Elnor Repo Reader

# E0 Charter Opening Brief

**Date opened:** 2026-05-28
**Charter:** E0 — DOC80 Core / Memory Control Plane
**Architect:** Will (per usual)

## Scope

E0 defines the **core contracts of the DOC80 family** — the cross-cutting registries, contracts, and named concepts that every other DOC80-family charter (E1–E10 + E_org) consumes. It does NOT own scope/policy (E1+E2), knowledge (E3+E4), extraction (E5+E6), delivery (E7+E8), learning (E9), UI (E10), or organization/membership (E_org).

The DOC80 core charter document, when complete, is the operative draft of the **DOC80 member spec** (one of 8 family members per ADQ-220). It becomes input to Stage 7 schema-body work and Stage 8 fixture work.

## Draft targets

Drawing from the Input Deck, the E0 draft must define:

1. **Member identity** — DOC80 family scope statement; V5 non-goal (per Skeletal §10.1); manual-deletion clause (per §10.2).
2. **ReasonCode registry** — schema, namespace rules (producer-domain prefixing), producer authority list, deprecation/lifecycle. (ADQ-310)
3. **Domain profile registry** — central registry + 'conservative' fallback profile. (ADQ-313)
4. **ContextProduct contract** — field-level contract DOC24 binds to for packet assembly. (ADQ-203)
5. **MemoryContextPlan contract** — three-plan model context-of-use contract. (ADQ-211)
6. **PromptShellRegistry + PromptShellVariant + PromptShellLearningContract** — cross-cutting shell registry; consumers DOC24/KDA/BDSM. (ADQ-208)
7. **MemoryFlowCertificate** — mandatory contract for durable write / render / export / carryover / delegation / learning attribution. (ADQ-207, Owner Map row at MemoryFlowCertificate)
8. **Warrant-degradation-trigger registry** — registry in core; producers per Owner Map line 171 (post 5R2c). (ADQ-312)
9. **Proof spine** — `ContextPacketProof` contract; `RenderSafetyProof` contract (DOC84 executes; DOC11 finalizes).
10. **MemoryMutationEnvelope (NAMED only, schema body deferred to Stage 7)** — the cross-cutting mutation wrapper that subsumes concurrency revalidation, idempotency, transaction_time/valid_time carrier, replay-source pointer. (Skeletal §10.5; §11.2; §11.8)
11. **MemoryProvenanceGraph (NAMED only)** — durable PROV-style graph; distinct from `MemoryCoordinationTrace`. (Skeletal §10.6)
12. **Memory-object classification table** — column set fixed at Stage 5R2; seed rows from Skeletal §10.12. (DOC80 §14)
13. **Observability / health seam** — `MemoryPlaneHealthReadModel` placement + seed counters. (Skeletal §10.15)
14. **MemoryOperationQuota / scale assumptions** — extends `FamilyWideComputeBudget` toward bounded operations. (Skeletal §10.16)
15. **Embedding-model-migration cross-cutting field convention** — `embedding_model_ref` + `embedding_generation_id` carrier rule. (Skeletal §10.14)
16. **ExternalDependencyRecord posture** — including EC `dependency_status = partial / moving` per ECSeamContract / OPA-031. (Skeletal §10.9; §11.2)
17. **Recovery / replay seam** — DOC80 family rebuild hooks; replay-completeness invariant carrier rule. (Skeletal §11.1)
18. **Invariant enforcement-point naming** — runtime gates + Stage 9 lint names per Skeletal §11.4 table.
19. **AC-004 + AC-005 acceptance posture** — `schema_plus_lints_and_fixtures` for AC-004 (Memory Intake & At-Use Disciplines); AC-005 depends on ADQ-202 (Corpus hierarchy — E4).
20. **ABC §21 normalization-object placement check** — verify Owner Map rows for `WarrantEvaluationResult`, `WarrantConsequenceRegistry`, `DomainProfileWarrantPolicy`, `IngestionCostBudget`, `PromotionGateRecord`, `ConsideredItemLedger`, `PromptShellExposure` — slot any missing into the appropriate member (most likely DOC82 / DOC84 / DOC85 — not DOC80, but the check itself is an E0 input). (Skeletal §10.17)

## Exit criteria

E0 is complete when:

1. All 20 draft targets above have section content in `DOC80_Core_Charter_Draft.md`.
2. Each ADQ in the Input Deck has an explicit landing site in the draft (a section/subsection that resolves that ADQ; nothing left as "pending").
3. Cross-cutting fields convention (embedding refs, ReasonCode prefixing, MemoryMutationEnvelope-carried fields) is stated unambiguously enough that E1+ charters can bind to it without re-asking.
4. ABC §21 normalization-object placement check is done — Owner Map row gaps either filled or explicitly deferred to the relevant member charter.
5. Red-team review passes (multi-AI, same rhythm as Stage 5R / 5R2 / Pass 2 review).
6. Architect ratification logged in `Ratification.md`.
7. Discharge sweep: ADQs marked resolved-by-this-charter in `Architect_Decision_Queue.md` (post-E0); Skeletal §10/§11 fold-ins marked landed; OPA V4 rows discharged or marked charter-time-resolved (E0 has 0 OPA rows, so this is mostly housekeeping).

## Drafting approach

**Recommendation:** **single-drafter + multi-AI red-team** (same shape as Stage 5R / 5R2 / Pass 2 review).

Drafter options:
- **(A) Will solo (slowest, max control).** Will writes `DOC80_Core_Charter_Draft.md` section by section in Cowork. Cowork helps with mechanical lookups and cross-references.
- **(B) Commission Claude Code or Codex first-draft.** Paste this brief + Input Deck into a fresh Claude Code / Codex session; ask for a first-draft of `DOC80_Core_Charter_Draft.md`; Will reviews and revises. Fastest first-draft; trades architect ownership for speed.
- **(C) Cowork-collaborative (this session).** Will + Cowork co-draft the charter section by section. Middle ground.

**My recommendation: (B) for first draft, (A or C) for revision.** First drafts are mechanical assembly from the Input Deck + Skeletal §10/§11 fold-ins — well-suited to Claude Code or Codex. Architect editing happens after first draft.

If you pick (B), I'll write the drafting commission prompt (same shape as `Pass_2_Commission_Prompt.md`).

## Pre-conditions

**None.** E0 is foundational; no prior charter must complete first. The DOC80 baseline (Skeletal + Owner Map + Import Graph + Retired Names) provides all upstream context.

## Estimated time

Per Will's stated cadence (2-3 days per charter cycle):
- First draft: 0.5-1 day (Option B); 1-2 days (Option A or C).
- Red-team review (2-3 model passes): 0.5-1 day.
- Synthesis + must-fix patch: 0.5 day.
- Ratification + discharge sweep: 0.25 day.

**Total: 2-3 days, consistent with the calibrated estimate.**

## Next action

Will picks drafting approach (A, B, or C) and replies:
- `commission B` — I write the drafting commission prompt for Claude Code / Codex.
- `start A` or `start C` — drafting begins in this session or solo.
- `change <X>` — adjust scope, draft targets, or exit criteria.

## Sources

- [E0 Input Deck](Charter_Input_Deck.md)
- [STAGE_6_CHARTER_INPUT_INDEX.md (live)](../../../Flattening/Execution%20Ledger/Stage_5R3/STAGE_6_CHARTER_INPUT_INDEX.md)
- [DOC80 Skeletal Target Baseline (live)](../../../DOC80%20Target%20Baseline/Skeletal%20Spec/DOC80_Skeletal_Target_Baseline.md)
- [DOC80 Owner Map (live)](../../../DOC80%20Target%20Baseline/Owner%20Map/DOC80_Owner_Map.md)
- [Architect Decision Queue (live)](../../../Flattening/Execution%20Ledger/Architect%20Decision%20Queue/Architect_Decision_Queue.md)
- [OPA V4 (live)](../../../../OP-A%20and%20Operations%20and%20Trackers/OPA_V4.md)