Skip to content

History

Project history

Chronology of what changed for readers and operators of the Decision Intelligence Runtime: from the first publication of the ROA/DIR narrative through runnable governance scenarios, a hardened decision kernel, and a public documentation site. Technical file moves or line counts are omitted when they do not change the business story.

2025-12-11 — Project start

  • The repository opens as a home for the Responsibility-Oriented Agents (ROA) manifesto: a clear statement of how agent work is scoped, delegated, and owned when decisions have operational consequences.

2026-01 — Decision Intelligence pattern, ready for serious readers

  • The Decision Intelligence Runtime (DIR) pattern is spelled out alongside ROA so teams can see how decision flows, contracts, and execution boundaries fit together in production-shaped systems.
  • Architecture prose is tightened for clarity, consistency, and implementability (definitions, cross-references, glossary, and references), with diagrams that leadership and engineering can share without re-drawing the stack on a whiteboard each time.
  • A production-readiness pass signals intent: this is not only conceptual writing; it is meant to inform how real services are governed.

2026-01-26 — Operating topologies

  • Topologies are introduced as named ways the same ROA/DIR ideas show up in live operations (different balances of autonomy, ledgering, and policy enforcement).
  • Topology C foregrounds a decision ledger with pre-commit intent (DL+PCI) as the pattern where financial and compliance-grade controls are first-class, not bolted on after the fact.

2026-02-03 to 2026-02-05 — First worked scenarios

  • The project ships initial worked examples so abstract topologies can be traced to concrete flows (who decides, what is logged, what can be blocked).
  • Public status and orientation in the README help newcomers understand maturity and where to start.

2026-02-14 — Onboarding narrative

  • A dedicated introduction to DIR lowers the barrier for stakeholders who need the “why” before the “how”.
  • Figures and graphs support executive and architecture conversations without requiring a live demo on day one.

2026-02-16 — Delegation in the real AI conversation

  • The work is mapped to the Intelligent AI Delegation framing so buyers and architects can place DIR next to mainstream agent research without conflating autonomy with authority.
  • Topology B vs C examples make the trade-off tangible: where agents may move fast versus where the ledger and intent gates must dominate.
  • EOAM-style live simulation material is refined so time-to-insight for “what breaks under load or ambiguity” is shorter in workshops.

2026-02-18 — Business-shaped examples per topology

  • Examples are reframed around recognisable business domains so risk, compliance, and product leaders can argue from scenarios, not only from principles.
  • The sample catalogue is organised so each scenario states intent, boundaries, and outcomes in one place (discoverability for audits and sales engineering).

2026-02-19 to 2026-02-20 — Trading narrative, wrappers, and “context as code”

  • The trading / market-style simulation gains decision-grade reporting leadership can skim after a run (not only console output for developers).
  • A LangChain-oriented ROA wrapper shows how popular agent frameworks can still run under mission and policy injection from DIR, instead of replacing governance.
  • Meta-context engineering illustrates how context is curated as a managed asset, not an accidental chat transcript.
  • The Context as Code article (with a portable PDF) positions compile-time and review-time context as a first-class governance lever.
  • Scope and boundary clarifications in ROA/DIR reduce mis-selling: where learning and autonomy sit, what the OS analogy does and does not claim, and why model confidence must not imply execution authority.

2026-02-24 to 2026-02-28 — Repeatable evidence and fraud-shaped controls

  • The trading-style scenario can persist results so comparisons across runs support internal risk reviews and stakeholder walkthroughs without rerunning everything from scratch.
  • Fraud-gate style material is stabilised so “stop / escalate / release” paths read consistently in data views teams already use.
  • ROA is positioned explicitly as a governance wrapper around generative frameworks, clarifying procurement and architecture conversations with LLM-centric vendors.

2026-03-02 — Richer partner and vertical stories

  • Finance, fraud, and agent-framework wrapper samples expand so prospects see industry-relevant paths, not only generic chatbots.
  • Topology documentation is aligned with that wave so named topologies still match what the samples exhibit.

2026-03-03 — Decision kernel that matches the narrative

  • The runtime gains explicit primitives for just-in-time compilation of decision context, ledgering, pre-commit intent, arbitration, and wake-ups, so demonstrations line up with the safety and audit story told in the long-form architecture.
  • LLM access is treated as a replaceable integration (local or vendor) rather than a hidden dependency inside samples.

2026-03-04 — Trust, contribution, and a five-minute path to value

  • Automated tests back critical behaviors: registry rules, decision identity and TTL, escalation, retried intents, resource contention, and saga-style flows. That supports change confidence as the kernel grows.
  • Contributor norms, licensing, and packaging appear so organisations can adopt or fork with clear legal and process footing.
  • Quick start material targets time-to-first governed decision for a new engineer or architect on a laptop.

2026-03-09 to 2026-03-13 — Compact spec for builders, smoother LLM onboarding

  • A short “DIR minified” specification gives implementers a dense contract-and-telemetry view without rereading the entire essay corpus.
  • Meta-context sample guidance is tightened for teams that already run context pipelines.
  • Quick start is improved so runs can switch between mock and live LLM behavior with operationally readable logging, reducing false starts in pilots.

2026-03-20 to 2026-03-21 — Underwriting under adversarial pressure, plus public Q&A

  • The insurance underwriting scenario is rebuilt end-to-end: policy gates, model-assisted judgment, and reporting suitable for a control discussion, not only a developer trace.
  • A prompt-injection style storyline makes explicit how agent-facing attacks surface in underwriting workflows and how DIR-style gates respond.
  • An FAQ answers recurring buyer and practitioner questions so the same objections are not rehashed privately in every meeting.

2026-03-25 — Sharper contracts in the minified spec

  • Contracts, policy proposals, structured decision telemetry, and execution intent language is reconciled so security and compliance reviewers see one coherent story in the compact specification.

2026-04-01 — Reference drift scenarios (optimization, refunds, marketing efficiency)

  • Retention and discount programs: reference material for reward hacking and optimisation drift when short-term metrics diverge from durable customer value.
  • Refund and support operations: reference material for semantic and policy drift where agents stretch business rules unless compliance monitors and caps are explicit.
  • Paid acquisition and bidding: reference material where environmental shifts (for example cost per click versus customer value) create silent margin erosion unless ROI-style monitors and bidding constraints stay aligned.
  • Narrative and experiment descriptions are aligned so risk, product, and data leaders can compare the three failure families side by side.

2026-04-02 — Governance as a first-class chapter

  • Documentation adds an explicit governance block: how policies, ownership, and operating boundaries are expected to work when agents touch customer-facing and money-moving decisions.

2026-04-12 — Public documentation site

  • A MkDocs-powered site publishes the architecture, samples, and supporting pages so external audiences (customers, regulators’ technical contacts, partners) can browse a stable URL.
  • GitHub Pages deployment makes updates part of the normal delivery rhythm instead of a manual export.
  • Diagrams render on the site so architecture reviews can point to the same figures online and in decks.
  • Samples are surfaced in navigation so evaluation teams can jump from concept to runnable scenario quickly.