intent adjustments
This commit is contained in:
@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ This architecture keeps authored content human-friendly while preserving machine
|
||||
The architecture is designed to satisfy three long-term requirements:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Methodology must be editable as markdown by humans.
|
||||
2. Agents must consume stable, discoverable resource contracts.
|
||||
2. Agents must consume stable, discoverable resource contracts, with a minimal read-only catalog tool fallback for constrained clients.
|
||||
3. Public documentation must be pre-built static output served from the application runtime without a separate docs service.
|
||||
|
||||
## System Model
|
||||
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ The document resource returns canonical Markdown, while clients can perform any
|
||||
|
||||
### Catalog Module
|
||||
|
||||
The catalog is the canonical discovery layer and publishes normalized records for all modules.
|
||||
The catalog is the canonical discovery layer and publishes normalized records for all modules. It may also expose a minimal set of read-only discovery tools that resolve back to the same canonical markdown content when a client chat surface does not expose MCP resource attachment.
|
||||
|
||||
Typical catalog resources:
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -128,7 +128,7 @@ Markdown remains easy to review, while contracts remain stable for clients.
|
||||
|
||||
### Client Independence
|
||||
|
||||
Clients can use Ask, Edit, or Agent modes without requiring server-owned prompt orchestration.
|
||||
Clients can use Ask, Edit, or Agent modes without requiring server-owned prompt orchestration. However, MCP affordances are still chat-surface-dependent: some clients or sessions expose resource attachment directly, while others make tool invocation the more reliable retrieval path.
|
||||
|
||||
## Authoring and Publishing Lifecycle
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -148,9 +148,13 @@ In-scope:
|
||||
Out-of-scope:
|
||||
|
||||
1. Prompt-first orchestration as the primary interface
|
||||
2. Large tool inventories duplicating static guidance
|
||||
2. Large tool inventories duplicating static guidance across skill modules
|
||||
3. Separate dynamic docs service at runtime
|
||||
|
||||
Allowed exception:
|
||||
|
||||
1. A small catalog-level tool layer is acceptable when it improves client interoperability without creating a second source of truth for skill content.
|
||||
|
||||
## Example Content Inputs
|
||||
|
||||
Existing markdown reference sets are valid examples of authored source material for this architecture:
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -108,6 +108,8 @@ Example mapping model:
|
||||
|
||||
Catalog resources provide discovery metadata and stable identifiers.
|
||||
|
||||
When clients cannot attach MCP resources directly, catalog-level tools may retrieve the same underlying skill documents indirectly. This does not create a second content source; it is only an alternate access path to the same markdown-backed contract.
|
||||
|
||||
## Why This Pattern
|
||||
|
||||
### Operational Simplicity
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user