inspect the model before claiming compatibility.

Review the artifact protocol →Inspect Mission Control →Review the source ↗