Control Plane Commissioning Evidence

Can a clean-session agent route common Playbook work from the smallest relevant map?

On 2026-07-18, a read-only cold agent began at the Wiki hub and tested five change classes. It read 11 unique control-plane artifacts, plus package.json only to verify commands. The run exposed three language and promotion ambiguities; those were corrected before this evidence was recorded.

Routing Matrix

Change	Authority and page job	Evidence boundary	Expected write-set	Proof
Canonical term	Language; typed DDL first; glossary or concept only when teaching needs a page	Preserve domain dialect; one definition and avoid-list; notation only after decoder value is proved	Typed DDL; readable projection or home conditionally; generated projections	formatting, publication, manifest, graph
Systems model	Systems; concept for explanation, playbook for a modeling method, representation owner for a diagram	Separate observed relationships, hypotheses, boundary, missing axes, and falsifier	Model page, parent route, governed visual source if needed; DDL only for shared language	formatting, publication, manifest, graph
Playbook method	Affected domain owns the method; Wiki assigns type: playbook	Reusable outcome, inputs, steps, outputs, checks, failures, and proof; no private delivery state	Method page, parent hub, conditional DDL; generated projections	formatting, publication, manifest, graph
Research to doctrine	Rightful domain concept, playbook, or standard owner	Preserve source, contradiction, confidence, limits, and falsifier; do not rewrite evidence as certainty	Preserve evidence; create or revise destination; update parent; conditional DDL and projections	formatting, publication, manifest, graph
Maintenance	Existing page type, target, parent, and domain	Correct the observed defect while preserving route, evidence state, and unrelated prose	Normally target page only; projections only when typed meaning changes	targeted formatting; conditional publication and graph checks

Instruction-Compliance Matrix

Required control	Direct evidence	Result
Four non-overlapping authorities	Wiki Schema	Pass
Delivery sequence	Wiki Schema: name → model → route → standardize → teach/apply → prove → evolve	Pass
Wisdom Transfer in typed DDL	src/data/agent-language/ddl-nomenclature.data.ts and its readable projection	Pass
Capability System owns intersections	Capability System	Pass
AI and Agents boundary	Wiki Schema and Folder Ownership	Pass
Truth does not depend on a missing Wiki ledger	Wiki Schema evidence model and contradiction search	Pass
Progressive disclosure	Wiki Schema Map-First Edit and Agent Read Order	Pass
Singleton and folder rules agree	Information Architecture	Pass
Standards hub only routes	Standards and Compounding Standards	Pass
Five-gate transfer contract	Wisdom Transfer Standard and seven page templates	Pass

Confidence and Limits

The routing test proves discoverability and contract coherence, not real-world transfer. Structural checks can support L2. L3 requires use in a real case. L4 requires an independent person in the served role to validate transfer.

The local publication, manifest, and graph commands depend on a configured STACKMATES_ROOT. That dependency was absent in this checkout during the 2026-07-18 run. Typecheck also reported existing application dependency and component errors outside this documentation write-set. These failures remain environment and repository-baseline evidence; they are not converted into passing claims.

Review Trigger

Repeat the five routes when an authority boundary, page type, generator, or proof command changes. Replace this evidence when a new cold run needs more than progressive disclosure or selects a different owner.

Context

• proved-against Wisdom Transfer Standard — supplies the five gates and commissioning ladder.
• applies-to Wiki Schema — tests the edit route and authority boundaries.
• pairs-with Open Knowledge Format — owns generated manifest and meaning-graph checks.