Replaces the v1 plan (10 phases, single-stage cross-check) with an 11-phase
plan that executes the v2 spec's git-history classifier + 3-stage cross-check
+ 30% quality gate. Plan Phase 2 = Spec Phase 2 part 1; renumbering shifts
from Plan Phase 4 onwards (per the spec-vs-plan mapping in the summary table).
11 phases, 28 tasks, 4 hard pause points (Plan Phase 6 quality gate, Plan
Phase 7 Tier 1 review, Plan Phase 10 user sign-off, plus the Plan Phase 6
ABORT fallback to manual review). TDD red+green cycles for Phases 2-4 (8
new tests for _classify_status + 4 for extract_summary + 3 for format_markdown
+ 5 for the quality gate).
Test runner: scripts/run_tests_batched.py (per Tier 2 sandbox rule #1).
Throw-away scripts: scripts/tier2/artifacts/chronology_20260619/ (rule #4).
Default branch: master (rule #2). Line endings: preserve existing (rule #3).
The first run shipped chronology.md with a status classifier that read stale
metadata.json.status, marking 167/216 rows with wrong status. This v2 spec
replaces FR1 (5-value status enum + per-row evidence + confidence), FR5
(git-history classifier with the 5-step algorithm from the handover), FR6
(3-stage cross-check), and adds FR7 (classifier quality gate at 30% low
confidence threshold with abort-to-manual-review fallback).
Substantive changes from v1:
- 7 FRs (was 6); FR7 is new
- 14 VCs (was 12); VC10-VC14 are new
- 10 Risks (was 9)
- 5-value status enum: Active / In Progress / Completed / Abandoned / Special
(was 6-value: Shipped/Superseded/etc.)
- Per-row evidence line format documented with worked example
- 'Needs Review' section as a 5th section in chronology.md
- Quality gate hard-codes the user's 'A only if classifier is good, else B'
fallback design from chat 2026-06-21
Out of scope: 24 v1 commits + conductor/chronology.md.broken-v1 remain as the
foundation; this is a continuation, not a re-do. state.toml still shows
current_phase=10 from v1's false completion; the Tier 2 implementing agent
will reset it in Phase 1.4 of the plan.
10 phases, 29 tasks, all worker-ready (WHERE / WHAT / HOW / SAFETY /
COMMIT / GIT NOTE per task):
Phase 1: Data extraction audit + draft helper script (FR5; TDD)
Phase 2: Generate conductor/chronology.md.draft
Phase 3: Prune [x]/[shipped] entries from conductor/tracks.md (FR2)
Phase 4: Add 3-step archiving convention to conductor/workflow.md (FR3)
Phase 5: Write docs/reports/CHRONOLOGY_MIGRATION_20260619.md (FR4)
Phase 6: User review of draft (GATE)
Phase 7: Promote draft to canonical chronology.md
Phase 8: Per-row cross-check (FR6 HARD GATE; 9 batches of ~20 rows)
Phase 9: Completeness check (FR6 HARD GATE; folder set vs row set)
Phase 10: User sign-off + end-of-track report (FR6 HARD GATE)
The cross-check (Phase 8) is the dominant cost. Per the user directive
2026-06-19, EVERY SINGLE ENTRY must be cross-checked. The plan batches
the work into 9 commits for review ergonomics; no batch is 'sample-based'
or 'looks right' -- each row's 5 fields (date, ID, status, summary,
range) are verified independently per FR6.
All 12 VCs from the spec are addressed in the plan's 'Verification
Criteria Recap' section.
Conductor Chronology is a manually-maintained, complete index of all
tracks (active + shipped + superseded + abandoned) plus notable
non-track commits. The per-track spec/plan/metadata in tracks/ and
archive/ remain the source of truth for each track's details; this
file is the index.
Scope (per the no-day-estimates rule added 2026-06-16):
- 6 FRs, 5 NFRs, 12 VCs, 9 Risks, 10 Phases
- 3 new files: conductor/chronology.md, scripts/audit/generate_chronology.py, docs/reports/CHRONOLOGY_MIGRATION_20260619.md
- 2 modified files: conductor/tracks.md (prune [x] entries), conductor/workflow.md (3-step archiving convention)
- 165+ per-row cross-check tasks (Phase 8 hard gate per user directive 2026-06-19)
User directive baked in as FR6 + VC10/VC11/VC12:
'EVERY SINGLE ENTRY MUST BE CROSS CHECKED TO MAKE SURE IT'S STILL
CORRECT, AND NOTHING WAS MISSED.' The helper script is DRAFT-ONLY;
the cross-check is the authority. Tier 1 does the mechanical check;
the user is the quality gate.
Plan + initial migration to follow in subsequent commits.
ed