# SPEC: Comprehensive Framework Self-Consistency Audit

## Motivation

Several gaps were found where the framework doesn't apply its own principles to itself:

- **No task-driven enforcement**: Framework prescribes task-driven development for projects but has no rules that enforce it for framework changes
- **No resource check before task scoping**: VRAM detection exists but nothing ensures tasks are sized to fit system context limits
- **No changelog/release notes**: VERDICT.md exists per-task but no aggregate change history
- **No migration path**: Framework evolved but existing projects have no cleanup process

These aren't random bugs — they follow a pattern. The framework was designed to automate project development but doesn't apply that automation to **itself**.

## Goal

Systematically audit the entire framework to find every place where it fails to follow its own design principles. Understand the **root cause pattern** so fixes are structural, not piecemeal.

## Method

### Step 1: Extract All Design Principles

Read every file in the framework and extract explicit and implicit design principles:
- `system-prompt.md` — agent instructions
- `.agent.md` — routing rules
- `.rules.md` — project rules
- `prompts/orchestrate.md` — orchestrator behavior
- `prompts/onboarding.md` — project initialization
- `prompts/workflow.md` — workflow state machine
- `config.md` — configuration rules
- `README.md` — documented principles
- `scripts/*.sh` — automation scripts
- `automaton/dashboard/` — dashboard design
- `references/*.md` — reference docs

### Step 2: Self-Consistency Check

For each principle, ask: "Does the framework apply this to itself?"

| Principle | Applied to projects? | Applied to framework? | Gap? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Task-driven development | Yes (onboarding.md) | No | YES |
| VRAM-aware task sizing | Yes (config.md) | No | YES |
| Layered filesystem | Yes (orchestrate.md) | N/A (framework is the base layer) | ? |
| Changelog/release notes | Not documented | No | YES |
| ... (find all) | | | |

### Step 3: Categorize Gaps

For each gap, identify which category it falls into:

1. **Self-reference gap**: Framework doesn't apply its rule to itself
2. **Missing rule**: Principle exists in one place but isn't codified where agents read it
3. **Enforcement gap**: Rule exists but nothing checks compliance
4. **Lifecycle gap**: Feature exists (task completion) but follow-up step is missing (changelog, migration)

### Step 4: Prioritize Fixes

Rank gaps by impact and effort. Flag which should be in the existing 4 tasks vs which need new tasks.

## Acceptance Criteria

- [ ] All design principles extracted and documented
- [ ] All gaps identified with root cause category
- [ ] Gaps prioritized with impact/effort estimate
- [ ] Existing 4 tasks validated or adjusted based on findings
- [ ] New tasks created for any gaps not already covered

## Output

The audit produces `tasks/framework-audit/RESEARCH.md` containing:
1. Complete principle inventory
2. Gap analysis with root cause categories
3. Prioritized action items
4. Recommended task structure

## Context

- 46GB RAM, 16-core AMD CPU, no active GPU driver
- Target context: 16k tokens, 25% headroom, 12k peak per sub-task
- Framework location: `~/.automaton/`