m3taversal
880193919c
- What: Added Astra to CLAUDE.md active agents table, repo structure, and write access table. Added space-development to domain enum in both CLAUDE.md and schemas/claim.md. - Why: Completing Astra onboarding — agent identity files and first 5 claims were auto-committed, this adds the shared infrastructure changes. Pentagon-Agent: Astra <973E4F88-73EA-4D80-8004-EC9801B62336> Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
87 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
87 lines
3.2 KiB
Markdown
# Claim Schema
|
|
|
|
Claims are the shared knowledge base — arguable assertions that interpret evidence. Claims are the building blocks that agents use to form beliefs and positions. They belong to the commons, not to individual agents.
|
|
|
|
## YAML Frontmatter
|
|
|
|
```yaml
|
|
---
|
|
type: claim
|
|
domain: internet-finance | entertainment | health | ai-alignment | space-development | grand-strategy | mechanisms | living-capital | living-agents | teleohumanity | critical-systems | collective-intelligence | teleological-economics | cultural-dynamics
|
|
description: "one sentence adding context beyond the title"
|
|
confidence: proven | likely | experimental | speculative
|
|
source: "who proposed this claim and primary evidence source"
|
|
created: YYYY-MM-DD
|
|
last_evaluated: YYYY-MM-DD
|
|
depends_on: [] # list of evidence and claim titles this builds on
|
|
challenged_by: [] # list of counter-evidence or counter-claims
|
|
---
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Required Fields
|
|
|
|
| Field | Type | Description |
|
|
|-------|------|-------------|
|
|
| type | enum | Always `claim` |
|
|
| domain | enum | Primary domain |
|
|
| description | string | Context beyond title (~150 chars). Must add NEW information |
|
|
| confidence | enum | `proven` (strong evidence, tested), `likely` (good evidence, broadly accepted), `experimental` (emerging evidence, still being evaluated), `speculative` (theoretical, limited evidence) |
|
|
| source | string | Attribution — who proposed, key evidence |
|
|
| created | date | When added |
|
|
|
|
## Optional Fields
|
|
|
|
| Field | Type | Description |
|
|
|-------|------|-------------|
|
|
| last_evaluated | date | When this claim was last reviewed against new evidence |
|
|
| depends_on | list | Evidence and claims this builds on (the reasoning chain) |
|
|
| challenged_by | list | Counter-evidence or counter-claims (disagreement tracking) |
|
|
| secondary_domains | list | Other domains this claim is relevant to |
|
|
|
|
## Governance
|
|
|
|
- **Who can propose:** Any contributor, any agent
|
|
- **Review process:** Leo assigns evaluation. All relevant domain agents review. Consensus required (or Leo resolves)
|
|
- **Modification:** Claims evolve. New evidence can strengthen or weaken. Confidence level changes tracked
|
|
- **Retirement:** Claims that are superseded or invalidated get `status: retired` with explanation, not deleted
|
|
|
|
## Title Format
|
|
|
|
Titles are prose propositions — complete thoughts that work as sentences.
|
|
|
|
**Good:** "AI diagnostic triage achieves 97% sensitivity across 14 conditions making AI-first screening viable"
|
|
**Bad:** "AI diagnostics" or "AI triage performance"
|
|
|
|
**The claim test:** "This note argues that [title]" must work as a sentence.
|
|
|
|
## Body Format
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# [prose claim title]
|
|
|
|
[Argument — why this claim is supported, what evidence underlies it]
|
|
|
|
## Evidence
|
|
- [[evidence-note-1]] — what this evidence contributes
|
|
- [[evidence-note-2]] — what this evidence contributes
|
|
|
|
## Challenges
|
|
[Known counter-evidence or counter-arguments, if any]
|
|
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
Relevant Notes:
|
|
- [[related-claim]] — relationship description
|
|
|
|
Topics:
|
|
- [[domain-topic-map]]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Quality Checks
|
|
|
|
1. Title passes the claim test (specific enough to disagree with)
|
|
2. Description adds information beyond the title
|
|
3. At least one piece of evidence cited
|
|
4. Confidence level matches evidence strength
|
|
5. No duplicate of existing claim (semantic check)
|
|
6. Domain classification accurate
|