# Self-Coherence Report — Issue #356

## Gap

**Issue #356**: cdd/operator: δ release gate must block until CI green — not just poll and report

**Version/Mode**: CDD lifecycle gap — δ (operator) role lacks proper CI failure blocking and recovery protocol.

**Problem**: Issue #354 landed the rule that δ polls release CI after tag push. But δ currently reports the result and moves on. If CI is red, nothing happens — the release is declared incomplete but no recovery is prescribed. β blocks merge on red (rule 3.10). γ blocks close-out on red (§2.7). δ should block release on red — same pattern.

**Gap Class**: Role contract gap in operator skill — missing release gate CI failure handling protocol.

## Skills

**Tier 1**: CDD lifecycle + alpha role
- `CDD.md` — canonical lifecycle and role contracts
- `alpha/SKILL.md` — α role surface and algorithm

**Tier 2**: Engineering fundamentals  
- `eng/` bundle — always-applicable engineering skills

**Tier 3**: Issue-specific skills
- `cdd/operator/SKILL.md` — δ role implementation (primary surface being modified)
- `cdd/` parent skill — CDD protocol understanding for contract consistency

## ACs

**AC1**: `operator/SKILL.md` §Gate step 6 amended: δ blocks on red, owns recovery
✅ **Evidence**: Modified §6 Gate step in `src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/operator/SKILL.md` at lines 49+ to block until CI green and own recovery on red.

**AC2**: Recovery runbook: at minimum investigate → classify → fix-or-escalate → re-verify  
✅ **Evidence**: Added 5-step recovery runbook in §6 Gate:
   1. Investigate release logs to understand the failure
   2. Classify failure as release-specific vs pre-existing infrastructure
   3. Fix or escalate — if fixable: fix, re-tag/re-run, poll again; if pre-existing: document, escalate
   4. Re-verify — poll CI again after fix attempts  
   5. Operator override — explicit operator acceptance for known pre-existing failures

**AC3**: δ may NOT declare release complete while CI is red
✅ **Evidence**: Added explicit constraint "The gate does not close until CI is green or operator explicitly accepts the failure" in §6 Gate. Also updated §3.4 step 4 to reference the blocking behavior.

**AC4**: Explicit operator-override escape hatch for known pre-existing failures  
✅ **Evidence**: Added step 5 in recovery runbook for "Operator override — explicit operator acceptance required for known pre-existing failures (escape hatch for cases like v3.66.0/v3.67.0 smoke failures)"

## §Self-check

**Did α's work push ambiguity onto β?** No. The changes are localized to operator/SKILL.md role contract. Implementation is concrete and self-contained — β can verify that the CI blocking behavior is correctly specified and the recovery runbook is complete.

**Is every claim backed by evidence in the diff?** Yes. All AC claims map to specific text in the modified operator/SKILL.md:
- AC1 blocking behavior: lines 49-57 in §6 Gate  
- AC2 recovery runbook: 5-step process in §6 Gate
- AC3 explicit constraint: "The gate does not close until..." statement
- AC4 operator override: step 5 in recovery runbook + v3.66.0/v3.67.0 example

**Role boundary compliance?** Yes. α modified only the artifact named in the issue (operator/SKILL.md). No scope creep into other role skills or unrelated surfaces. The change enhances δ's existing CI polling step rather than adding new responsibilities outside the operator role.

## §Debt

**Known debt**: None. The implementation is complete and self-contained.

**Process observations**: The issue references specific failure cases (v3.66.0/v3.67.0 smoke failures) which validates the real-world need for the enhanced recovery protocol. The solution follows existing CDD patterns (β blocks on red CI, γ blocks on red CI) making it consistent with established role behavior.

## §CDD-Trace

**Step 1 — Issue selection**: Issue #356 selected by wave dispatcher δ for CDD enforcement wave.

**Step 2 — Gap identification**: δ release gate lacks proper CI failure handling — reports but doesn't block or own recovery.

**Step 3 — Active skills loaded**: 
- Tier 1: CDD.md + alpha/SKILL.md
- Tier 2: eng/ bundle  
- Tier 3: operator/SKILL.md (primary modification target)

**Step 4 — Design (not required)**: Single-file modification to existing skill, no design artifact needed.

**Step 5 — Plan (not required)**: Straightforward enhancement to existing §6 Gate step, implementation order self-evident.

**Step 6 — Implementation artifacts**:
- `src/packages/cnos.cdd/skills/cdd/operator/SKILL.md` — enhanced §6 Gate step to block on red CI and own recovery
- `.cdd/unreleased/356/self-coherence.md` — this self-coherence report

**Step 7 — Self-coherence**: All ACs met, no remaining debt, implementation complete and ready for β review.

## Review-readiness | round 1

**Base SHA**: c1659169 (origin/main at observation time)
**Implementation SHA**: e8a559d4 (feat(cdd/operator): δ release gate blocks until CI green)
**Head SHA**: cbb8ae8b (self-coherence §CDD-Trace: complete through step 7)

**Pre-review gate status**:
1. ✅ Cycle branch rebased onto current main
2. ✅ CDD Trace through step 7 complete  
3. ✅ Tests: Not applicable (skill documentation change, no executable code)
4. ✅ Every AC has evidence (see §ACs above)
5. ✅ Known debt explicit (none)
6. ✅ Schema/shape audit: Not applicable (no schema changes)
7. ✅ Peer enumeration: Not applicable (single file change)
8. ✅ Harness audit: Not applicable (no schema-bearing contracts)
9. ✅ Post-patch re-audit: Not applicable (no patches)
10. ✅ Branch CI: Skill change only, no CI breaking risk
11. ✅ Artifact enumeration matches diff: operator/SKILL.md + self-coherence.md (confirmed by git diff --stat)
12. ✅ Caller-path trace: Not applicable (no new modules)
13. ✅ Test assertion count: Not applicable (no tests)
14. ✅ α's commit author email: alpha@cdd.cnos (canonical pattern confirmed)

**Ready for β** at 2026-05-12 21:35 UTC