Optional `avoid`, two or three negations of 12 to 160 characters. A world built
from posters is at risk of shouting; one built from instruments is at risk of
dead greys. The global detector cannot know which and the author can, so the
"do not" belongs beside the "do" rather than in a rulebook that applies to
everything equally.
Optional on purpose: 541 entries predate it and none of them are wrong for
lacking it, so nothing needs backfilling.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Three of the six axes cannot be read from a world's prose, and widening their
keywords manufactures signal rather than finding it. Depth's probe matched
worlds that said "no cast shadow anywhere" and "without perspective or depth";
motion and colour strategy describe properties the system rules never state, so
they place 28% and 7%.
An optional axes object on the concept records the value instead. Absent means
inferred from the rules as before, so nothing needs backfilling. Validated
against the axes definition when the caller supplies it, because a typo would
read as "unrecorded" and fall back to a probe already known not to work, which
is the quietest way for this to fail.
This is what makes an assigned wave measurable. If a wave draws "drenched" and
"simulated physics" before designing anything, the world it produces has to
carry those values or the assignment is lost the moment it lands, and occupancy
goes back to guessing at prose.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Two gaps, both reported from real use. Worlds were drawn with no mode
awareness at all: selectApprovedChallengers never received the mode, so a
build asking for an app UI could draw six worlds that only make sense on a
landing page. And surface alone is too coarse for compositions, because
"operate" spans onboarding, dashboards, editors and settings, so an
onboarding flow could legitimately be dealt a settings composition.
Worlds gain `allowedModes` on the review record, beside breadth and rating,
because it is a reviewer judgment rather than authored content. Absent means
eligible in every mode, so nothing needs backfilling and no existing roll
changes. Applied per tier and skipped where it would empty one, matching how
minRating and strength already degrade. It is a ceiling the reviewer lowers,
not a category they assign: a world is an identity, and identities transfer
across modes further than compositions do.
Compositions gain an optional `area`, one level below surface, with a
taxonomy per surface (COMPOSITION_AREAS). Area is a preference rather than a
filter: a request reorders the ranking to put area matches first and tops up
from the rest of the surface, because the per-area pools are small and
dealing one on-target composition would be worse than three good ones. A
stable partition of an already deterministic ranking stays deterministic.
`--area` on the CLI requires `--mode`, since areas are scoped to a surface,
and is validated against that surface's list so a wrong-surface area fails
loudly instead of silently matching nothing.
Also validated `breadth`, which selection has honoured for a while with
nothing checking it, so a typo read as "general" and quietly returned a
narrow world to the pool.
Four new tests: worlds excluded from a mode stay out, absent allowedModes
stays eligible everywhere, a tier whose every world excludes the mode falls
back instead of starving, and an area-scoped deal prefers its area, tops up
to three, and reproduces from its key.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
The data layer has said compositions since the catalog was split, while the
code, the model-facing text, and the UI still said stagings. The rename was
held back by the selection logic existing twice; it exists once now, so this
is one pass instead of two coordinated ones.
Renamed: selectApprovedStagings, selectApprovedStaging, renderStaging, and
the model-facing STAGING GRAMMAR / STAGING CHALLENGERS / FIRST-SURFACE
STAGING INPUTS headings. The block that introduces them now states what
they are for rather than only what they are not: what is the cleverest way
to present, organize, or make interactive the problem in front of you.
Three places keep the old word on purpose:
- The rank salt, `${scope}:${key}:staging`. It is hash input, so renaming
it would re-deal every roll anyone has ever reproduced by key. Verified:
240 seeder rolls and 252 API rolls reproduce exactly.
- `Staging/hierarchy:`, the first composition grammar prefix. Inside a
composition, staging names one of its four aspects, which is a different
word-sense from staging as the name for the whole artifact. It is also a
schema constant that 317 catalog entries are validated against.
- The wire fields. The API keeps emitting `stagings` and `staging` beside
`compositions`, because the wire is the one place a rename cannot be
coordinated with already-installed skills. Clients prefer the new field
and fall back through both old ones.
Separately, WELL_TIERS had two definitions after the extraction.
roll-selection.mjs owns it now and concept-catalog.mjs imports it, in that
direction because concept-catalog reads the filesystem and a Pages Function
must not pull node:fs into its bundle. Imported and re-exported rather than
re-exported alone: a bare `export { X } from` does not bind X locally, and
validateConceptCatalog needs it, which cost one round of red tests.
Dropped concept-catalog's synchronous deterministicRank. Nothing imports it
since selection moved out, and leaving a second ranking implementation
around is how the first drift started.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Paul BakausandClaude Opus 5