jpmschweitzerandClaude Sonnet 4.6
2ee095306b
Subversions added or made explicit across 3 most-imbalanced groups: Afrikaans/Dutch: - Breëvlei (GJ-661B): xenobiology research community, pre-settlement marsh stakes of unknown origin drive community identity - Bestevaer (GJ-103): Dutch maritime mystery culture; Diepzeecommissie secretly building capacity to investigate restricted deep zone German: - Lichtung (GJ-356A): full rewrite → artists' colony, F-type light environment, no industrial or agricultural purpose - Haltefenn (GJ-1248): Moorlesen craft tradition (peat-layer reading as art) now primary economic identity over peat fuel extraction Portuguese: - Espinho (GJ-1075): science/research subversion made explicit on page - Nascente (GJ-2097): Irmandade reframed as commercial dynasty via 400 years of freight transit intelligence Also creates docs/audits/cultural-stereotyping-audit.md with full audit findings, ratios, recommendations, and follow-up scope for Sprint 32+. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com>
title, description, type, status, created, updated
| title | description | type | status | created | updated |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture Audits | Index and methodology reference for adversarial two-round architecture audits. Documents the review format, scope, reviewer roles, and audit history. | audit | active | 2026-02-11 | 2026-02-11 |
Architecture Audits
Audit Pattern: Adversarial Two-Round Review with Code Review
Format
Two independent reviewers (typically Tyre + Troblum) run a structured architecture audit in two rounds:
Round 1 — Independent Reviews (parallel)
- Each reviewer independently analyzes the architecture plan AND current code
- Covers decisions, implementation, risks, scalability, and recommendations
- Reviewers do not see each other's output
Round 2 — Adversarial Debate (parallel)
- Each reviewer receives the other's Round 1 findings
- Writes a debate response: AGREE / PUSH BACK / SYNTHESIZE per finding
- Challenges assumptions, catches blind spots, reconciles priorities
Synthesis — Consensus Recommendations
- Merged priority list both reviewers sign off on
- Items rated by sprint and effort
- "Not Accepted" section for recommendations that were debated and deferred
Scope
Each review covers:
- Architecture decisions (all
decisions/*.mddomain files) - Current implementation (server Rust code, client GDScript code, tests)
- Technical risk assessment with severity ratings
- Decision coherence and gaps
- Scalability and performance analysis
- Implementation readiness
- Prioritized recommendations
Output
Single document per audit, date-coded: architecture-review-YYYY-MM-DD.md
Reviewers
- Tyre (Technical Architect, internal) — focuses on decision coherence, system design, implementation readiness, algorithm selection
- Troblum (External Technical Consultant) — focuses on technology evaluation, operational concerns, failure modes, performance profiling, time bombs
When to Run
- Before major sprint milestones
- After significant architecture decisions
- When scope changes require re-evaluation
- At kill switch checkpoints (D-020)
Audit History
| Date | Reviewers | Scope | Key Finding |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-02-11 | Tyre + Troblum | Full architecture + code (Sprint 1) | Architecture GREEN, implementation plan AMBER — knowledge graph and observer pipeline underspecified |