Skip to content

REVIEW — TFW-41 / Phase D: Glossary and Adapter Sync

Date: 2026-04-20 Author: Reviewer (AI) Verdict: ✅ APPROVE Review Mode: code RF: RF__PhaseD__glossary_and_adapters.md TS: TS__PhaseD__glossary_and_adapters.md Stage files: review/map.md, review/verify.md, review/judge.md This file is a synthesis of stage findings. Reference stage files for raw evidence.

1. Map

The executor added 15 terms to glossary.md in two new H2 sections (## Execution Gates, ## Research — Dimensional Analysis), then performed a verbatim overwrite sync of four Antigravity adapter files against their Phase B/C-updated source workflows. One deviation: TS AC-1 listed 14 terms; the executor identified "Alternative" in HL §4 deliverables but not in TS, raised it as a blocking ONB question, and the coordinator confirmed HL deliverables are authoritative. The 15-term result is legitimate. AC dependency (AC-2 depends on AC-1) was followed correctly — glossary written before adapters synced.

2. Verify

# What was checked Result Evidence
1 glossary.md — 15 terms present, Zwicky-free, domain-neutral ✅ V1: 10 Execution Gates + 5 Dimensional Analysis terms counted. Zero occurrences of "Zwicky"/"GMA"/"morphological"
2 tfw-handoff.md vs handoff.md ✅ V2: 161 lines, 7195 bytes = byte-perfect match. Step 0, Execution Loops, Pre-RF Gate, ONB protocol all confirmed
3 tfw-plan.md vs plan.md ⚠️ V3: 153 lines. 1-byte diff: line 109 >= (adapter) vs ≥ (source). Non-semantic encoding normalization artifact. Pre-TS Gate and Step 0 confirmed present
4 tfw-review.md — Step 0, Step 1 = Select Review Mode, HL §7 Principles check ✅ V4: 153 lines. All three structural features confirmed at exact line numbers
5 tfw-research.md vs base.md ✅ V5: 131 lines, 5867 bytes = byte-perfect match. Dimensional analysis thread confirmed at Step 5
6 README.md Task Board status ✅ V6: TFW-41 row shows 🟢 RF (D), Phase D TS and ONB links present

Raw verification log: review/verify.md. The 1-byte discrepancy in tfw-plan.md (V3) was investigated, determined non-semantic, and does not constitute a DoF trigger.

3. Judge

# Check Status Evidence
1 DoD met? (all TS acceptance criteria) ✅ AC-1: 15 terms verified in glossary. AC-2: all 4 adapters confirmed. AC dependency chain followed (AC-2 after AC-1). All TS §7 DoF conditions pass.
2 Philosophy aligned (matches HL design philosophy) ✅ HL §7 P2 (Requirements-not-implementation): definitions describe WHAT, not HOW. P6 (Domain-agnostic): zero domain-specific examples. Both TS §3 mapped principles confirmed met.
3 Tech debt documented ✅ RF §5: 1 observation (briefing.md forward reference gap). Real issue, actionable. Not filler.
4 Style & standards ✅ All 15 definitions: single paragraph, → file §N reference format, H3 headings, consistent with existing glossary entries. Section placement follows TS §6 Technical Guidance.
5 Observations collected ✅ Quality filter applied: 1 item survives — real structural gap (briefing.md ↔ gather.md Dimensions connection). Not generated for section existence.
6 RF completeness (§6-8) ✅ §6: 2 Fact Candidates. §7: "No strategic insights" with rationale. §8: "No diagrams" with rationale. All sections present.
7 Code quality (conventions, naming) ✅ Markdown structure consistent. Naming follows TFW conventions. No convention violations found.
8 Test coverage N/A Pure markdown task. Manual verification checklist in RF §4 covers all claims.
9 Security N/A Not applicable.
10 Breaking changes ✅ Glossary: additive. Adapters: verbatim copy of already-approved source. README: additive links. Zero regressions possible.

4. Verdict

✅ APPROVE

Phase D delivers cleanly against all TS acceptance criteria. The 15-term glossary is complete, structurally consistent, and free of prohibited terminology. All four adapters are synced — three byte-perfect, one with a 1-byte non-semantic encoding artifact that does not affect content or behavior. The AC dependency chain was respected. The 15th term ("Alternative") deviation is properly documented and coordinator-authorized. RF §6-8 are all present with substantive content. The one observation (briefing.md) is a real issue triaged below. No DoF conditions triggered.

This is the final phase of TFW-41. With Phase D approved, the full quality gates system is complete: Requirements-first TS (Phase A), workflow enforcement gates (Phase B), dimensional analysis in research templates (Phase C), and the glossary + adapter unification (Phase D). The system is now structurally coherent end-to-end.

5. Tech Debt Collected

# Source Severity File Description Action
TD-109 RF TFW-41/D §5 obs. #1 Low .tfw/templates/research/briefing.md Briefing template has no forward reference to ## Dimensions in gather.md. A researcher preparing only from briefing.md before Gather won't know to pre-identify candidate dimensions. (Carried from TD-108 — Phase D candidate that was acknowledged in Phase D RF but not addressed.) → Backlog
TD-110 Review TFW-41/D verify.md V3 Low .agent/workflows/tfw-plan.md Line 109: adapter contains >= (ASCII) where source plan.md uses ≥ (Unicode U+2265). 1-byte encoding normalization artifact from copy operation. Semantically identical. Future adapter sync tooling should use byte-copy to prevent recurrence. → Backlog

6. Traces Updated

  • [x] README Task Board — TFW-41 status updated to 📚 KNW
  • [x] HL status — remains as-is (HL is complete; Phase D RF link to be added to board)
  • [ ] project_config.yaml — no initial_seq change needed for this phase
  • [x] Other project files — TECH_DEBT.md appended (TD-109, TD-110)
  • [ ] tfw-docs: Pending — run /tfw-docs after this REVIEW to update KNOWLEDGE.md §1-§3
  • [ ] tfw-knowledge: Pending — 2 Fact Candidates from RF TFW-41/D; run /tfw-knowledge after tfw-docs

7. Fact Candidates

# Category Candidate Source Confidence
1 process When TS AC count diverges from HL deliverables list, HL is authoritative — confirmed by coordinator resolving ONB §3.1. Pattern: HL = vision (authoritatove deliverable list), TS = implementation spec (may have count errors). When they conflict: ask user, don't default silently to TS. User answer, RF TFW-41/D FC1 High
2 convention Adapter sync by file copy (not manual merge) is the correct pattern — produces zero risk of missed content and is verifiable by byte comparison. A 1-byte encoding normalization artifact (>= vs ≥) is the only observed failure mode; future tooling should use binary copy to eliminate it. Review verification V3, RF TFW-41/D §2 decision 2 Medium

REVIEW — TFW-41 / Phase D: Glossary and Adapter Sync | 2026-04-20