Added workplan for dependency awareness

workplans/RREG-WP-0008-dependency-aware-scope-propagation.md

@@ -0,0 +1,149 @@
+---
+id: RREG-WP-0008
+type: workplan
+title: "Dependency-Aware Scope Propagation"
+domain: capabilities
+repo: repo-scoping
+status: active
+owner: codex
+topic_slug: foerster-capabilities
+created: "2026-05-01"
+updated: "2026-05-01"
+state_hub_workstream_id: "81ec50c4-fe73-41ea-ba5b-2e02be2bed42"
+---
+
+# Dependency-Aware Scope Propagation
+
+This workplan explores and implements a spreadsheet-inspired dependency model
+for repo-scoping. Facts, evidence, features, capabilities, abilities, and scope
+can be treated as interdependent cells in a conceptual graph: when source facts
+or lower-level characteristics change, dependent characteristics can be marked
+stale, recalculated, or queued for human review.
+
+The goal is not to force every repository into a brittle fully-derived model.
+Instead, repo-scoping should distinguish between observed inputs, derived claims,
+manual curator decisions, and mixed claims whose confidence depends on both
+machine-observed evidence and human judgment.
+
+## Motivation
+
+Repository understanding changes over time. A new route, package, test suite,
+configuration file, README section, CLI command, or removed module may affect a
+feature directly, a capability indirectly, and an ability or scope only when the
+change is conceptually important. Tracking that propagation can make updates
+faster, safer, and more explainable.
+
+The propagation rate itself is valuable: repositories where many low-level fact
+changes constantly force top-level scope changes may be conceptually immature,
+poorly decomposed, or still in rapid product discovery. Repositories where
+changes stay local may have a more stable conceptual model.
+
+## Model Dependency Graph
+
+```task
+id: RREG-WP-0008-T01
+status: todo
+priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "a7a6080e-a78b-447b-a3a9-0a575f882578"
+```
+
+Design a dependency graph that can link facts, evidence, features, capabilities,
+abilities, and scope. Capture dependency type, direction, strength, source, and
+whether the target is deterministic, curator-owned, or mixed.
+
+Acceptance criteria:
+- A documented model explains dependency edges and ownership semantics.
+- Same-layer dependencies are allowed but flagged as normalization signals.
+- Scope remains the single root characteristic.
+
+## Change Impact Analysis
+
+```task
+id: RREG-WP-0008-T02
+status: todo
+priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "0f00ffaf-5685-4327-bb93-b5c78bc97bd1"
+```
+
+Compare analysis runs and approved characteristic revisions to identify which
+higher-level characteristics are affected by changed facts or changed child
+characteristics.
+
+Acceptance criteria:
+- Changed facts can produce an impact list of potentially stale evidence,
+  features, capabilities, abilities, and scope.
+- Impact output explains why each item was affected.
+- Unchanged upstream claims are explicitly distinguishable from claims requiring
+  review.
+
+## Recalculation And Review Workflow
+
+```task
+id: RREG-WP-0008-T03
+status: todo
+priority: high
+state_hub_task_id: "29a85e0a-7203-484c-aa5d-94096ab695a9"
+```
+
+Define and implement a review workflow for downstream recalculation. Some values
+may be automatically updated, while higher-level or curator-owned claims should
+be marked stale and presented for approval.
+
+Acceptance criteria:
+- Characteristics can carry freshness or staleness state.
+- The UI shows impacted items and recommended actions.
+- Curators can accept recalculated text, keep the previous claim, or edit it.
+
+## Propagation Metrics
+
+```task
+id: RREG-WP-0008-T04
+status: todo
+priority: medium
+state_hub_task_id: "99cab29a-d51a-4709-b08c-46414bab8053"
+```
+
+Track propagation depth and breadth as signals about conceptual maturity and
+model stability.
+
+Acceptance criteria:
+- Analysis summaries report how far fact changes bubbled up.
+- Repository-level metrics distinguish local churn from scope-level churn.
+- Documentation explains how propagation rate should be interpreted cautiously.
+
+## UI Drilldown
+
+```task
+id: RREG-WP-0008-T05
+status: todo
+priority: medium
+state_hub_task_id: "02147d64-d339-40e2-b88d-406567bfa366"
+```
+
+Expose dependency and impact information in the UI as a drilldown from scope to
+facts and as an impact view from changed facts upward.
+
+Acceptance criteria:
+- Users can inspect why a characteristic is considered current or stale.
+- Users can navigate from a changed fact to affected features, capabilities,
+  abilities, and scope.
+- Evidence remains the bridge between observed facts and interpreted claims.
+
+## Documentation And Terminology
+
+```task
+id: RREG-WP-0008-T06
+status: todo
+priority: medium
+state_hub_task_id: "44b0b992-da74-45b0-970a-2f3786ac3b31"
+```
+
+Document dependency-aware scoping as a core concept, including spreadsheet
+analogy, derived claims, curator-owned claims, mixed claims, staleness, and
+propagation metrics.
+
+Acceptance criteria:
+- `docs/terminology.md` defines dependency, staleness, recalculation, and
+  propagation rate.
+- A design note explains how deterministic and optional LLM-assisted updates fit
+  into the dependency model.