generated from coulomb/repo-seed
Add implementation roadmap and milestone workplans
This commit is contained in:
113
docs/ImplementationRoadmap.md
Normal file
113
docs/ImplementationRoadmap.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,113 @@
|
||||
# Adaptive Pricing Implementation Roadmap
|
||||
|
||||
Status: draft, implementation-facing.
|
||||
|
||||
## Purpose
|
||||
|
||||
This roadmap translates the strategic goals in `INTENT.md` into an executable
|
||||
implementation sequence for the current repository state.
|
||||
|
||||
The root research roadmap in `research/PricingResearchRoadmap.md` remains the
|
||||
conceptual and research-first planning artifact. This document starts from the
|
||||
current implementation reality: a Coulomb-specific economic observatory MVP
|
||||
under `projects/coulomb-pricing/observatory/`.
|
||||
|
||||
## Current Baseline
|
||||
|
||||
The repository already provides:
|
||||
|
||||
- ledger-backed economics and liquidity tracking
|
||||
- cost-floor, value-range, and market-context views
|
||||
- file-based Stripe / Bubble / OpenRouter imports
|
||||
- scenario comparison for a small set of candidate pricing models
|
||||
- rules-based pricing recommendations
|
||||
- a local dashboard API and UI
|
||||
|
||||
The repository does not yet provide:
|
||||
|
||||
- a canonical, generic pricing-model schema
|
||||
- a validation engine for pricing constraints and commitments
|
||||
- comparable customer LTV estimation
|
||||
- a customer-tuning solver
|
||||
- outbound payment-provider execution
|
||||
- governance workflows for publishing and changing pricing
|
||||
|
||||
## Sequencing Principles
|
||||
|
||||
- Preserve the observatory MVP as a proving ground while extracting generic core logic.
|
||||
- Build schema and validation before solver or provider execution.
|
||||
- Keep the internal pricing model as the source of truth; execution adapters come later.
|
||||
- Require explainability at each stage: validation, simulation, tuning, and publish.
|
||||
- Convert repository planning into milestone workplans rather than one large umbrella plan.
|
||||
|
||||
## Milestones
|
||||
|
||||
| Milestone | Goal | Primary workplan | Dependencies | Exit signal |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| M0 | Economic observatory baseline | `ADAPTIVE-WP-0002` | done | Coulomb ledger, dashboard, simulator, recommendations |
|
||||
| M1 | Extract canonical pricing core and schema | `ADAPTIVE-WP-0003` | M0 | Generic schema and validator adopted by Coulomb data |
|
||||
| M2 | Add boundary engine and explainable validation | `ADAPTIVE-WP-0004` | M1 | Pricing configurations are validated against explicit constraints |
|
||||
| M3 | Upgrade economics to comparable-customer LTV and richer simulation | `ADAPTIVE-WP-0005` | M1, M2 | Simulations compare models using segment/risk-aware economics |
|
||||
| M4 | Implement customer-tuning solver prototype | `ADAPTIVE-WP-0006` | M2, M3 | Tuned configurations can be proposed, evaluated, and explained |
|
||||
| M5 | Add provider abstraction and Stripe publication flow | `ADAPTIVE-WP-0007` | M1, M2, M3 | Internal pricing definitions can publish Stripe artifacts safely |
|
||||
| M6 | Add governance and recommendation workflows | `ADAPTIVE-WP-0008` | M4, M5 | Pricing changes become auditable, explainable, and operational |
|
||||
|
||||
## Milestone Details
|
||||
|
||||
### M1 — Canonical Pricing Core And Schema
|
||||
|
||||
Create a reusable pricing core that can represent more than the current
|
||||
subscription-only observatory model. Expand beyond the current narrow
|
||||
`PricingModel` structure to include charge components, commitments, tunable
|
||||
parameters, eligibility, and provider-mapping metadata.
|
||||
|
||||
### M2 — Boundary Engine And Explainable Validation
|
||||
|
||||
Turn strategic boundary conditions into testable rules. A pricing configuration
|
||||
must be accepted or rejected by explicit logic, not only by dashboard review.
|
||||
This milestone defines hard and soft constraints, invalid-configuration reasons,
|
||||
and commitment-backed discount semantics.
|
||||
|
||||
### M3 — Comparable Customer LTV And Richer Simulation
|
||||
|
||||
Extend the current period snapshot and fixed-assumption simulator into an engine
|
||||
that can compare pricing configurations across customer segments, usage
|
||||
forecasts, risk classes, and contract conditions. This is the economics core
|
||||
needed by any seller-safe adaptive system.
|
||||
|
||||
### M4 — Customer-Tuning Solver Prototype
|
||||
|
||||
Expose a customer/seller configuration interface where selected parameters are
|
||||
tunable and the solver adjusts the rest while preserving seller economics. This
|
||||
milestone is the first actual realization of the adaptive-pricing thesis in
|
||||
`INTENT.md`.
|
||||
|
||||
### M5 — Provider Abstraction And Stripe Publication
|
||||
|
||||
Add an outbound execution layer that maps internal pricing definitions to Stripe
|
||||
artifacts. This is where the repo moves from observatory-only to operational
|
||||
pricing infrastructure.
|
||||
|
||||
### M6 — Governance And Recommendation Workflows
|
||||
|
||||
Operationalize the engine with approval policies, publish/change workflows,
|
||||
auditable recommendations, experiment guardrails, and customer-facing safe
|
||||
tuning contracts.
|
||||
|
||||
## Workplan Set
|
||||
|
||||
- `ADAPTIVE-WP-0003` — Canonical pricing core and schema extraction
|
||||
- `ADAPTIVE-WP-0004` — Boundary engine and explainable validation
|
||||
- `ADAPTIVE-WP-0005` — Comparable customer LTV and simulation upgrade
|
||||
- `ADAPTIVE-WP-0006` — Customer-tuning solver prototype
|
||||
- `ADAPTIVE-WP-0007` — Provider abstraction and Stripe publication
|
||||
- `ADAPTIVE-WP-0008` — Governance and recommendation workflows
|
||||
|
||||
## Near-Term Recommendation
|
||||
|
||||
Start with `ADAPTIVE-WP-0003`.
|
||||
|
||||
The current implementation bottleneck is not UI or provider execution. It is
|
||||
the absence of a sufficiently expressive internal pricing model. Until that
|
||||
schema exists, later milestones would hard-code MVP assumptions into layers that
|
||||
should remain generic.
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user