# Post-Release Epoch Assessment — v3.14.0–v3.14.5

Epoch: **RT v2 + CDD Governance + Bundle Migration**
Releases covered: v3.13.0 (#75, untagged), v3.14.0 (#62), v3.14.1 (#78), v3.14.2 (#81), v3.14.3 (#86), v3.14.4 (#89), v3.14.5 (#91)
Date range: 2026-03-24

This is a retroactive epoch assessment per CDD §11, created under issue #85.
v3.13.0 is included because it shipped between the two epochs and was never assessed.
Option B (epoch grouping) was chosen per the #85 recommendation.

---

## 1. Coherence Measurement

### Baseline

v3.12.2 (end of epoch 1) — α A+, β A+, γ A+

Encoding lag was at MCI-freeze levels (5 growing). The epoch 1 assessment committed to shipping #62 as the next MCA with MCI frozen.

### This epoch

| Version | C_Σ | α | β | γ | What shipped |
|---------|-----|---|---|---|---|
| v3.13.0 | A- | A- | A- | A- | Docs governance (#75): CDD pipeline, self-coherence format, feature bundles, frozen snapshots. |
| v3.14.0 | A | A | A- | A | Runtime Contract v2 (#62): vertical self-model, zone classification, doctor validation. |
| v3.14.1 | A | A | A | A | CDD post-release tightening (#78): encoding lag table mandatory, concrete next-MCA, MCI freeze triggers. |
| v3.14.2 | A | A | A | A | Alpha bundle migration (#81): legacy design docs into CDD bundle structure. |
| v3.14.3 | A | A | A | A | Alpha docs reorg (#86): loose alpha files into bundle dirs, 81 cross-refs fixed. |
| v3.14.4 | A | A | A | A | Beta docs reorg (#89): 7 beta root docs into bundles, frozen-snapshot semantics note in CDD §5.1. |
| v3.14.5 | A | A | A | A | Gamma docs reorg (#91): CDD.md and AGILE-PROCESS.md into cdd/ bundle, trilogy complete. |

### Addendum: v3.14.3–v3.14.5 (docs reorg trilogy)

v3.14.3, v3.14.4, and v3.14.5 are docs-only patches that reorganized the three documentation tiers (alpha, beta, gamma) into bundle directories. No runtime code changed. No new designs were introduced. Each followed the same migration pattern established in v3.14.2: move files → create bundle README → freeze snapshot → update cross-references.

**No coherence measurement delta.** All three score A/A/A/A because they are pure structural reorganization — moving existing content into the bundle structure without modifying semantics. The scores carry forward unchanged from v3.14.2.

These releases are significant for process (they prove the migration pattern is repeatable) but not for coherence measurement (no new concepts, no new relations, no process changes).

### Delta

- **α (PATTERN):** Regressed from A+ to A. The v3.13.0 docs governance rewrite introduced new structural concepts (feature bundles, frozen snapshots, bootstrap-first rule) that temporarily increased surface area before settling. By v3.14.2 the pattern stabilized at A — coherent but broader.
- **β (RELATION):** Regressed from A+ to A. v3.14.0 scored A- on β because the zone classification touched all architecture docs — many relations were in flux during the transition. v3.14.1 restored β to A by codifying the relationships in the post-release skill.
- **γ (EXIT/PROCESS):** Held at A (relative to epoch 1 end). v3.13.0 dipped to A- as the new CDD pipeline was being established, but v3.14.0 onward restored A. The process is more explicit now but the score reflects that the new process has not yet been stress-tested through many cycles.

### Coherence contract closed?

This epoch had two interlocking theses:
1. **Ship the vertical self-model (#62)** — the MCA committed in epoch 1's assessment.
2. **Make the development method self-enforcing** — CDD pipeline, post-release skill, feature bundles.

Thesis 1: **closed.** Runtime Contract v2 shipped in v3.14.0. The agent now receives a vertical self-model (identity → cognition → body → medium) at every wake. Zone classification covers all paths.

Thesis 2: **partially closed.** CDD pipeline exists, post-release skill exists, but the skill was never executed for any release in this epoch (the very gap #85 addresses). The method is documented but not yet proven through practice.

Residual gap: post-release assessments never ran. This epoch assessment closes that gap retroactively.

---

## 2. Encoding Lag (as of v3.14.5)

| Issue | Title | Design | Impl | Lag |
|-------|-------|--------|------|-----|
| #62 | Runtime Contract v2 | converged | **shipped (v3.14.0)** | none |
| #73 | Runtime Extensions — capability providers | converged (issue spec) | not started | **stale** |
| #65 | Communication — surfaces, transport | converged (issue spec) | not started | **stale** |
| #67 | Network access as CN Shell capability | converged (subsumed by #73) | not started | **stale** |
| #68 | Agent self-diagnostics | converged (issue spec) | not started | growing |
| #59 | cn doctor — deep validation | partial design | partial impl | low |
| #64 | P0: agent probes filesystem despite RC | bug report | not started | growing |
| #84 | CA mindset reflection requirements | design (issue spec) | not started | growing |
| #79 | Projection surfaces | design (issue spec) | not started | growing |

**MCI/MCA balance: Freeze MCI**

**Rationale:** 3 issues at stale lag (#73, #65, #67 — all carried over from epoch 1 with no progress). 4 issues at growing. The epoch shipped its committed MCA (#62) but did not reduce the broader design backlog. The stale issues are the most concerning — these designs have been waiting across two full epochs.

Positive signal: #62 moving from growing to shipped proves the system can close design lag when focused. The problem is breadth, not capability.

---

## 3. Process Learning

### What went wrong

1. **Post-release skill created but never used.** The skill shipped in v3.14.1 (#78) — literally a release about making post-release assessment mandatory — but was not applied to v3.14.1 itself or any subsequent release. Ironic and structurally predictable: the skill had no enforcement gate.
2. **v3.13.0 never tagged.** CHANGELOG has the entry, code changes merged, but no `git tag` exists. This means `v3.13.0` is a ghost release — documented but not referenceable by tooling.
3. **TSC scores dropped from A+ to A without alarm.** The regression from A+ (epoch 1) to A (epoch 2) happened gradually across four releases. No single release triggered concern because each was individually coherent. The epoch view reveals the trend: broadening scope (governance, bundles, snapshots) diluted per-axis depth.
4. **MCI freeze was not honored.** Epoch 1's assessment (retroactively) called for MCI freeze, but v3.13.0 (#75) was pure MCI — a governance design with no runtime implementation. This is exactly what "freeze MCI" prohibits.

### What went right

1. **#62 shipped.** The committed MCA from epoch 1 was delivered. Runtime Contract v2 is the most significant structural change in the v3.x series — vertical self-model, zone classification, full architecture alignment.
2. **CDD pipeline became explicit.** v3.13.0 defined the 9-step pipeline with per-step artifacts. v3.14.1 added the post-release skill with concrete templates. The method now exists as executable procedure, not just doctrine.
3. **Bundle migration pattern.** v3.14.2 proved that doc reorganization can follow a repeatable pattern (move → bundle README → frozen snapshot → cross-ref update). This pattern was reused in v3.14.3, v3.14.4, v3.14.5.
4. **Feature bundles + frozen snapshots.** The version-directory pattern with manifests provides structural traceability that didn't exist before.

### Skill patches

- Post-release skill created in v3.14.1 (#78) — addresses the assessment gap
- This epoch assessment (#85) adds the enforcement gate (CDD §9.11) — the skill now cannot be skipped
- v3.12.2 CHANGELOG entry gap noted — future releases must have full CHANGELOG entries (already enforced by CDD §11.3)

---

## 4. Next Move (as decided at epoch boundary)

**Next MCA:** #85 — Post-release assessments + process gate
**Owner:** sigma
**Branch:** claude/review-agent-runtime-docs-LyUlu
**First AC:** Epoch assessments written, encoding lag table current, process gate committed
**MCI frozen until shipped?** Yes — 3 stale issues, 4 growing. No new designs until stale backlog is addressed.

**Rationale:** Before tackling any stale design issue (#73, #65, #67), the process itself must be trustworthy. #85 closes the meta-gap: the system that measures encoding lag must itself be enforced. After #85, the next MCA should target a stale issue — likely #73 (Runtime Extensions) since #65 and #67 depend on it.

**Stale issue triage (recommended priority):**
1. #73 Runtime Extensions — foundation for #65 and #67
2. #65 Communication — depends on #73 transport model
3. #67 Network — subsumed by #73, may close automatically

**Immediate fixes** (executed in this session via #85):
- Process gate added to CDD §9: assessment required before next release tag
- Both epoch assessments committed as CDD §11 artifacts
