stage: review (pipeline audit)
product: prism-site
auditor: עמית (gate supervisor)
date: 2026-07-17
mandate: reconstruct all stages actually run; answer honestly why stages were skipped
status: done — report is the deliverable; no fixes executed
skills_invoked: []
Ordered by Ben. Scope: products/prism-site/, OpenSpec change prism-site-onepager
(archived 2026-07-17), git history on feat/pulse-v031-s1. Site is live at
https://preview.prism-site-preview.pages.dev (preview branch, noindex).
| When | What |
|---|---|
| 2026-06-23/25 | Earlier attempt (b0d0464f, c3653b93, 679a02b8): architecture plan + research + vision.md + 2 brand directions + vision-gate. Not an ancestor of HEAD — lives on an unmerged branch (plan doc survives in .claude/worktrees/refract-scene/docs/plans/2026-06-23-001-feat-prism-site-architecture-plan.md). The July run restarted from zero and does not reference it. |
| 2026-07-16 17:59 | de5f901e — corrective scaffold: pipeline.md + research + vision-draft + 3 brand directions (product opened as corrective action: "Ben expected this from גל; it was never opened as a task") |
| 2026-07-16 ~15:13Z | P6 gate deployed (prism-site-gate.pages.dev); Ben approves: clients / PRISM / one-page / separate portfolio / Glass Box; receipt decisions/p6-20260716.yaml, next_state: mockup_preview |
| 2026-07-16 23:39 | 661ebc74 — OpenSpec adopted (D-015), first change = prism-site-onepager |
| 2026-07-16 23:50 – 00:12 | Full implementation: 9 scoped commits, deploy, receipt.md — same evening |
| 2026-07-17 15:19 | 4dee2cdb — openspec archive prism-site-onepager ("11/11, site approved by Ben") |
| # | Stage | Artifact on disk | Receipt | Gate approval | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Research | research/research.md — repo-grounded + real competitor research (Rotem's competitors-landscape + live WebFetch of 10Web/Lindy/Light Anchor, 3 positioning angles) | frontmatter w/ skills_invoked | — (no gate) | RAN |
| 2 | Vision | vision/vision-draft.md incl. success criteria + anti-scope | decisions/p6-20260716.yaml | Ben, P6, 2026-07-16 (via deployed gate link — per house rule) | RAN |
| 3 | Brand — direction | brand/direction-notes.md — 3 directions, divergence audit vs. ben-portfolio/plakton/aperture | same P6 receipt | Ben selected Glass Box, no blending | RAN |
| 3b | Brand — DesignSync mockups (dashboard.html + mobile.html + tokens.html → deployed preview) | NONE. No dashboard.html/mobile.html/tokens.html anywhere in the product | — | — | SKIPPED — see §2.1 |
| 3c | "Mockup Preview" row in pipeline.md | review/p6/index.html — but this is the P6 decision form (Hebrew radio-button gate page), not a mockup of the site | review/p6/deployment-receipt.yaml, workflow-verdict.yaml | pipeline.md marks "✅ done" | MISLABELED — the artifact pointed to is not a mockup; honest verdict for the mockup stage is SKIPPED |
| 4 | Spec | OpenSpec .../specs/prism-site-onepager/spec.md — 5 requirements w/ scenarios (pipeline.md says 4; it missed the performance-baseline req) | archived change | — | RAN (via OpenSpec, not specs/) |
| 5 | Architecture | OpenSpec design.md — goals/non-goals/decisions/risks | archived change | — | RAN (light; appropriate for a one-pager) |
| 6 | Tasks | OpenSpec tasks.md — 11 tasks | archived change | — | RAN. Bookkeeping defect: archive commit claims "11/11" but archived tasks.md still shows 3.5 unchecked |
| 7 | P7 gate | none — pipeline.md: "folded into OpenSpec change discipline" | none | none | FOLDED / PARTIAL — declared, plausible, but no receipt of the fold decision itself |
| 8 | Implement | implementation/ — Astro static, tokens-as-code, 0 JS, 9 scoped commits | implementation/receipt.md (thorough: sha256, Lighthouse ×2, curl link checks, honesty gate, screenshot-QA fixes) | — | RAN (exemplary receipt) |
| 9 | Review | self-verification only (inside receipt.md). No independent/adversarial review artifact; reviews/ did not exist until this audit | — | — | PARTIAL |
| 10 | Evaluation | none on disk. Ben's approval of the live preview exists only in a commit message (4dee2cdb) — no receipt YAML, no evaluation.md vs. the vision's success criteria; pipeline.md still says "⏳ awaiting Ben" (stale) | missing | Ben approved (chat/console) — unreceipted | SKIPPED |
| 11 | Knowledge | no lessons/; pipeline.md row "todo". Mitigation: 2 prism-site entries did land in memory/decisions/promotions.log (commit-attribution race note; Ben's post-prism-site feedback → live-progress-link rule + product-owner-agent model) | partial | — | PARTIAL |
Three executable documents promised it: brand/direction-notes.md ("Which one direction to
develop into mockups (dashboard.html + mobile.html + tokens.html → DesignSync)"),
decisions/p6-20260716.yaml (next_state: mockup_preview), and
review/p6/workflow-verdict.yaml (`required_owner_action: Gal develops Glass Box into desktop
and mobile mockup previews`). It never ran. Cause, from the timeline: **the workflow switched
mid-stream to OpenSpec** (D-015, adopted 23:39 the same evening) and the change's task list
contained no mockup task — so the newly-adopted discipline silently swallowed the standing
DesignSync requirement, and implementation started 11 minutes after OpenSpec init. Nobody
amended the three documents that said mockup_preview comes next. pipeline.md then marked
"Mockup Preview ✅ done" pointing at review/ — but that directory holds the decision form,
not a mockup. That row is the one genuinely dishonest cell in the tracker.
Mitigating fact: Ben approved the real deployed site on 2026-07-17 — a stronger artifact
than a mockup. The product outcome was not harmed; the process record was.
Implementation ended 00:12; Ben's verdict arrived next day and was captured only in the archive
commit message. Nobody returned to: write an eval against the vision's measurable criteria,
receipt the approval, update pipeline.md, or ship lessons. This is precisely the failure mode
already recorded in memory ("stay in PRISM loop" — implementation work owes its Review +
Knowledge stages). Partial credit: two real learnings were promoted to promotions.log.
Spec / Architecture / Tasks / P7 were not skipped — they moved into the OpenSpec change
(proposal + design + spec + tasks), which is a documented, D-015-sanctioned equivalent and in
this case produced better artifacts than the average specs/ folder (scenarios, honesty-gate
requirement, risk register). Research and Vision/Brand-direction were done properly, with real
competitor research and a deployed P6 gate link per house rule.
**Mixed — legitimate fast-path on the spec side, P3 + pipeline-law violations on the
brand/closure side.**
mockup_preview`; implementation contradicted them and the documents were never amended.
Under P3 the implementation was "wrong" the moment it started without either running the
mockup stage or amending the state machine.
P6 decision form as a mockup; Evaluation/Knowledge rows are stale (Ben approved a day ago,
tracker still says awaiting).
Brand stage) was not met. tokens exist only as implementation code (src/styles/tokens.css),
which satisfies tokens-as-code but not the DesignSync deliverable.
and sanctioned by D-015); the one-evening speed itself; the preview-branch deploy scope.
claim; unreceipted P6 approval living only in a commit message; an unmerged June attempt at
this product whose artifacts (vision.md, brand-directions.md, vision-gate) exist on a dead
branch and were never reconciled or cited.
Ordered; costs are estimates.
| Pri | Action | Why | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Truth-fix the record: amend pipeline.md (Mockup row → "SKIPPED — superseded by Ben's live-preview approval"; Evaluation → approved 2026-07-17; Knowledge → link promotions.log entries), write decisions/p6-20260717-live-approval.yaml receipt, check off archived tasks.md 3.5 | The tracker must stop lying before anything else; cheapest fix, highest constitutional value | ~30 min |
| 2 | Evaluation stage + production decision: evaluation.md against vision success criteria, incl. measurement plan for "1 qualified inbound inquiry / 30 days"; decide production deploy — today the "live" storefront is a --branch=preview deploy with X-Robots-Tag: noindex and a 404 bare URL — a client-facing site search engines are told to ignore. This is the highest product stake in the audit | ~45 min + a P6-adjacent direction question for Ben (domain/production) | |
| 3 | Retro DesignSync-lite: generate tokens.html from the shipped tokens.css + a Glass Box brand one-pager (dashboard/mobile screens can be captures of the live site) → deployed preview per the standing requirement. Full retro mockups are theater — the site shipped — but the publication routes (approved product direction) will need the DesignSync base anyway | ~1–2 h | |
| 4 | Independent Review pass (code + public-content leak check on the governance feed) by a non-author agent | receipt.md is self-review; governance feed publishes ledger content | ~1 h |
| 5 | Knowledge stage: lessons/ — "new discipline adoption must map the old state machine's pending states" (the mockup swallow) + promotions | closes the loop; the lesson generalizes to every future discipline switch | ~30 min |
If Ben prefers to waive the DesignSync requirement for this product retroactively, that
waiver is itself a P6 decision and needs a receipt — it is his standing rule, not ours to drop.
This audit is a near-perfect test case for the Understand-Anything pilot: the ground truth was
scattered across a product tree, an OpenSpec archive, a stale tracker, commit messages, an
unmerged dead branch, and promotions.log — and the single hardest question ("did the mockup
stage run?") required noticing that a file pointed to by a ✅ row was a different kind of
artifact than the row claimed. I would want the pilot, pointed at products/prism-site/, to
show: (a) a stage-completeness map (which canonical pipeline stages have artifacts, receipts,
and gate approvals, with MISSING/MISLABELED flags), (b) a promise-graph — every next_state /
required_owner_action declared in receipts vs. what actually happened next in git, and (c) a
staleness report on tracker rows vs. commit evidence. If it can produce that table unassisted,
it replaces roughly two hours of manual forensics per product and becomes the standard
onboarding artifact for any agent entering a product tree.