auto(polish): W20 #5 aspice-assessment-builder pass, regen STATUS.md
Autonomous daily run. - DoD check 1 PASS: 13-tab list matches generate_aspice_assessment.py schema exactly - DoD check 2 PARTIAL: v3.1/v4.0 absent from trigger list; rewrite drafted, not applied - third consecutive POLISH pass with trigger-phrase-outside-trigger-list shape Generated by automotive-skills-daily-standup scheduled task.
This commit is contained in:
Automotive Skills Autonomous
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
|
||||
# Automotive Skills Suite — STATUS
|
||||
|
||||
_Generated: 2026-05-13 by autonomous daily run._
|
||||
_Generated: 2026-05-14 by autonomous daily run._
|
||||
|
||||
**Builders:** 76 · **Reviewers:** 76 · **Paired:** 76/76 (100.0%)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -57,3 +57,23 @@ _Maintained by `automotive-skills-daily-standup` scheduled task._
|
||||
- **Suite-wide pattern emerging:** two-for-two POLISH passes have flagged "formal trigger phrase outside first 400 chars" as the dominant finding. W21 PLAN should consider scripting a once-per-week DoD audit across all 76 builders that emits a shortlist of "descriptions where the canonical trigger phrase falls past char 400", instead of catching one per Tuesday.
|
||||
- Human review: if the proposed `cs-concept-builder` description rewrite looks right, ship it as a manual commit and close #4. Same posture as #3 from yesterday.
|
||||
- Issue #2 ("goodd") still needs Sunday TRIAGE — still too low-confidence to label.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## 2026-05-14 (autonomous run, POLISH)
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode:** POLISH
|
||||
**Action:** Regenerated STATUS.md and ran third POLISH pass on `aspice-assessment-builder.skill` (W20 issue #5). Wrote `docs/skill-polish-log/aspice-assessment-builder.md` with the DoD verdict, four low-severity findings, and a drafted ≤1024-char description rewrite. No `.skill` edits applied — none of the findings matched the autonomous-edit allowlist (typo / over-length / missing required field).
|
||||
**Files touched:**
|
||||
- `STATUS.md` (regenerated — no skill files changed since 2026-05-13: same 152 files, same git last-touched dates, same classifier + alias map, so the body is byte-identical and only the generation-date header advanced)
|
||||
- `docs/skill-polish-log/aspice-assessment-builder.md` (new)
|
||||
- `docs/AUTONOMOUS_LOG.md` (this entry)
|
||||
**Tests:** N/A (no test suite in this repo yet)
|
||||
**Skill count:** 76 builders / 76 reviewers / 100.0% paired (aliases honored: `item-definition-builder ↔ item-def-checklist-reviewer`, `ppap-package-builder ↔ ppap-checklist-reviewer`)
|
||||
**Open issues:** 5 (#2 untriaged + #3–#6 W20 weekly targets — unchanged from yesterday)
|
||||
**Notes:** POLISH priority order ran the same as Tue/Wed: no `skill-bug` / `reviewer-finding` issues open, and STATUS shows no true orphan builders (the two known naming aliases are honored), so the next W20 issue (#5 `aspice-assessment-builder.skill`) was the target. **DoD check 1 passes cleanly** — I diffed the SKILL.md "Output structure (13 tabs)" table against the `tabs` list in `scripts/generate_aspice_assessment.py` and all 13 entries match one-for-one in order, and the frontmatter's "Produces 13 tabs including ..." enumeration names only real tabs with a correct count. **DoD check 2 is a partial miss** — v3.1/v4.0 appear in the description's opening clause but not in the "Use this skill whenever..." trigger list. Two side findings: the bundled `references/` files are never read by any workflow step, and there is no v4.0 reference file despite the v3.1/v4.0 claim. A drafted description rewrite is in the polish log; not auto-applied because trigger-reordering is editorial, outside the allowlist. This is now the **third consecutive POLISH pass** flagging the same shape (fundamentals sound, one formal trigger phrase outside the active trigger list).
|
||||
**Follow-ups:**
|
||||
- Tomorrow (Fri) is DOCS mode, not POLISH — issue #6 (`8d-problem-solving-builder.skill`, the last W20 target) will not get an autonomous POLISH pass this week. Flagging so the W21 PLAN either re-lists it or a human picks it up; otherwise #6 closes the week unworked.
|
||||
- **Suite-wide pattern confirmed (3/3):** every POLISH pass this week — #3 hara ("safety goal"), #4 cs-concept ("CSR derivation"/"CAL allocation"), #5 aspice ("v3.1/v4.0") — found a canonical trigger phrase living outside the active trigger list. W21 PLAN should make a scripted once-per-week trigger-coverage audit across all 76 builders a first-class target instead of catching one per Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday.
|
||||
- Human review: if the proposed `aspice-assessment-builder` description rewrite looks right, ship it as a manual commit and close #5. Same posture as #3/#4.
|
||||
- Repackaging note for a human pass: `aspice-assessment-builder.skill` carries a stray empty `.placeholder` file and is missing a v4.0 reference doc — both worth fixing the next time the archive is rebuilt.
|
||||
- Issue #2 ("goodd") still needs Sunday TRIAGE — still too low-confidence to label.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,130 @@
|
||||
# aspice-assessment-builder polish log
|
||||
|
||||
_Polish target for W20 (issue [#5](https://github.com/jherrodthomas/automotive-skills-suite/issues/5)). Reviewer: autonomous daily-standup task._
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## 2026-05-14 — first POLISH pass
|
||||
|
||||
**Mode:** POLISH (Thursday)
|
||||
**File reviewed:** `skills/aspice-assessment-builder.skill` (ZIP archive; SKILL.md is 4,705 bytes / 95 lines).
|
||||
**DoD recap (from `docs/weekly/WEEK-2026-W20.md`):**
|
||||
confirm the 13-tab output list in the description matches the actual builder schema,
|
||||
and the trigger list mentions both v3.1 and v4.0.
|
||||
|
||||
### DoD verdict
|
||||
|
||||
| DoD check | Result |
|
||||
|---|---|
|
||||
| 13-tab list matches builder schema | **PASS** |
|
||||
| Trigger list mentions v3.1 and v4.0 | **PARTIAL** — versions are in the description's opening clause but not in the "Use this skill whenever..." trigger list |
|
||||
|
||||
### What's good
|
||||
|
||||
- **13-tab list is exact.** Cross-checked the SKILL.md "Output structure (13 tabs)"
|
||||
table (rows 00–12) against the `tabs` list in `scripts/generate_aspice_assessment.py`.
|
||||
All 13 entries match one-for-one, in order: Title Page, Document Control, Assessment
|
||||
Scope, Process Reference Model, Process Assessment Model, BP Assessment, GP Assessment,
|
||||
PA Rating, Capability Level, Capability Profile, Strengths/Weaknesses, Assessor
|
||||
Sign-off, References. The frontmatter description's "Produces 13 tabs including ..."
|
||||
partial enumeration names only real tabs and the count is correct. This is the
|
||||
primary DoD check and it passes cleanly — no drift between doc and schema.
|
||||
- **Frontmatter is clean.** Both required keys present (`name`, `description`); no drift
|
||||
fields; YAML parses without complaint. Description is ~530 / 1024 chars — very
|
||||
comfortable headroom for a polish-only rewrite.
|
||||
- **The ASPICE rating algorithm section is accurate.** The CL0–CL5 determination ladder
|
||||
in SKILL.md matches the `pa_mapping` in the generator (PA1.1, PA2.1–2.2, PA3.1–3.2,
|
||||
PA4.1–4.2, PA5.1–5.2) and the standard ASPICE PAM aggregation rule (each level needs
|
||||
the level below achieved AND both of its PAs ≥ Largely). Mentor-quality content, not
|
||||
filler — a junior assessor could rate a process correctly from this section alone.
|
||||
- **N/P/L/F indicator scale is introduced once, early, and reused consistently.** Defined
|
||||
in the intro paragraph and echoed in Step 3 and the tab table. No ambiguity.
|
||||
- **Workflow is correctly ordered** — scope capture → enumerate processes/practices →
|
||||
rate indicators → generate → review. The Step 5 review checklist (BP/GP evidence
|
||||
completeness, indicator ratings, PA aggregation, achieved CL) maps to the exact tabs
|
||||
a human would sanity-check.
|
||||
|
||||
### What to fix
|
||||
|
||||
1. **DoD partial miss: v3.1 / v4.0 are not in the trigger list.**
|
||||
The versions appear in the description's first clause ("ASPICE PAM v3.1/v4.0 process
|
||||
assessment workbook") but the "Use this skill whenever the user needs to ..." trigger
|
||||
list does not name them. A user invoking with "run an ASPICE v4.0 assessment" still
|
||||
matches on "ASPICE ... process assessment", so trigger reliability is not broken — but
|
||||
per the strict W20 DoD this is the one open item. Severity: **low**.
|
||||
|
||||
2. **No workflow step instructs reading the bundled references.** The archive ships
|
||||
`references/aspice_pam_3_1.md` and `references/methodology.md`, but unlike
|
||||
`item-definition-builder` (which has an explicit "Step 2 — Read the references"),
|
||||
this SKILL.md never tells Claude to read them before generating. The reference
|
||||
content is therefore dead weight at runtime. Severity: **low**.
|
||||
|
||||
3. **References directory has no v4.0 companion file.** The skill advertises v3.1/v4.0
|
||||
support and the References *tab* lists "ASPICE PAM v4.0" / "ASPICE PRM v4.0", but
|
||||
`references/` only contains `aspice_pam_3_1.md`. A v4.0 reference (or a note that the
|
||||
v3.1 file covers both with deltas called out) would close the gap. Severity: **low**,
|
||||
observation.
|
||||
|
||||
4. **`.placeholder` cruft file in the archive.** `unzip -l` shows an empty
|
||||
`aspice-assessment-builder/.placeholder` — almost certainly a leftover empty-dir
|
||||
marker from packaging. Harmless but untidy; worth dropping next time the `.skill` is
|
||||
repackaged. Severity: **low**, observation.
|
||||
|
||||
### Suggested edits (NOT applied this run)
|
||||
|
||||
The autonomous-edit allowlist for the daily-standup task is narrow — typo / over-length
|
||||
description / missing-required-frontmatter-field. None of the four findings match that
|
||||
list: #1 is an editorial trigger-coverage rewrite, #2 is a workflow-content addition,
|
||||
and #3/#4 are archive-content changes. **No edits committed today.** Captured here for
|
||||
the next human review pass.
|
||||
|
||||
Minimal proposed rewrite of the description — folds v3.1/v4.0 into the trigger list and
|
||||
adds the CL range, still well under 1024 chars, 13-tab claim untouched:
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
description: Generate a multi-tab ASPICE PAM v3.1/v4.0 process assessment workbook
|
||||
with capability level ratings, base practices, generic practices, and process
|
||||
attribute assessments. Produces 13 tabs including Title Page, Document Control,
|
||||
Assessment Scope, Process Reference Model, Process Assessment Model, BP/GP
|
||||
assessments, Capability Level determinations, strengths/weaknesses analysis, and
|
||||
assessor sign-off blocks. Use this skill whenever the user needs to conduct or
|
||||
document an ASPICE v3.1 or v4.0 process assessment, evaluate process maturity,
|
||||
rate capability levels (CL0-CL5), or create audit-ready assessment evidence.
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
For finding #2, the minimal fix is a one-line addition to Step 2 (or a new half-step):
|
||||
"Before generating, read `references/methodology.md` and `references/aspice_pam_3_1.md`
|
||||
for the PA aggregation rules and indicator-rating guidance." — left for human review
|
||||
since it is workflow content, not a surgical fix.
|
||||
|
||||
### Other observations (not fixes, just notes for future passes)
|
||||
|
||||
- SKILL.md uses ASCII hyphens for step headers (`### Step 1 - Capture ...`) where
|
||||
`hara-builder` and `cs-concept-builder` use em-dashes (`### Step 1 — ...`). Purely
|
||||
cosmetic; not worth an autonomous edit, but a suite-wide style pass could normalize it.
|
||||
- The SKILL.md has **no "Files in this skill" tree** block (item-definition-builder and
|
||||
the safety builders do). Optional, but adding one would make the `.placeholder` cruft
|
||||
and the missing v4.0 reference visible to anyone reading the skill. Docs item, not a
|
||||
polish item.
|
||||
- The generator is a single clean script (`generate_aspice_assessment.py`) plus the
|
||||
shared `recalc.py` / `office/soffice.py` helpers — consistent with the rest of the
|
||||
suite. The `tabs` list at the bottom of the script is the source of truth for the
|
||||
13-tab claim and is easy to diff against SKILL.md on future passes.
|
||||
|
||||
### Severity roll-up
|
||||
|
||||
| Finding | Severity | Action |
|
||||
|---|---|---|
|
||||
| v3.1/v4.0 absent from trigger list | low | proposed rewrite drafted; await human review |
|
||||
| No step instructs reading `references/` | low | one-line Step 2 addition proposed; await human review |
|
||||
| No v4.0 reference file in archive | low (obs) | flagged for human / repackage pass |
|
||||
| `.placeholder` cruft in archive | low (obs) | flagged for human / repackage pass |
|
||||
|
||||
**No code edits committed in this run.** Issue #5 stays open with this log linked from
|
||||
the journal entry. This is the **third consecutive POLISH finding** with the same core
|
||||
shape — fundamentals are sound (13-tab list exact, rating algorithm accurate, frontmatter
|
||||
clean) but a formal trigger phrase (here: the version numbers) lives outside the active
|
||||
trigger list. `hara-builder` (#3, "safety goal"), `cs-concept-builder` (#4, "CSR
|
||||
derivation"/"CAL allocation"), and now `aspice-assessment-builder` (#5, "v3.1/v4.0") all
|
||||
shipped this pattern. The W21 PLAN should treat a suite-wide trigger-coverage DoD audit
|
||||
as a first-class target rather than continuing to catch one per POLISH day.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user