Skip to content
archived Visibility internal Owner erik@uvilo.com Approver _ Created 2026-06-27 Updated 2026-06-27

Forge Project Cleanup Ambiguities

Record of ambiguities encountered during Plans 1-4, per Spec §10.


#Affected areaDecision neededOptions consideredRecommended optionResolutionResponsible ownerStatusRelated todo item
A1Spec §2 / Migration mappingWhether the migration mapping table in Forge_Project_Workflow.md (showing former Erik_Todo → todos replacement) constitutes an “active instructional reference” that must be removed(1) Remove the mapping table entirely; (2) Keep the mapping table as historical reference contextOption (2) — The mapping table documents the migration for users transitioning from the old system and is clearly labeled as “Former behavior → Replacement behavior”Kept as historical reference context — the table is not an instruction to use Erik_Todo; it documents the migrationerik@uvilo.comResolved
A2Spec §3 / WIP references in non-project filesWhether WIP references in Forge/Output/README.md and Project_Create/SKILL.md template table constitute “active WIP instructions” that must be removed(1) Remove all WIP references everywhere; (2) Keep historical/test references that are not instructionsOption (1) — Even non-instructional WIP references can confuse users about whether WIP is still activeRemoved stale WIP_Template.md row from Project_Create/SKILL.md template table; removed Output_WIP.md reference from Forge/Output/README.mdAgent (Plan 4 Task 1)Resolved
A3Spec §7 / Run-cost evidenceWhether the project must have exact token/cost data to satisfy the run/cost evidence requirement(1) Require exact data; (2) Accept explicit “unavailable” notation with available contextOption (2) — The platform does not currently expose exact token/cost data to agents; requiring it would block completionExplicit “unavailable” notation with available context (convo IDs, dates, commands) is recorded in inventory and eval reportserik@uvilo.comResolved
A4Spec §9 / Charter partial itemsWhether ⚠️ Partial Charter alignment items that would require changing the lifecycle shape (Spec §8) should be corrected in this project(1) Add stakeholder-impact, security, and privacy checkpoints to templates; (2) Document as known gaps with out-of-scope rationaleOption (2) — Spec §8 explicitly states “The cleanup does not add new phases or new work-product types”; adding checkpoints would change the lifecycle shapeDocumented as known gaps with out-of-scope rationale in Charter alignment matrix; recommended as future improvementserik@uvilo.comResolved
A5Spec §7 / Inngest schedule promptsWhether stale Erik_Todo/WIP references in the uvilo-mono orchestrator schedules.ts task prompts are in scope for this cleanup(1) Update the uvilo-mono code; (2) Record as out-of-scope and note separatelyOption (2) — This project’s scope is the uvilo-os repo (Knowledge, Skills, Guides, Prompts, Templates); the orchestrator code is in uvilo-monoRecorded in infrastructure inventory as a known issue; uvilo-mono orchestrator schedule prompts should be updated separatelyerik@uvilo.comResolved
A6Spec §6 / Bot prompt version numberingWhether the compliance audit in the Bot Prompt Inventory document (recording versions 12, 4, 3, 7) is sufficient evidence of prompt inspectability, or whether prompt-version artifacts must also be verified as accessible(1) Accept inventory document as sufficient; (2) Verify prompt-version artifacts are accessibleOption (1) — Prompt-version artifacts were created in Plan 3; the inventory records the version numbers; full accessibility verification would require runtime checks outside this project’s scopeInventory document accepted as sufficient evidence; prompt-version artifacts exist from Plan 3erik@uvilo.comResolved
A7Spec §12 / Default human gatesWhether the default human gates (Spec_Eval, Plan_Eval, Verify) should be written to existing project Phase files that lack human_gates frontmatter(1) Write defaults to all existing Phase files; (2) Document the default and apply only to new projectsOption (2) — Modifying existing project Phase files could disrupt in-progress projects; the default is documented and the Runner applies it when the key is absentDefault documented in Spec §12 and project-runner prompt; applied only when human_gates key is absent from Phase fileerik@uvilo.comResolved
A8Spec §1 / Knowledge status valuesWhether Forge_Agent_Architecture.md, Forge_Document_Structure.md, and Forge_Charter.md having approved status (not published) constitutes a compliance issue(1) Change status to published; (2) Accept approved as sufficient for foundational documentsOption (2) — These are foundational/architectural documents that may follow a different publication workflow than user-facing guides; changing status without understanding the publication workflow could be incorrectAccepted as-is; approved status is sufficient for foundational documents that are not user-facing guideserik@uvilo.comResolved

Summary

StatusCount
Resolved8
Pending0

All ambiguities have been resolved. No pending user decisions remain. No todo items needed for unresolved ambiguities.