S3 CONVERSATION

I want to build and verify a deterministic pricing application for Aoodle AI so our inte…

f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0Updated Nov 12, 2026, 12:30 PMidle

Transcript

26 turns

UserNov 12, 2026, 7:58 AM

I want to build and verify a deterministic pricing application for Aoodle AI so our internal sales team can estimate and compare on-demand and annual commitment costs. Use the attached idea.md as the pricing proposal and business context. The nine attached CSVs are the complete source set from my datasets folder. Use them together as the fixed pricing data. Walk me through source interpretation and pricing requirements, then implement, verify, and package the application for review. I want to review material business decisions and the source, requirements, verification and final delivery documents at the applicable checkpoints. This is for internal USD estimates.

idea.md
annual_curve.csv
meter_definitions.csv
plan_pricing_policies.csv
plans.csv
price_books.csv
resource_allowances.csv
resource_rates.csv
resource_skus.csv
run_bands.csv

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 7:59 AM

I’ll first check the pricing project’s scope and whether an existing application could meet your needs. Your attached proposal and datasets will remain the fixed sources for the pricing work.

Agent activity 4 items

read · /constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/PROJECT.md · limit: 2000, offset: 1

Call ID: call_51dc54d6c0864da39e08ee2cb7502afc|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af571c6d3a087d0a730c670491adf72Arguments

{
  "file_path": "/constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/PROJECT.md",
  "limit": 2000,
  "offset": 1
}

Result

<path>/constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/PROJECT.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: ---
2: project_meta_name: agent-guided-pricing
3: description: >-
4: Author one deterministic pricing application from confirmed business rules
5: and fixed source data. Guide source review, policy authoring, required
6: verification, and application packaging. The author confirms business
7: meaning; the agent generates and validates the files. Deployment and
8: production use require separate authorization.
9: ---
10:
11: # Project: agent-guided-pricing
12:
13: This project defines the business scope, collaboration, deliverables and completion
14: conditions for one pricing application. Authoring follows **Clarify → Plan → Build**.
15: Build contains the four business Tasks below and their Subtasks; they are not
16: separate runtime stages. The [shared execution guide](references/README.md)
17: owns state mapping, document confirmation and technical execution conventions.
18: The explicit work-contract links below preserve complete Outputs and Done Criteria;
19: their linked guides own technical procedures. This root is the resident overview
20: and global constraints, not a copy of every operating procedure.
21:
22: ## Objective
23:
24: Create **one reviewable, deterministic pricing application** for a quote,
25: order, offer, subscription, service engagement, or similar transaction.
26:
27: The finished handoff should include:
28:
29: - confirmed source meanings and pricing rules;
30: - an executable candidate;
31: - current verification evidence; and
32: - a validated application package.
33:
34: Fixed CSV/Excel snapshots must use `sources/data/` from initial source setup;
35: profile selections and mappings use `data/<file>` relative to the source project.
36: The final package preserves this relative tree without editing accepted mappings.
37: The shared execution guide owns this cross-Step source layout contract.
38:
39: Make expected outcomes, restrictions, missing evidence, and limitations easy to
40: understand.
41:
42: During execution, progressively read Build's recorded references for the current
43: Task and their relevant indexed or linked detail before the action they govern.
44: Apply the [Task resource reading boundary](#task-resource-reading-boundary).
45: Paths do not imply that reference contents have already been loaded.
46:
47: ## Scope
48:
49: Keep the application within:
50:
51: - **one coherent pricing policy and result family**, including related line items;
52: - **one computed currency**, declared rounding rules, and agreed request inputs;
53: - deterministic calculations, selections, thresholds, tiers, discounts,
54: premiums, caps, floors, minimums, controls, and mutually exclusive rules; and
55: - complete, restricted, incomplete, no-price, or error outcomes supported by
56: the confirmed policy.
57:
58: Use **fixed CSV or .xlsx snapshots** in the authoring workspace. Existing Tables may be
59: the source authority, but live Table retrieval is out of scope. If required data is
60: missing, identify the needed Table Management work. Result storage requires a
61: separate integration.
62:
63: This project does not include:
64:
65: - autonomous optimization, negotiation, approval routing, or tax engines;
66: - jurisdiction resolution, currency conversion, or mixed-currency totals;
67: - billing, invoicing, product compatibility, or unrelated policy routing;
68: - effective-dated policy families or arbitrary external services; or
69: - Table creation or redesign.
70:
71: A confirmed flat levy or surcharge may be an ordinary pricing rule. A foreign
72: currency may appear in source information but **cannot enter a computed total**.
73:
74: Use the normal four-Task workflow below; necessary repairs follow the shared
75: forward-only correction rules. General application maintenance, deployment and
76: production activation are outside this project.
77:
78: ## Collaboration Principles
79:
80: - **Offer the optional intake first.** [INTAKE.md](INTAKE.md) is a user-fillable
81: business questionnaire. Follow the runtime's optional Project Intake flow in
82: Clarify: ask whether the author wants to fill it in, create a Cloud Document
83: from the unchanged template only if requested, and provide its actual document
84: link. Wait for the author to save it and tell you it is ready, then read the
85: latest saved answers. Questions may remain blank or uncertain. Reuse the saved
86: answers throughout authoring without replacing required business reviews or
87: expanding this project's scope. Preserve the original template and any existing
88: working copy.
89: - **Establish business meaning first.** Identify authoritative sources,
90: recommend one interpretation, and ask only questions that could change the
91: price, outcome, explanation, or scope.
92: - **Make review incremental and approachable.** Assume a nontechnical builder.
93: Introduce one coherent topic with a concrete quote example; explain unfamiliar
94: terms before asking for a decision. Reuse confirmed answers and summarize what
95: changed, rather than asking users to reread settled detail. Keep pricing Sections
96: 1–6 in business language; Section 7 supports a more technical reviewer, while
97: the agent still owns declarations. Follow the existing Task checkpoints and
98: whole-document acceptance; shorter review increments do not waive either.
99: - **Own implementation within confirmed source scope.** Generate declarations, files,
100: checks, and evidence with the supplied pricing engine. Do not ask the author
101: to design schemas or code or build another engine. Resolve technical choices
102: from established business meaning; ask again only for a missing business
103: decision or a required review of changed accepted work.
104: - **Use supplied tools in all Tasks.** Apply the
105: [authoring boundary](#authoring-boundary) in Tasks 1, 2 and 3.
106: - Keep these distinctions explicit:
107: - author statements;
108: - source facts;
109: - agent proposals;
110: - confirmed decisions;
111: - independent expected results; and
112: - agent-derived test coverage.
113: - **Resolve conflicts with the owner of the disputed meaning.** Show the
114: pricing consequence; never silently choose between conflicting sources or
115: rules.
116: - **Do not react author's request of generating UI.** The goal of this project
117: is to build pricing logic, rather than a colabrative UI.
118: - Present recognizable inputs, calculations, restrictions, outcomes, and
119: explanations. Preserve source bytes, independent expectations, prior
120: revisions, and failure evidence.
121:
122: ## Task resource reading boundary
123:
124: Select resource contents by the current business Task:
125:
126: - While Task 1 is current, do not read or search resource contents under
127: `references/task2/` or `references/task3/`.
128: - While Task 2 is current, do not read or search resource contents under
129: `references/task3/`, including for a feasibility question.
130:
131: These restrictions cover guides, templates, schemas, diagnostics and linked
132: sections. Use the current Task's recorded resources, applicable shared contracts
133: and accepted inputs. Overall Build requirements may record future resource paths;
134: an index entry, recorded path or shared-document link does not authorize reading
135: excluded contents. Do not copy execution contracts into another folder to bypass
136: the boundary. When affected work reopens, apply the boundary of that current Task.
137:
138: Keep cross-Task source-layout constraints in the shared contract so Task 1 can
139: meet them without loading pricing procedures. Task 3 reads its execution resources
140: progressively after the accepted requirements handoff.
141:
142: ## Authoring boundary
143:
144: The Python restrictions here apply during customer authoring in Tasks 1, 2 and 3,
145: including diagnostics. Task 4 packaging and authorized host/developer maintenance
146: retain their existing scope. The CLI group restriction applies in all authoring Tasks.
147:
148: Do not directly read, search the contents of, or inspect any `*.py` file.
149: Do not create, generate, or modify Python files, including temporary scripts,
150: helpers, wrappers, supplied entrypoints, or engine files.
151:
152: Use recorded guides, supplied source/policy schemas, authorized declarations, fixed data,
153: and tool results. Write owned YAML inputs and required source/pre-execution
154: Markdown reviews directly. Compiled specifications and reports remain tool-owned,
155: including `verification/run-[ts]/summary.md`.
156:
157: Invoke the environment-installed CLI through v2 Bash using one complete
158: `pricing-engine <group> <action> ...` command per call. Use only the `source`,
159: `policy` and `package` groups. Do not invoke `pricing-engine schema`, including
160: its help or export options, or export schemas through another launcher.
161: Read supplied schema files only within the current Task's resource boundary.
162: When authoring or revising declarations, follow the selected schema definition
163: and its field documentation with the complete `$defs` context. The schema owns
164: field requirements; guides own business interpretation, procedures, and review
165: gates. Schema shape alone does not establish correctness or acceptance.
166: Task 1 uses `source <action>` with the
167: [source sandbox calls](references/task1/README.md#sandbox-source-calls);
168: Task 3 uses `policy <action>` with the
169: [policy and verification sandbox calls](references/task3/README.md#sandbox-policy-and-verification-calls).
170: It may also use the existing `package run_quote` for bounded, nonqualifying
171: [early quote checks](references/task3/README.md#early-quote-checks) within accepted
172: implementation scope and actual host execution authority, before full verification readiness.
173: For independently specified local source-data variants only, Task 3 may profile
174: the isolated test copy as described in [isolated source variants](references/task3/README.md#isolated-source-variants).
175: Task 4 uses `package <action>` with the [packaging guide](references/packaging/README.md).
176: Each Task retains its own action scope; the allowed groups do not authorize
177: implementation before accepted requirements or early package delivery.
178: Use absolute mounted workspace paths, inspect process status and saved reports,
179: and write only the action's documented destinations. Bash starts in `/scratch`;
180: each action's documented write scope applies without a per-call tool allowlist.
181: The process may load installed dependencies without granting agent source-read
182: permission or permission to import internals.
183:
184: Do not import internals. In Tasks 2 and 3, do not create a wrapper, copier, publisher,
185: or renaming script to bypass a canonical failure, identity check, retry
186: suppression, or publication rule. Retain diagnostics, repair supported owning
187: inputs, and retry the same canonical operation. Incorrectly suppressed changed
188: inputs remain a runtime blocker.
189:
190: Missing required instruction or schema context is a technical blocker under the
191: shared [forward-only correction rules](references/README.md#forward-only-corrections).
192: Unsupported capabilities or unresolved tool failures remain reported blockers; do not inspect
193: Python or generate a helper as a fallback.
194:
195: ## User-Friendly Confirmation Pattern
196:
197: Make user participation, agent execution and acceptance boundaries explicit.
198: Reuse actual answers; source facts, proposals and technical success do not create
199: business agreement. Present each guide-required checklist increment promptly and
200: wait for explicit confirmation before completing it or starting the next checklist
201: item. Routine technical execution remains autonomous.
202:
203: Preserve the review arrangement from the user's actual request, or propose it in
204: Plan for their choice: accepted source meaning before dependent pricing work;
205: accepted complete pricing requirements before implementation; AI-owned whole-document
206: reconciliation against accepted intent before verification and user acceptance of
207: `test_result_alignment.md` after complete evidence and any explicit exception decisions; readiness and usage reviewed once with final delivery. Plan agreement
208: never accepts future content. Bind actual reviews to exact registered versions;
209: missing acceptance blocks dependent handoff while independent work may continue.
210: Supporting declarations, logs and reports do not require separate user approvals.
211:
212: Before questions or review documents, read the applicable
213: [confirmation procedure](references/authoring-flow.md#user-friendly-confirmation-pattern)
214: and [review contract](references/README.md#document-review-and-task-handoffs) for
215: question batching, document presentation, checklist flags and exact-version acceptance.
216:
217: ## Project Stages
218:
219: ### Clarify
220:
221: Align what is priced, intended users, goal, scope, success criteria and proposed
222: source revisions. Preserve supplied facts and unresolved source/history questions;
223: do not invent meanings or historical rows. The author confirms readiness to plan.
224: Use the [Clarify procedure](references/authoring-flow.md#clarify) with runtime stage
225: timing; detailed source interpretation belongs to its owning Build Task.
226:
227: ### Planning
228:
229: Agree on one Build with the four business Tasks below, in order. Make main outputs,
230: execution authority, participation, requested reviews and observable completion
231: clear. Retain known constraints and authoritative references; develop detailed
232: Subtasks and execution specifications in Build. Section 7 behavioral-contract and
233: test-intent checkpoints require confirmation; compiler internals and routine
234: commands require no technical approval. Plan acceptance permits scoped Build work,
235: without accepting future outputs or authorizing publication. Follow the
236: [planning procedure and completion criteria](references/authoring-flow.md#planning).
237:
238: ##### Planning references and supplied resources
239:
240: Use the explicit links below and relevant indexes. Resolve links relative to their
241: containing document and record observed installed paths in Build. Do not infer a
242: path or select a section from a runtime Task ID, number, title or directory
243: convention. A Task may need several documents and several Tasks may share one.
244: These filenames declare this project's references, not a runtime loading rule.
245: Links do not mean their contents have already been read or override the
246: [Task resource reading boundary](#task-resource-reading-boundary). Task 2 uses
247: alignment material; address concrete feasibility questions through its
248: [capability-question guidance](references/task2/README.md#capability-questions-during-alignment)
249: without reading Task 3 resources.
250: Task 3 starts with its participation message, then reads execution contracts for
251: the next operation.
252:
253: | Business work | Required work contract | Technical entry points |
254: |---|---|---|
255: | Source meaning | [Source work](references/source-meaning.md) | [Source guide](references/task1/README.md), its schemas, content instructions and diagnostics |
256: | Pricing requirements | [Requirements handoff](references/pricing-behavior.md#task-2-align-pricing-and-acceptance-requirements) | [Alignment guide](references/task2/README.md#incremental-alignment) and [content instructions](references/task2/pricing_requirement_alignment_template.md) |
257: | Implementation and verification | [Implementation work](references/pricing-behavior.md#task-3-implement-and-verify-pricing) | [Implementation entry](references/task3/README.md#1-accept-the-handoff-and-start-implementation), its schema and diagnostics |
258: | Application delivery | [Delivery work](references/application-delivery.md) | [Packaging guide](references/packaging/README.md) |
259: | Shared contracts | [Review and stage procedures](references/authoring-flow.md) | [Shared execution guide](references/README.md) |
260:
261: The [supplied-resource contract](references/authoring-flow.md#planning-references-and-supplied-resources)
262: owns schema entries and resource roles. Preserve business reviews, compilation,
263: full readiness, reconciliation, applicable-work verification, exact
264: user-agreed skipped-work accounting and package/runtime checks through these
265: references. Status or document acceptance does not substitute for technical evidence.
266:
267: ### Build
268:
269: Read the current work contract and applicable linked procedure before its actions.
270: The linked Subtasks, Outputs and Done Criteria remain mandatory. Before first
271: marking a Task IN_PROGRESS, read its complete applicable Subtasks and persist them
272: with their confirmation requirements in the same state update; document relocation
273: does not remove, merge or waive them. Restore missing known Subtasks before resuming.
274: Maintain Task/Subtask progress within one Build; no additional stages are created.
275: Check downstream input constraints through the current Task's permitted references
276: before producing or confirming affected outputs, including the shared source layout
277: before initial setup. Retain a concise verified technical
278: contract in a Task-associated Resource with exact source paths, sections and
279: observed versions where available. On Task switches, recovery or source changes,
280: reconcile its applicability before dependent work; reuse unchanged verified content
281: and read missing, insufficient, changed or uncertain sections. Do not preload all
282: future procedures or discard business reviews to save context.
283:
284: ## Tasks
285:
286: ### Task 1: Confirm Source Meaning
287:
288: Align source purposes, relationships, fields, special values and pricing concepts;
289: validate complete declarations and reconcile the source-understanding document.
290: Preserve all physical headers, source bytes, unresolved meanings and four checklist
291: confirmation checkpoints. Exact validated meaning and the latest document need
292: actual user acceptance through the separate final-review Subtask before Task 1
293: completion and dependent Task 2 work. Read the
294: [source work contract](references/source-meaning.md) for all Subtasks, Outputs and
295: Done Criteria alongside its linked technical guide.
296:
297: ### Task 2: Align Pricing and Acceptance Requirements
298:
299: Maintain the seven-section `pricing_requirements_alignment.md`; confirm pricing meaning, exact
300: behavioral contracts and independent expected outcomes. Complete checkpoints 1–8
301: and obtain acceptance of the complete requirements and implementation scope through
302: the separate final-review Subtask before completing Task 2 or starting Task 3.
303: Compilation, readiness and verification belong to the implementation
304: Task and are not prerequisites for this requirements handoff. Read the
305: [requirements contract](references/pricing-behavior.md#task-2-align-pricing-and-acceptance-requirements).
306:
307: ### Task 3: Implement and Verify Pricing
308:
309: Implement the exact accepted requirements; compile, check readiness,
310: reconcile against accepted intent and verify; retain the accepted requirements
311: revision and assemble the separate `test_result_alignment.md` results review. Before lengthy
312: technical reading or execution, explain that work may take substantial time and
313: explicitly tell the user they can attend to other work without continuously waiting.
314: AI reconciliation before verification is autonomous. Final results acceptance
315: follows evidence validation PASS, complete case accounting and exact user-approved
316: business exceptions for any actual mismatches. All other applicable assertions
317: match; unavailable work remains explicitly accounted for. Apply the
318: [compound handoff gate](references/task3/README.md#completion-and-packaging-handoff).
319: The host may approve packaging with exceptions while technical FAIL remains FAIL. Retain genuine failures, independent expectations and every applicable
320: case, including data-unavailable cases and
321: [expected input rejections](references/task3/README.md#invalid-input-variants).
322: Rejection cases retain their identities and actual evidence; they are executed
323: checks, not skipped work. Business response assertions remain required where
324: the accepted behavior specifies a status, explanation or unavailable amounts.
325: Read the [implementation contract](references/pricing-behavior.md#task-3-implement-and-verify-pricing)
326: for all Subtasks, Outputs, bindings and Done Criteria. The pricing Tasks preserve
327: the accepted requirements resource; Task 3 owns the separate results review;
328: no directory is derived from runtime Task IDs.
329:
330: ### Task 4: Package and Deliver the Application
331:
332: Use accepted source/pricing handoffs and qualifying current verification. Assemble
333: actual files, execute packaged requests, check inventory/layout, and prepare
334: readiness and usage information. After preparation Tasks are complete, explicit
335: delivery preparation generates the manual and obtains final runtime validation.
336: Mandatory package, execution, integrity and runtime checks must pass before final
337: delivery acceptance. Preserve disclosed, exactly approved business deviations;
338: packaging fidelity does not rewrite their independent expectations or FAIL verdicts. Review readiness,
339: the runtime-generated manual and fixed application once in final delivery
340: acceptance after all Tasks. Read the
341: [delivery contract](references/application-delivery.md) for all Subtasks, Outputs
342: and Done Criteria alongside its linked packaging guide.
343:
344: ## Stage and Task Dependencies
345:
346: Clarify → Plan → Build. Within Build, Task 1's accepted source document and valid
347: source evidence precede dependent pricing work; Task 2's accepted requirements
348: precede Task 3 implementation. Task 3's accepted final document and qualifying
349: verification precede Task 4 packaging. Task 4 prepares delivery; the runtime's
350: final acceptance completes Build. No Task handoff advances an Authoring stage.
351:
352: Tie evidence to the exact source, policy, scenario, request, engine and document
353: revisions. Reopen affected Tasks/Subtasks within Build, retain previous evidence
354: and refresh changed review bindings; do not edit completed Clarify/Plan history.
355:
356: ## Final Output Contract
357:
358: Hand off the **actual files and recorded decisions**:
359:
360: - confirmed source interpretation, source snapshot, and declarations;
361: - accepted `pricing_requirements_alignment.md`, checked pricing policy, and exact
362: accepted `test_result_alignment.md` with its applicable exception decisions;
363: - `verification/verification_spec.yaml`, `verification/inspection.yaml`, the exact current
364: `verification_report_check.yaml`, final `run_metadata.yaml` and matching detailed
365: `verification/run-[ts]/summary.md`, with complete case verdicts and actual invocation-time findings;
366: - validated application package including the accepted alignment document,
367: with package validation evidence retained outside the package; and
368: - remaining limitations, verification gaps, and pending business decisions.
369:
370: Identify the **paths actually produced and checked**. Keep runtime files
371: separate from test requests and review evidence according to the
372: [shared execution guide](references/README.md#generated-file-classification).
373:
374: Authoring completion means the candidate and its evidence are ready for
375: handoff. Sending, publishing, deployment, write-back, and production execution
376: each require **separate authorization and observed execution evidence**.
377:
378: Retain historical plans, source identities, independent expectations, failed
379: attempts, and approvals unchanged. Current active work uses supported declarations,
380: current review/confirmation, complete current execution evidence, and the exact
381: host approval gate. Technical FAIL is retained when an explicit exception applies. Earlier completion
382: or evidence cannot supply current acceptance. Frozen package bytes remain unchanged.
383:
384: ### Live Cloud Table source planning
385:
386: When the selected sources include Cloud Tables, select the Task 1 live-table
387: instructions and retain endpoint, organization, and table identity with mappings
388: in `sources.yaml`. These sources are read live during source-consuming operations,
389: including policy compilation, verification, and quotes. Record this dependency behavior in
390: the alignment document; do not describe profile observations as frozen
391: future runtime facts. Incremental business alignment, complete verification
392: inventory and applicable-work checks still apply to intent/configuration and
393: actual execution results. Re-evaluate accepted skipped conditions when live facts
394: change; an old decision does not establish applicability for future rows.

(End of file - total 394 lines)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 7:59 AM

Please continue with idea.md and the attached CSVs. The pricing proposal provides our intake context.

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:00 AM

I’ll use the proposal and attached CSVs as the intake context, and identify any overall scope questions before preparing the brief.

Agent activity 14 items

read · /conversation/uploads/ef33524361dfe565258030328e901a7c/idea.md · limit: 2000, offset: 1

Call ID: call_84965c3ea7514e4d8b6c856051bf40ee|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af571fe0ef887d081813ceb0da5a313Arguments

{
  "file_path": "/conversation/uploads/ef33524361dfe565258030328e901a7c/idea.md",
  "limit": 2000,
  "offset": 1
}

Result

<path>/conversation/uploads/ef33524361dfe565258030328e901a7c/idea.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: # My pricing proposal for Aoodle AI
2: 
3: ## Business context
4: 
5: Aoodle AI helps businesses run applications and automate work, sometimes using AI. People or other systems can start tasks. Customers need to understand the work completed and the AI, files and stored records it requires.
6: 
7: ## Pricing strategy at a glance
8: 
9: Choose **monthly on-demand**, where volume discounts restart monthly, or **an annual commitment**, where runs share one year-long pool. Then add AI and purchased capacity, less a monthly resource credit.
10: 
11: These proposed USD terms support internal sales estimates, not invoices or approved offers. There are no separate application, seat or agent licenses.
12: 
13: ## 1. Count the work across the account
14: 
15: A run is one distinct, successful production execution delivering an independent business result, whoever starts it. Separate invocations count separately; duplicate reports do not. Failed, development and test executions use no production runs, but their AI can cost money.
16: 
17: Runs, capacity and credits are account-wide across applications. Adding applications creates no extra fee or allowance.
18: 
19: ## 2. Choose how to pay for runs
20: 
21: ### Monthly on-demand: reach the discounts again each month
22: 
23: Each active month costs $500, including 50 runs—even with zero usage. This production base is not a spending wallet. Additional runs cost:
24: 
25: | Monthly run numbers | Price per run in that range |
26: |---|---:|
27: | 51–300 | $5.00 |
28: | 301–1,000 | $2.50 |
29: | 1,001–5,000 | $1.25 |
30: | 5,001–25,000 | $0.50 |
31: | 25,001–100,000 | $0.30 |
32: | 100,001–1,000,000 | $0.14 |
33: | 1,000,001 onward | $0.12 |
34: 
35: A cheaper band applies only to later runs, never earlier ones. Thus 301 runs cost $500 + 250 × $5 + $2.50 = $1,752.50.
36: 
37: Reset every calendar month: unused runs and achieved discounts expire.
38: 
39: ### Annual commitment: use one pool throughout the year
40: 
41: Offer only these fixed 12-month packages. No additional monthly base or separate subscription fee applies.
42: 
43: | Annual commitment | Annual run pool | Included storage | Included table records |
44: |---|---:|---:|---:|
45: | $24,000 | 12,000 | 40 GB | 400,000 |
46: | $60,000 | 60,000 | 100 GB | 1,000,000 |
47: | $120,000 | 204,000 | 200 GB | 2,000,000 |
48: | $300,000 | 1,020,000 | 500 GB | 5,000,000 |
49: | $600,000 | 3,480,000 | 1,000 GB | 10,000,000 |
50: | $1,200,000 | 12,000,000 | 2,000 GB | 20,000,000 |
51: 
52: - **Fixed choices:** no interpolation, partial packages or extension above the largest. $42,000 is unavailable.
53: - **One contract-year pool:** no monthly reset or monthly cap. Unused runs expire at year-end without refund, commitment reduction or rollover.
54: - **After exhaustion:** each extra run costs the exact annual commitment divided by included runs, even on the largest package. Never apply monthly bands or switch packages automatically. At $600,000, 100,000 extra runs cost $17,241.38.
55: 
56: Dividing commitment and runs by twelve is for comparison only, not monthly entitlements or payment installments. AI and extra capacity are additional charges; they do not satisfy the commitment.
57: 
58: ## 3. Add the capacity the customer chooses to buy
59: 
60: On-demand includes 10 GB and 100,000 records. Annual allowances above equal 10 GB and 100,000 records per $500 of monthly-equivalent commitment. Capacity does not accumulate monthly.
61: 
62: Customers select total required capacity. Above the included amount, round each resource independently up to whole increments:
63: 
64: | Additional capacity increment | Monthly price |
65: |---|---:|
66: | 1 GB storage | $1 |
67: | 100,000 table records | $50 |
68: 
69: Bill purchased capacity even when unfilled. Observed average or peak usage never automatically buys capacity. Requests within the allowance produce no extra charge or plan discount.
70: 
71: Example: with 40 GB/400,000 records included, requesting 40.1 GB/400,001 records costs $51/month and provides 41 GB/500,000 records. Distinguish requested from provided capacity.
72: 
73: One GB is one billion bytes. Ordinary version history is excluded from working-file storage charges. History retention is 30 days on-demand or 180 days annual; current files are not deleted. The product team must still define which items history covers.
74: 
75: ## 4. Add AI, then deduct the monthly resource credit
76: 
77: Sales may supply an external monthly AI dollar estimate. Use it unchanged, with no markup or token calculation; provider/model pricing remains undecided. Blank means a disclosed $0 assumption, not free AI. Entered zero is an explicit estimate.
78: 
79: Every paid account gets **one $50 monthly credit at every tier**, against combined AI and extra storage/table charges:
80: 
81: - Use no more than those eligible charges. No base, commitment or run offset, cash redemption or rollover.
82: - It is neither a separate credit per resource nor a pooled $600 annual balance.
83: - $30 eligible charges leaves $20 to expire. $30 AI plus $51 capacity leaves $31 payable.
84: 
85: Capacity charges and credits remain monthly for annual customers. Direct data operations and outbound transfer add no charge.
86: 
87: ## 5. Compare a full year using the same assumptions
88: 
89: Require typical monthly production runs and total selected storage and record capacity; AI is optional. Repeat these assumptions for twelve full paid months with unchanged capacity. Disclose that this is not a seasonal forecast.
90: 
91: Choose annual alternatives by comparing monthly runs with each package's annual runs divided by twelve:
92: 
93: | Forecast position | Annual packages shown |
94: |---|---|
95: | Between two quantities | Nearest lower and higher |
96: | Exact match | Matching and next lower; only the minimum at the minimum |
97: | Below minimum or above maximum | That endpoint only, with excess charges where applicable |
98: 
99: Keep two annual positions and explain an unavailable second. Order by increasing commitment, then on-demand. These are volume comparisons, not guaranteed cheapest choices.
100: 
101: Show each option's twelve-month total and monthly equivalent; base/commitment; included/expected runs; annual excess/unused runs; run charges; included/requested/provided capacity and charges; full AI assumption; and separate credit deduction. Also show on-demand's monthly total. Commitment alone is not total cost.
102: 
103: ### Example: a larger commitment can cost less overall
104: 
105: Assume 3,000 runs/month, 41 GB, 400,001 records and $30 monthly AI:
106: 
107: | Component | $24,000 annual | $60,000 annual | On-demand |
108: |---|---:|---:|---:|
109: | Base or commitment | $24,000/year | $60,000/year | $500/month |
110: | Extra run charges | $48,000/year | $0 | $5,500/month |
111: | Extra capacity | $51/month | $0 | $231/month |
112: | AI | $30/month | $30/month | $30/month |
113: | Credit used | $50/month | $30/month | $50/month |
114: | **Twelve-month total** | **$72,372** | **$60,000** | **$74,532** |
115: | **Monthly equivalent** | **$6,031** | **$5,000** | **$6,211** |
116: 
117: The $60,000 package costs less despite 24,000 unused runs.
118: 
119: ## Rounding and boundaries
120: 
121: Round charges/totals to cents, exact half-cents up. Keep the full annual excess rate until rounding its charge: 1,200 extra runs on $120,000 cost $705.88, not $708 from a rounded $0.59 rate.
122: 
123: Preserve AI precision. Combine monthly AI/capacity charges, deduct credit, then round net resources. $50.005 AI alone therefore costs $0.01/month and $0.12/year.
124: 
125: Annual total = commitment + rounded annual excess + twelve rounded monthly resource amounts. On-demand total = twelve × (monthly base + progressive run charges + rounded net resources). Divide annual totals by twelve before rounding monthly equivalents.
126: 
127: Runs/records must be nonnegative whole numbers; storage/AI may be fractional but nonnegative. Zero is not missing. Report all missing/invalid entries together; show no totals until corrected. Explain unavailable prices without substituting zero; retain independently priceable options.
128: 
129: Trials, negotiated enterprise offers, tax, currency conversion, payment schedules, refunds, upgrades, mid-month capacity changes and partial-period billing require separate decisions.

(End of file - total 129 lines)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:01 AM

I reviewed Part A and confirm this scope. The estimate compares the same account-wide typical month across twelve full paid months, uses the fixed draft USD snapshot, and needs no historical customer records or quote date. Version-history object coverage can remain an out-of-scope product decision. Please proceed to planning.

Thinking

**Integrating the clarification**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:01 AM

Thank you. I’ll incorporate those clarifications into the brief and prepare the overall work plan.

Agent activity 4 items

apply_patch · patch: *** Begin Patch *** Update File: /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/clarify/sc...

Call ID: call_5cb40bfbbcb94c9bae81e6712dd05b97|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57259df4487d0951952bb713b3695Arguments

{
  "patch": "*** Begin Patch\n*** Update File: /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/clarify/scope-alignment.md\n@@\n-- **Sales inputs:** typical monthly runs, total selected capacity and optional external monthly AI amount. No live source retrieval is proposed.\n+- **Sales inputs:** typical monthly runs, total selected capacity and optional external monthly AI amount. The fixed draft USD snapshot needs no quote date or historical customer records; no live source retrieval is proposed.\n@@\n-- The proposal says the product team must still define which items are covered by version history. This is a product-policy limitation to disclose; it does not establish an additional storage charge.\n+- The product team must still define which items are covered by version history. This is an out-of-scope product decision to disclose; it does not establish an additional storage charge.\n@@\n-| Historical facts | The proposal uses a hypothetical repeated month and a fixed annual pool; no prior customer transaction history is identified as an input for this comparison. | idea.md §5 | Observed; confirm any contrary source meaning in Build |\n+| Historical facts | The comparison needs no historical customer records or quote date. | User clarification; idea.md §5 | Confirmed |\n*** End Patch"
}

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:03 AM
I reviewed Part A and confirm the four-task plan, including the incremental and final business reviews. Please start Build with Confirm Source Meaning. I've attached my source-alignment notes as business answers for that task. Use those notes to resolve the nine CSVs' meanings and exclusions. The source set itself remains the nine CSVs previously attached.
- source-meaning-alignment.md
Agent activity 2 items
patch_authoring_state · expected_stage_id: plan, confirmation_action_ref: {"action_id":"confirm-build-plan","version":2}, summary:...
Call ID: call_b5cbb0abb92e47cdb70c8ae2b2118862|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af572c418b487d086fa6fa263c31c18Arguments
{ "expected_stage_id": "plan", "confirmation_action_ref": { "action_id": "confirm-build-plan", "version": 2 }, "summary": "The user confirmed the four-task plan and supplied source-alignment notes for the source Task; the nine CSVs remain the fixed source set." }
Result
{"status":"SUCCESS","commit_status":"COMMITTED","mutation_input_uid":"aoodle-plan-04","mutation_ordinal":1,"active_stage_id":"plan","stage_status":"IN_PROGRESS"}
advance_authoring_stage · expected_stage_id: plan
Call ID: call_c0da6295a3014fda844c255db61570c5|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af572c7ceac87d0ae3db6ebf1c7f22dArguments
{ "expected_stage_id": "plan" }
Result
{"status":"SUCCESS","transition":{"status":"ADVANCED"},"commit_status":"COMMITTED","mutation_input_uid":"aoodle-plan-04","mutation_ordinal":2,"active_stage_id":"build","stage_status":"IN_PROGRESS"}

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:05 AM

I reviewed the dataset overview and confirm the nine CSVs are one fixed draft USD price book. Use the applicable on-demand and annual rows, storage and table capacity, and shared monthly resource credit. Evaluation and enterprise rows are legacy, operations and egress are monitoring context, and pending AI token prices are excluded in favor of an external monthly AI estimate. Please continue to the field review.

Thinking

**Reading field section**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:05 AM

The dataset overview is confirmed. I’ll carry your supplied field explanations into the next source review, including the distinctions between blank values and zero.

Agent activity 4 items

read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286.../steps/source-meaning-alignment.md · limit: 155, offset: 43

Call ID: call_0f9a8f9790cd4518a2ce7fbe25134fab|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57348b48887d0915c6f47a005fa03Arguments

{
  "file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-meaning-alignment.md",
  "limit": 155,
  "offset": 43
}

Result

<path>/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-meaning-alignment.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
43: 
44: ## 3. Column definitions and special values
45: 
46: ### 3.1 Column definitions
47: 
48: CSV values are text on disk. The logical types below describe their meaning: **ID/code** is exact case-sensitive text; **integer** is a whole quantity; **decimal** is a base-10 amount; **Boolean** is `TRUE` or `FALSE`; **timestamp** is interpreted as a UTC instant. The recorded timestamp text uses `Sat Oct 31 2026 17:00:00 GMT-0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)`, equivalent to `2026-11-01T00:00:00Z`; it is not ISO 8601 text on disk. Numeric fields contain no currency signs or thousands separators. Blank handling is field-specific; do not globally replace blanks with zero. Quote-input precision and serialization are outside this document’s scope.
49: 
50: #### price_books.csv
51: 
52: | Column | Meaning, type, and applicability |
53: |---|---|
54: | `price_book_id` | Required ID from `price_books.csv`, shared by all nine files; identifies their common pricing dataset. |
55: | `version_label`, `schema_version` | Required text supplied by this row; dataset revision and schema identifiers, not commercial tiers. |
56: | `currency` | Required code `USD`; all monetary columns use it. |
57: | `effective_from`, `effective_to_exclusive` | Timestamp metadata. Recorded start is `2026-11-01T00:00:00Z`; blank end means no recorded end. A supplied end is exclusive. This fixed estimate does not select prices by a quote date. |
58: | `status`, `approved_at`, `approved_by` | Code `DRAFT_SIMULATION`; optional approval timestamp and approver ID are blank. No production approval is implied. |
59: | `billing_timezone` | Code `UTC`, retained engineering metadata; no date-boundary input is used by this estimate. |
60: | `money_rounding_mode`, `money_precision` | Code `HALF_UP` and integer `2`: nearest-cent monetary rounding, exact halves upward. |
61: | `rounding_stage` | Code `NET_MONTHLY_RESOURCES_AND_ANNUAL_EXCESS`: identifies the applicable monetary subtotals. Calculation sequence is outside this source-meaning document. |
62: | `rate_selection_policy` | Code `FIXED_ESTIMATE_SNAPSHOT`: one identified bundle, with no live lookup or date-based switching. |
63: | `config_hash` | Required SHA-256 fingerprint of the nine CSVs using the convention below. It identifies content, not approval. |
64: 
65: Fingerprint convention: sort the nine canonical CSV filenames lexicographically. For each, append its UTF-8 filename, a NUL byte, and canonical CSV bytes. Preserve header/row order and field text; use comma delimiters, minimal double-quote escaping, CRLF line endings, and a final CRLF. Treat `config_hash` as blank while hashing. Store the lowercase hexadecimal SHA-256 result. All files must share the book ID; never combine different snapshots.
66: 
67: #### plans.csv
68: 
69: | Column | Meaning, type, and applicability |
70: |---|---|
71: | `price_book_id`, `plan_code` | Required IDs; initial-scope plan codes are `ON_DEMAND` and `ANNUAL`. |
72: | `display_name`, `availability` | Text name and code: `PUBLIC` for both paid plans. `EVALUATION` and `CONTRACT_ONLY` describe excluded legacy rows. |
73: | `minimum_term_months` | Positive integer: on-demand `1`, annual `12`. A blank on an excluded row supplies no term. |
74: | `base_fee_monthly_usd` | Nonnegative decimal: on-demand `500.00`, annual `0.00`. Annual zero means no extra monthly base, not a free annual package. |
75: | `minimum_commitment_monthly_usd` | Positive decimal `2000.00` for annual: monthly equivalent of its minimum package. Blank for on-demand is not applicable. |
76: | `included_runs_monthly` | Integer `50` for on-demand. Annual blank is not zero entitlement; its fixed packages are in `annual_curve.csv`. |
77: | `trial_runs`, `trial_window_days` | Legacy integers on the excluded evaluation row; no trial terms apply to this estimate. Blank elsewhere means not applicable. |
78: | `run_pricing_method` | Codes `PROGRESSIVE_MONTHLY` and `ANNUAL_COMMITMENT_RATE` identify the two applicable pricing methods. Legacy `TRIAL_LIMITED` and `CONTRACT_SPECIFIC` are excluded. |
79: | `run_pool_period` | `CALENDAR_MONTH` for on-demand; `CONTRACT_YEAR` for annual. `TRIAL_WINDOW` is excluded. |
80: | `resource_credit_eligibility` | `ACTIVE_PAID_PLAN` for both paid options. It means eligibility for included resources while active, not a separate subscription charge. Legacy eligibility codes are excluded. |
81: | `retention_days` | Integer `30` on-demand or `180` annual: historical-version retention, not current-file deletion or run-pool expiry. Product-object coverage is unresolved; this field does not affect price. |
82: 
83: #### plan_pricing_policies.csv
84: 
85: The existing columns are retained for compatibility. Applicability is explicit: only `ON_DEMAND` and `ANNUAL` rows marked `ALIGNED_DRAFT_ESTIMATE` supply estimator policies. Evaluation and enterprise rows are marked `EXCLUDED_FROM_ESTIMATE` in their entirety.
86: 
87: | Columns | Meaning, type, and applicability |
88: |---|---|
89: | `price_book_id`, `plan_code`, `policy_version`, `policy_status` | IDs and codes; `policy_version` identifies the policy revision recorded in this CSV. Status distinguishes applicable draft policy from excluded legacy context. |
90: | `interpolation_method` | Legacy column name; annual value `FIXED_ANCHORS_ONLY` means only listed packages exist. On-demand blank is not applicable. |
91: | `entitlement_rounding_mode`, `entitlement_rounding_stage` | Annual codes `EXACT_INTEGER`, `ANNUAL_POOL`; package entitlements are exact whole annual runs. Blank for on-demand. |
92: | `top_extension_rate_usd` | Blank: no extrapolated commitment package exists. It is not a zero overage rate and must not price excess runs. |
93: | `committed_rate_method` | Annual `ANNUAL_COMMITMENT_DIVIDED_BY_POOL` identifies its package unit-rate basis. On-demand blank is not applicable; excluded enterprise `CONTRACT_EXPLICIT` has no estimator effect. |
94: | `capacity_scaling_method`, `capacity_scaling_divisor_usd` | `FIXED` on-demand; `LINEAR_MONTHLY_COMMITMENT` with positive decimal divisor `500.00` annual. These describe included capacity, not permission for intermediate annual packages. |
95: | `count_allowance_rounding`, `storage_allowance_rounding` | Annual `FLOOR` for count allowances, `EXACT_DECIMAL` for storage. Applicable anchors already yield whole record allowances. Blank for fixed on-demand allowances. |
96: | `contract_start_rule` | Blank for applicable plans because contract scheduling is not defined by this estimator. Excluded-plan values are historical only. |
97: | `contract_duration_rule` | `ONE_CALENDAR_MONTH` on-demand and `EXACTLY_12_CALENDAR_MONTHS` annual; interpretation of plan periods, not payment schedules. |
98: | `partial_period_policy` | `REJECT_PARTIAL_CALENDAR_MONTH`: partial-period scenarios are outside this full-month estimate. |
99: | `resource_rate_change_policy`, `resource_quota_rate_policy` | `FIXED_ESTIMATE_SNAPSHOT` for paid plans. No within-estimate rate changes are represented. |
100: | `credit_application_method` | `SEPARATE_NEGATIVE_MONTHLY_LINE`: the credit is a separate monthly deduction. |
101: | `incremental_usage_policy`, `correction_policy`, `upgrade_effective_rule`, `prior_pool_treatment`, `prior_overage_treatment` | Retained operational codes `UNSUPPORTED` / `MANUAL_REVIEW_REQUIRED`; excluded from calculations. They define no upgrade, correction, or billing workflow here. |
102: | `renewal_policy`, `renewal_lookback_months` | Blank for applicable plans. Excluded legacy rows retain `RECOMMEND_ONLY` and integer `3`; neither creates a renewal requirement. |
103: | `trial_scope`, `trial_eligibility_rule`, `trial_window_rule` | Blank for paid plans; evaluation-row codes are excluded. |
104: | `resource_quota_basis` | `CUSTOMER_SELECTED_TOTAL_QUOTA`: desired total capacity for the account, not observed usage. |
105: | `resource_quota_billing_period` | `CALENDAR_MONTH`: capacity price period. |
106: | `resource_quota_change_policy` | `FULL_MONTH_ONLY_NO_MIDMONTH_CHANGE`: the estimate holds chosen capacities unchanged for its full months. |
107: 
108: #### run_bands.csv
109: 
110: | Column | Meaning, type, and applicability |
111: |---|---|
112: | `price_book_id`, `plan_code` | IDs; all seven rows belong to `ON_DEMAND`. |
113: | `band_order` | Unique positive integer, 1–7; orders the ranges. |
114: | `first_run_inclusive`, `last_run_inclusive` | Whole monthly run ordinals; both bounds inclusive. Only the final upper bound is blank, meaning unbounded. |
115: | `marginal_rate_usd` | Positive decimal USD per run inside that range, not a whole-account blended rate. |
116: 
117: The first range starts at run 51; the plan separately contains the first 50 included runs. Ranges are consecutive, ordered, non-overlapping, and end with an unbounded range. Rates in order are 5.00, 2.50, 1.25, 0.50, 0.30, 0.14, and 0.12. Combining band charges with the base is outside this document’s scope.
118: 
119: #### annual_curve.csv
120: 
121: | Column | Meaning, type, and applicability |
122: |---|---|
123: | `price_book_id`, `plan_code` | IDs; all six rows belong to `ANNUAL`. |
124: | `point_order` | Unique positive integer, 1–6; orders fixed packages. |
125: | `monthly_commitment_usd` | Positive decimal USD: one-twelfth of a package's annual run commitment. It is neither a monthly bill nor a resource-spending balance. |
126: | `reference_monthly_runs` | Positive integer: one-twelfth of its annual run pool, not a monthly reset or cap. |
127: 
128: The filename is historical: its rows are fixed packages, not a continuous curve. Monthly-equivalent pairs are `(2000,1000)`, `(5000,5000)`, `(10000,17000)`, `(25000,85000)`, `(50000,290000)`, `(100000,1000000)`, ordered by increasing commitment and runs. Annual commitment covers the run package; AI and additional capacity are separate. Comparison-package selection and excess-charge calculations are outside this document’s scope.
129: 
130: #### meter_definitions.csv
131: 
132: | Columns | Meaning, type, and applicability |
133: |---|---|
134: | `price_book_id`, `meter_code`, `unit` | IDs and unit codes: `RUN`, `GB`, `RECORD`, `OPERATION`, `BYTE`, `TOKEN`, or `USD`. |
135: | `aggregation_scope` | `ACCOUNT`, or `ACCOUNT_SKU` for token templates. Capacity and runs are shared across applications. |
136: | `aggregation_method` | `COUNT_DISTINCT_EXECUTION_ID` for qualifying runs; `SELECTED_TOTAL_ACCOUNT_QUOTA` for capacity; `SUM_UNROUNDED_ELIGIBLE_RESOURCE_CHARGES` for the resource-dollar basis. Legacy `SUM` describes monitored operations, egress, and token quantities. |
137: | `timestamp_basis` | `COMPLETED_AT`, `OCCURRED_AT`, or `SERVICE_MONTH`; source context, not a requirement for event input to this estimator. |
138: | `qualification_rule` | Code describing the included population. Runs require production, success, and an independent business output; capacity excludes observed usage. `ELIGIBLE_QUOTA_CHARGES_AND_EXTERNAL_AI_ESTIMATE` includes eligible capacity charges and the external AI-dollar estimate in the resource basis. |
139: | `bytes_per_gb` | Storage-only integer `1000000000`: decimal GB. Blank on unrelated rows is not applicable. |
140: | `include_version_history` | Storage-only Boolean `FALSE`: ordinary history does not consume priced working-file capacity. Blank elsewhere is not applicable. |
141: | `policy_status` | Runs: `DEFINED_ESTIMATE_INPUT`; capacity and resource-dollar basis: `DEFINED`; token templates: `DEFINED_RATE_PENDING`. No core-approval workflow is required to supply a sales run estimate. |
142: 
143: Direct operations include nonproduction activity; egress covers outbound bytes. Both are monitoring context without charges. Token meters cover provider input/output tokens including nonproduction, but do not price AI in this estimate. The resource-dollar meter describes an unrounded eligible amount; credit calculations and monetary rounding operations are outside this document’s scope.
144: 
145: #### resource_allowances.csv
146: 
147: | Columns | Meaning, type, and applicability |
148: |---|---|
149: | `price_book_id`, `plan_code`, `allowance_code`, `meter_code` | IDs for the plan allowance and its quantity definition. Each paid plan has five rows, of which three price the estimate. |
150: | `included_quantity`, `unit`, `period` | Nonnegative decimal quantity interpreted using its row's unit, with `CALENDAR_MONTH` period. Monetary credit is USD; storage is GB; table capacity is whole records. These are capacities/benefits, not accumulating monthly stock. |
151: | `scaling_method`, `scaling_divisor_usd`, `scaling_rounding_mode` | `FIXED` / `NONE` for on-demand and credits; annual capacity uses `LINEAR_MONTHLY_COMMITMENT`, divisor `500.00`, and `EXACT_DECIMAL` storage / `FLOOR` records. A blank fixed-row divisor is not applicable. |
152: | `overage_action`, `overage_resource_sku` | `PURCHASE_ADDITIONAL_QUOTA` links storage/table allowances to their extra-capacity items. Credit uses `OFFSET_CREDIT` without a purchasable item. `ADVISORY_ONLY` and `MONITOR_ONLY` entries are excluded from charges. |
153: | `eligibility_condition` | `ACTIVE_PAID_PLAN`; paid options are assumed active throughout this estimate. |
154: | `rollover_allowed`, `cash_redeemable` | Booleans `FALSE`; credits cannot roll forward or become cash, and capacities do not accumulate monthly. |
155: | `expiry_rule` | `END_OF_CALENDAR_MONTH` describes monthly benefits; it does not instruct deletion of current files or records. |
156: | `partial_period_policy` | `REJECT_PARTIAL_CALENDAR_MONTH`; no partial-period entitlement is specified. |
157: | `credit_application_method`, `credit_scope` | Credit rows: `SEPARATE_NEGATIVE_MONTHLY_LINE`, `RESOURCES_ONLY`. Blank for other allowances. |
158: 
159: `MONTHLY_RESOURCE_DOLLAR_CREDIT` is fixed at USD 50 for both plans. `WORKING_FILE_STORAGE` is 10 GB and `PROGRAMMABLE_TABLE_RECORDS` is 100,000 records before any annual capacity scaling. `DIRECT_DATA_OPERATIONS` retains a legacy 500,000-operation reference and `EGRESS_FAIR_USE` has no quantity; neither is a billable allowance or enforced cap here.
160: 
161: #### resource_skus.csv
162: 
163: | Columns | Meaning, type, and applicability |
164: |---|---|
165: | `price_book_id`, `resource_sku`, `meter_code`, `category` | IDs and category codes `STORAGE`, `TABLES`, or `AI`. |
166: | `provider_code`, `model_code`, `service_tier`, `region` | Optional identifiers, all blank. No provider/model coverage is established. For quota items these dimensions are not applicable. |
167: | `usage_dimension`, `unit` | Quotas: `SELECTED_STORAGE_QUOTA` / `GB`, `SELECTED_RECORD_QUOTA` / `RECORD`. Excluded AI templates: `INPUT_TOKENS` or `OUTPUT_TOKENS` / `TOKEN`. |
168: | `credit_eligible` | Boolean `TRUE` for the four items. The resource-dollar meter also includes the externally supplied AI dollar estimate in the eligible resource basis. |
169: | `sku_status` | Quota items `READY`; AI templates `PENDING_PROVIDER_MODEL`. Readiness does not establish an AI rate. |
170: | `charge_basis` | `PURCHASED_QUOTA` for capacity; `METERED_USAGE` for excluded token templates. |
171: 
172: The applicable items are `EXTRA_STORAGE_GB_QUOTA` and `EXTRA_TABLE_RECORD_BLOCK`. `AI_INPUT_TOKENS_TEMPLATE` and `AI_OUTPUT_TOKENS_TEMPLATE` are retained placeholders, not substitutes for the monthly AI-dollar input. Requested capacity is the customer's total selection; provided capacity includes the purchased whole increments and can exceed that request.
173: 
174: #### resource_rates.csv
175: 
176: | Columns | Meaning, type, and applicability |
177: |---|---|
178: | `rate_id`, `price_book_id`, `resource_sku` | Required IDs. Applicable rates are the ready rows linked to `EXTRA_STORAGE_GB_QUOTA` and `EXTRA_TABLE_RECORD_BLOCK`. |
179: | `effective_from`, `effective_to_exclusive` | Timestamp metadata; start `2026-11-01T00:00:00Z`, blank end. The selected fixed snapshot supplies rates without a quote-date input. |
180: | `unit_size`, `unit_price_usd` | Positive decimal block quantity and nonnegative decimal USD price. Unit comes from the linked item; these quota prices are monthly. Blank pending AI prices mean unavailable, not free. |
181: | `billing_method` | Applicable `ROUND_UP_BLOCK` means purchasable whole capacity increments. `PROPORTIONAL` belongs only to excluded AI templates. |
182: | `rate_source`, `rate_status` | Quota: `PUBLISHED_FIXED`, `READY`. AI templates: `PROVIDER_RETAIL_SNAPSHOT`, `PENDING`. These historical source labels do not establish production approval or an actual provider quote. |
183: 
184: Storage is USD 1 per additional 1 GB each month; records are USD 50 per additional 100,000 each month. Pending AI templates carry a 1,000,000-token unit size with no price. Pricing requirements specify block selection and monthly charges.
185: 
186: ### 3.2 Special values and interpretation
187: 
188: | Situation | Meaning |
189: |---|---|
190: | Annual base fee `0.00` | No separate monthly base; commitment still applies. |
191: | Annual monthly included runs blank | Entitlement is represented by fixed package rows. |
192: | Final band upper bound blank | No upper limit. |
193: | Annual top-extension rate blank | No additional commitment tier; overage has its separate package rate basis. |
194: | AI price blank with pending status | Token pricing unavailable and excluded; use the externally supplied monthly dollar estimate. |
195: | Egress quantity blank | No defined threshold; not a zero quota or unlimited service guarantee. |
196: | Storage history `FALSE` | Excluded from priced working-file capacity; unrelated blank fields mean not applicable. |
197: | Missing required applicable value | Source is incomplete; never infer a price or replace it with zero. Quote error behavior is outside this document’s scope. |

(Showing lines 43-197 of 215. Use offset=198 to continue.)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:06 AM

I reviewed and confirm the field meanings and special values. The observed timestamp text in price_books.csv and resource_rates.csv represents 2026-11-01T00:00:00Z and serves as metadata for this fixed snapshot. The documented canonical fingerprint matches the nine CSVs. Annual anchor values are monthly equivalents of fixed year-long packages. The annual zero base, blank annual monthly run quantity, unbounded final run band, excluded pending AI rate, and undefined egress quantity have their distinct documented meanings. Missing applicable required values are source defects. Please continue to the pricing-concept review.

Thinking

**Reviewing section 4**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:06 AM

The field meanings are confirmed. I’ll now connect those source facts to the pricing concepts, without treating that review as approval of the later calculation rules.

Agent activity 2 items

read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286.../steps/source-meaning-alignment.md · limit: 30, offset: 198

Call ID: call_394a9d82722a4fe99dc02274683ee7b1|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57372060c87d097362cee598de34eArguments

{
  "file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-meaning-alignment.md",
  "limit": 30,
  "offset": 198
}

Result

<path>/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-meaning-alignment.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
198: 
199: Within this snapshot, IDs and composite keys are unique, applicable references resolve, units match across allowance/meter/item/rate, block sizes are positive, bands are contiguous, and the six anchors increase in both amount and quantity. These are source integrity constraints. The effect of a failed constraint on a quote is outside this document’s scope.
200: 
201: ## 4. How the data supports pricing
202: 
203: The following CSV facts support the scoped commercial concepts. This document establishes their meaning and applicability; calculations and customer-visible quote behavior are outside its scope.
204: 
205: | Business concept | Source facts and agreed meaning | Calculation boundary |
206: |---|---|---|
207: | Monthly on-demand runs | `plans.csv`, `run_bands.csv`, run meter: base, included runs, inclusive marginal bands, monthly account scope | Progressive charge calculation and monthly/annual estimate |
208: | Fixed annual commitment | Annual plan, six `annual_curve.csv` rows, applicable policy: annual package expressed in monthly equivalents, contract-year pool | Comparison selection, pool conversion, unused/excess runs, committed rate |
209: | Purchased capacity | Allowances → extra-capacity item → ready rate, with matching meter and unit | Required blocks, charge, and requested versus provided capacity |
210: | Shared resource credit | Fixed monthly USD allowance, eligible capacity items, external AI eligibility described by the resource-dollar meter | Capped credit, net resources, and rounding |
211: | Monthly AI estimate | External dollar amount from sales; pending token rows are excluded | Optional-input default, disclosure, and inclusion in resources |
212: | Monetary and snapshot conventions | `price_books.csv` and applicable plan policy | Exact arithmetic, fixed source selection, and result provenance |
213: | Source limitations | Explicit exclusions and unresolved history coverage | Maintain estimator scope; do not invent trial, enterprise, or operational behavior |
214: 
215: Version-history coverage and future provider/model prices remain separate product decisions; neither prevents this scoped estimate. Only the applicable supplied CSV rows establish the source facts described here.

(End of file - total 215 lines)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:06 AM

I reviewed the source-to-pricing map and confirm it. The paid-plan and run-band or anchor data establish the applicable run terms. Allowance-to-meter and allowance-to-item-to-ready-rate mappings establish included and additional selected capacity. The fixed monthly credit and resource-dollar meter establish resource eligibility, including the external AI estimate. The book and policy data establish fixed-snapshot and rounding conventions. Please validate the declarations against all nine unchanged CSVs.

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:06 AM

The source-to-pricing understanding is confirmed. I’ll now validate the source declarations against the nine unchanged CSVs and reconcile the results with the reviewed interpretation.

Agent activity 3 items

patch_authoring_state · expected_stage_id: build, summary: Source scope, field meanings and pricing-concept mapping are confirmed....

Call ID: call_5960e2c91965493d93d79ae6a34c5ab4|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af573940cdc87d080f5e091f8156ac4Arguments

{
  "expected_stage_id": "build",
  "summary": "Source scope, field meanings and pricing-concept mapping are confirmed. Source declaration and validation are underway.",
  "tasks": {
    "upsert": [
      {
        "id": "source",
        "title": "Confirm Source Meaning",
        "goal": "Review and validate the interpretation of all fixed sources for pricing alignment.",
        "status": "IN_PROGRESS",
        "progress_note": "The source meaning checkpoints are confirmed. I’m validating the interpretation against all nine fixed datasets.",
        "confirmation_required": true,
        "user_confirmed": false,
        "resource_ids": [
          "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-meaning-alignment.md",
          "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-technical-contract.md"
        ],
        "subtasks": [
          {
            "id": "source-scope",
            "title": "Understand source scope and datasets",
            "goal": "Establish dataset purposes, record meanings, coverage and relationships.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The source scope and dataset overview are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-meaning-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "source-fields",
            "title": "Understand fields and special values",
            "goal": "Establish relevant field and special-value meanings across datasets.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The field meanings and special values are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-meaning-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "source-concepts",
            "title": "Connect data to pricing concepts",
            "goal": "Review how the understood data relates to pricing concepts without deciding pricing formulas.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The source-to-pricing concepts are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/source-meaning-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "source-validation",
            "title": "Validate source interpretation",
            "goal": "Create and validate complete source declarations and repair supported issues.",
            "status": "IN_PROGRESS",
            "progress_note": "I’m checking that the confirmed meanings can be applied consistently to all nine datasets.",
            "confirmation_required": false,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "source-final",
            "title": "Review the complete source interpretation",
            "goal": "Confirm the complete interpretation reconciled with validated source evidence.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          }
        ]
      }
    ]
  }
}

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:13 AM
I reviewed and confirm the complete source understanding in revision 2, reconciled with the passing source validation. Keep the recorded timestamp format and row-specific units, and keep the nine CSVs unchanged. The limits of source-declaration enforcement do not change the pricing requirements for detecting unusable applicable source data. Please proceed to pricing requirements. The attached pricing-requirements-alignment.md supplies my business decisions, exact interface and calculation requirements, and independent acceptance expectations for that task.
- pricing-requirements-alignment.md
Thinking
**Reading Task2 guides**
AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:13 AM
Thank you. I’ll preserve the confirmed source interpretation and use your attached pricing decisions to develop the requirements review.
Agent activity 17 items
read · /constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/pricing-behavior.md · limit: 2000, offset: 1
Call ID: call_ea2bc261318f4e75aca4a66269bf76ec|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57533e8d087d0bb749fccd3f2de0dArguments
{ "file_path": "/constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/pricing-behavior.md", "limit": 2000, "offset": 1 }
Result

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:15 AM

I reviewed Sections 1–2 and confirm the pricing scope and terminology. Quote account-wide qualifying production runs, customer-selected total storage and table capacity, and optional externally estimated monthly AI, under one repeated month across twelve paid months. The audience is internal sales. For the later test-intent review, preserve the literal dollar-prefixed text example from the supplied C16 spec inside its inline code span, without a backslash.

Thinking

**Locating inline literal**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:15 AM

The pricing scope is confirmed. I’ll preserve the literal test input exactly as supplied and move on to the pricing model review.

Agent activity 6 items

bash · command: grep -nF '\$' steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md | grep '`', description: Find escaped dollar...

Call ID: call_8877d4537f9840c0bcf232c233c63cfe|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af575befb5087d08bc01555f63c99d4Arguments

{
  "command": "grep -nF '\\$' steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md | grep '`'",
  "description": "Find escaped dollars inside literal examples",
  "timeoutMs": 10000,
  "workdir": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0"
}

Result

562:[Business example](#case-c02). Base request selects \$24,000 and \$60,000 commitments. Exact rate numerators/denominators are `2000/1000` and `5000/5000`; unit rates are \$2 and \$1 respectively. Add a focused arithmetic check: 100,000 excess runs at the \$600,000 package produce \$17,241.38.
640:[Business example](#case-c11). At 17,100 monthly runs, annual_1 selects the \$120,000 commitment: included 204,000, estimated 205,200, excess 1,200, unused 0; exact rate `10000/17000`; annual excess charge \$705.88, not \$708. annual_2 is \$300,000. Do not round the rate first.
644:[Business example](#case-c12). At 301 monthly runs, independently omit AI, set it null, or use empty text. Each gives effective AI zero and `ai_cost_assumed_zero = true`, with a disclosure. On-demand monthly/annual totals are \$1,752.50/\$21,030, credit zero. Pending AI template rates do not block the result.
654:[Business example](#case-c14). Inputs: 3,000 runs, 41 GB, 400,001 records, AI \$30. Status complete, issues empty, months 12, assumed-zero flag false. Context exactly matches the supplied `price_books.csv` identity, schema metadata, and verified CSV fingerprint, plus the applicable policy version from `plan_pricing_policies.csv`. All three options are available with no reason, ordered annual_1, annual_2, on_demand.
688:| Every input | Negative value; nonempty text such as `"1"`, `"abc"`, `"1,000"`, `"\$50"`, or `"NaN"`; whitespace-only text; Boolean; array; object; nonfinite numerical value supplied through a non-JSON adapter |
724:[Business example](#case-c20). Base with explicit AI 0: effective AI 0, `ai_cost_assumed_zero = false`, no assumed-zero disclosure. Available annual totals are \$72,000/\$60,000 and on-demand monthly total \$6,000. This is an explicit estimate, not a statement that actual AI usage is free.

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:16 AM

I reviewed Section 3 and confirm the pricing model. Apply the $500 monthly base and 50 included on-demand runs with progressive marginal bands. Use only the six fixed annual packages, one contract-year pool and the exact package rate on excess. Round selected capacity shortfalls up in the documented blocks. Apply the shared $50 monthly credit once to combined eligible capacity and external AI charges. Please continue to the request and result review.

Thinking

**Reviewing input requirements**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:17 AM

The pricing model is confirmed. I’ll review the information sales supplies first, then the comparison they receive as a separate topic.

patch_authoring_state · expected_stage_id: build, summary: The user confirmed the pricing model. The request and result review is u...

Call ID: call_c21a414c259d4c8288f727c6007d9e46|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af575fff5c487d09d6964c561259af2Arguments

{
  "expected_stage_id": "build",
  "summary": "The user confirmed the pricing model. The request and result review is underway.",
  "tasks": {
    "upsert": [
      {
        "id": "requirements",
        "title": "Align Pricing and Acceptance Requirements",
        "goal": "Confirm the complete pricing behavior, boundaries and independent expectations before implementation.",
        "status": "IN_PROGRESS",
        "progress_note": "The pricing model is confirmed. The sales inputs and resulting comparison are the next review topics.",
        "confirmation_required": true,
        "user_confirmed": false,
        "resource_ids": [
          "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
          "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-technical-contract.md"
        ],
        "subtasks": [
          {
            "id": "req-scope",
            "title": "Align scope and terminology",
            "goal": "Confirm quote scope, measurements and terminology.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The scope and terminology are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-model",
            "title": "Align pricing model",
            "goal": "Confirm charges, allowances, eligibility and exclusions.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The pricing model is confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-interface",
            "title": "Align requests and results",
            "goal": "Confirm request and result behavior as separate topics.",
            "status": "IN_PROGRESS",
            "progress_note": "The sales inputs are ready for review; the result presentation follows.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-flow",
            "title": "Align pricing rules and flow",
            "goal": "Confirm conditions, ordering, boundaries and stopping paths.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "req-cases",
            "title": "Align examples and limitations",
            "goal": "Confirm independent example outcomes and material limitations.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "req-data",
            "title": "Align pricing data and field contracts",
            "goal": "Confirm pricing data and exact business inputs and outputs.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "req-rules",
            "title": "Align detailed rules and errors",
            "goal": "Confirm rule bindings, rounding, validations and error behavior.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "req-tests",
            "title": "Align acceptance expectations",
            "goal": "Confirm reproducible cases and independent expected outcomes.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "req-final",
            "title": "Review complete pricing requirements",
            "goal": "Confirm the complete requirements and implementation scope before implementation.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          }
        ]
      }
    ]
  },
  "actions": {
    "upsert": [
      {
        "id": "confirm-pricing-inputs",
        "question": "[pricing-requirements-alignment.md](</conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md#4.1%20Quote%20inputs%2C%20required%20fields%2C%20and%20defaults>) — Build Output. Please review [sales inputs](</conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md#4.1%20Quote%20inputs%2C%20required%20fields%2C%20and%20defaults>): runs and selected capacity are required; omitted AI is disclosed as assumed zero. Does this fit how sales will estimate? Confirmation enables result review; identify corrections.",
        "resolution_mode": "BLOCKING",
        "option_selection_mode": "SINGLE_SELECT",
        "options": [
          "Confirm the sales inputs",
          "Describe corrections to the sales inputs"
        ],
        "acceptance_option": "Confirm the sales inputs",
        "resource_ref": {
          "resource_id": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
          "version": 2
        }
      }
    ]
  }
}

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:17 AM

I reviewed Section 4.1 and confirm the four sales inputs. Typical monthly runs and selected table records are required whole counts. Selected storage is required and can be fractional. External monthly AI is optional and can include fractions of a cent. Only blank AI defaults to zero with a disclosure. Please continue to the results review.

Thinking

**Estimating the overview size**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:17 AM

The four sales inputs are confirmed. I’ll check the size of the proposed comparison as part of the separate results review, including the detailed run-band breakdown.

Agent activity 6 items

read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286.../pricing-requirements-alignment.md · limit: 35, offset: 106

Call ID: call_d4ac43573e024e85a5e9a55b88fae384|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af5762b877087d0bf026026638f083cArguments

{
  "file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
  "limit": 35,
  "offset": 106
}

Result

<path>/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
106: ## 4. How to calculate a quote
107: 
108: ### 4.1 Quote inputs, required fields, and defaults
109: 
110: | Input | Business requirement | If blank |
111: |---|---|---|
112: | Typical monthly production runs | Nonnegative whole runs | Required |
113: | Selected total storage | Nonnegative GB, allowing fractions | Required |
114: | Selected total table capacity | Nonnegative whole records | Required |
115: | Monthly AI cost | Nonnegative USD, allowing fractions of a cent | Assume zero and disclose |
116: 
117: Zero is an explicit value. Invalid values or missing required inputs stop pricing; identify all affected inputs together. Technical numeric limits and representations appear in 7.3 and 7.6.
118: 
119: ### 4.2 Quote outputs and result statuses
120: 
121: This is an internal sales comparison, not an external customer-facing offer mode. Return one comparison set containing separately calculated quote alternatives, rather than combining their totals into one price. With valid sources, the set contains two or three priceable quotes: on-demand plus one or two annual packages. Keep three output positions even when the second annual choice is unavailable. All alternatives use identical customer assumptions, USD, and the same twelve-month horizon; each retains its own entitlements and charges.
122: 
123: Show annual options in ascending commitment order, followed by on-demand. Select annual packages using reference monthly runs: between two anchors, choose the nearest lower and higher; at an exact anchor, choose it and its predecessor; at or below the smallest anchor, show only the minimum; above the largest, show only the maximum. At exactly the largest anchor, show it and its predecessor. Keep two annual positions and explain when the second is unavailable. Selection is volume-based, not a global cheapest-plan recommendation.
124: 
125: Each priceable option shows its twelve-month total and monthly equivalent, commitment or monthly base, included and expected runs, annual excess/unused runs, run charges, included/selected/provided capacities, purchased blocks and their charges, full AI assumption, separate credit, and net resources. Also show on-demand's monthly total, assumptions, source version, and draft-estimate limitations.
126: 
127: | Situation | Required behavior |
128: |---|---|
129: | Inputs valid and sources available | Show comparison; an intentionally unavailable second annual choice is not an error. |
130: | Missing required or invalid input | Explain all issues and show no calculated options. |
131: | An option's required source is unavailable or inconsistent | Explain that option as unpriced; retain independently priceable options. |
132: | AI omitted versus explicitly zero | Same effective amount; different assumption disclosure. |
133: 
134: ### 4.3 Detailed pricing rules
135: 
136: <a id="pricing-rules"></a>
137: 
138: | Rule | Business requirement |
139: |---|---|
140: | R01 — Validate inputs | Apply the required/default rules; reject invalid inputs before pricing. |

(Showing lines 106-140 of 724. Use offset=141 to continue.)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:18 AM

I reviewed Section 4.2 and confirm the detailed comparison. Sales needs the annual total and monthly equivalent to compare plans, and the breakdown to explain how run bands, annual excess or unused runs, purchased capacity, the AI assumption, and the monthly credit affect each option. Keep annual_1, annual_2 and on_demand in order, with reasons for unavailable or unpriced positions. The screen can lead with totals and disclose supporting details without dropping any specified output fields.

Thinking

**Reviewing integration flow**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:18 AM

The detailed comparison is confirmed, including a totals-first screen with the full supporting breakdown retained. I’ll incorporate that usage context and move to the calculation flow.

Agent activity 5 items

apply_patch · patch: *** Begin Patch *** Update File: /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pric...

Call ID: call_fa8ef766081f406b9baf843b1c977214|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af576593d3887d08695d8fae5a7b854Arguments

{
  "patch": "*** Begin Patch\n*** Update File: /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md\n@@\n-The request has four values. A complete three-option result has approximately 135 business values: about 56 across the two annual alternatives, 65 for on-demand including 41 values across its seven run bands, and 14 for shared status, assumptions, source context and disclosures. This is also the maximum normal priced comparison; fewer annual choices or an unpriced option produce fewer values. The detail supports explaining how each estimate was built, but may make the result harder to read and process. The requested breakdown is retained pending confirmation of its practical use; no detail has been silently removed.\n+The request has four values. A complete three-option result has approximately 135 business values: about 56 across the two annual alternatives, 65 for on-demand including 41 values across its seven run bands, and 14 for shared status, assumptions, source context and disclosures. This is also the maximum normal priced comparison; fewer annual choices or an unpriced option produce fewer values. Sales needs annual totals and monthly equivalents to compare plans and the detailed run, capacity, AI and credit components to explain each estimate. The screen can lead with totals and disclose the supporting details, while retaining every specified output field.\n*** End Patch"
}

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:19 AM

I reviewed Sections 3.4 and 4.3 and confirm R01–R10. Validate all inputs first, repeat the same month twelve times, select annual anchors by volume, and calculate each independently priceable option. Keep the annual excess rate exact through multiplication, and apply the monthly resource credit to the exact eligible amount before rounding the net. Explain unavailable or unpriced options and preserve independently priceable results.

Thinking

**Reviewing relevant sections**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:19 AM

The calculation flow is confirmed. I’ll move to the independent examples and the assumptions that determine how sales should interpret an estimate.

patch_authoring_state · expected_stage_id: build, summary: The user confirmed the pricing rules and calculation flow. Independent e...

Call ID: call_002daa7cf6d34b748514e3cce9582fef|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57692b11487d0b51161ee9876d2f2Arguments

{
  "expected_stage_id": "build",
  "summary": "The user confirmed the pricing rules and calculation flow. Independent examples and limitations are ready for review.",
  "tasks": {
    "upsert": [
      {
        "id": "requirements",
        "title": "Align Pricing and Acceptance Requirements",
        "goal": "Confirm the complete pricing behavior, boundaries and independent expectations before implementation.",
        "status": "IN_PROGRESS",
        "progress_note": "The pricing rules and flow are confirmed. The independent examples and limitations are ready for review.",
        "confirmation_required": true,
        "user_confirmed": false,
        "resource_ids": [
          "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
          "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-technical-contract.md"
        ],
        "subtasks": [
          {
            "id": "req-scope",
            "title": "Align scope and terminology",
            "goal": "Confirm quote scope, measurements and terminology.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The scope and terminology are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-model",
            "title": "Align pricing model",
            "goal": "Confirm charges, allowances, eligibility and exclusions.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The pricing model is confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-interface",
            "title": "Align requests and results",
            "goal": "Confirm request and result behavior as separate topics.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The sales inputs and detailed comparison are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-flow",
            "title": "Align pricing rules and flow",
            "goal": "Confirm conditions, ordering, boundaries and stopping paths.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The pricing rules and flow are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-cases",
            "title": "Align examples and limitations",
            "goal": "Confirm independent example outcomes and material limitations.",
            "status": "IN_PROGRESS",
            "progress_note": "The independent examples and assumptions are ready for review.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-data",
            "title": "Align pricing data and field contracts",
            "goal": "Confirm pricing data and exact business inputs and outputs.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "req-rules",
            "title": "Align detailed rules and errors",
            "goal": "Confirm rule bindings, rounding, validations and error behavior.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "req-tests",
            "title": "Align acceptance expectations",
            "goal": "Confirm reproducible cases and independent expected outcomes.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          },
          {
            "id": "req-final",
            "title": "Review complete pricing requirements",
            "goal": "Confirm the complete requirements and implementation scope before implementation.",
            "status": "PENDING",
            "progress_note": "",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false
          }
        ]
      }
    ]
  },
  "actions": {
    "upsert": [
      {
        "id": "confirm-pricing-examples",
        "question": "[pricing-requirements-alignment.md](</conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md#5.%20Quote%20examples%20and%20expected%20outcomes>) — Build Output. Please review the [examples](</conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md#5.%20Quote%20examples%20and%20expected%20outcomes>) and [assumptions and limitations](</conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md#6.%20Assumptions%20and%20known%20limitations>): they specify expected comparisons and stopped results. Do they match your business? Confirmation enables the detailed contract review; identify corrections.",
        "resolution_mode": "BLOCKING",
        "option_selection_mode": "SINGLE_SELECT",
        "options": [
          "Confirm the examples and limitations",
          "Describe corrections to the examples or limitations"
        ],
        "acceptance_option": "Confirm the examples and limitations",
        "resource_ref": {
          "resource_id": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
          "version": 4
        }
      }
    ]
  }
}

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:20 AM

I reviewed Sections 5–6 and confirm C01–C20 and the stated limitations. For C14, the inputs are 3,000 monthly runs, 41 GB, 400,001 records and $30 monthly AI. The independent annual totals are $72,372 and $60,000 for the annual packages, and $74,532 for on-demand ($6,211 per month). Use the supplied expected outcomes for verification, including the exact-rate, half-cent, missing and invalid input, and independently unpriced-option cases. These are draft estimates for twelve identical months.

Thinking

**Reviewing fields 7.1–7.4**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:20 AM

The independent examples and limitations are confirmed. I’ll now review how the comparison’s data, inputs and outputs are specified before implementation.

Agent activity 3 items

read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286.../pricing-requirements-alignment.md · limit: 78, offset: 369

Call ID: call_0f502146ab33408f8d0aa6c33e2c125f|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af576ba97ec87d0878ccae8205c7c05Arguments

{
  "file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
  "limit": 78,
  "offset": 369
}

Result

<path>/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
369: No variable monthly forecast, live pricing, metering, token-rate calculation, partial periods, payment schedule, refund, upgrade, trial, or enterprise contract is included in this quotation scope. Version-history object coverage and future AI provider/model prices remain separate decisions. The retained legacy CSV rows described in source alignment have no pricing effect. Numeric limits in section 7 are engineering limits for this estimator, not new commercial tiers.
370: 
371: ## 7. Implementation alignment
372: 
373: ### 7.1 How to read this section
374: 
375: Sections 1–6 establish customer-visible behavior. This section binds it to sources, logical fields, and exact acceptance expectations. Field names, numeric encoding, error identifiers, and precedence below are engineering decisions implementing the scoped offer. They add no commercial fee or package.
376: 
377: | Commercial requirement | Source meaning / applicable data | Rule and output | Acceptance coverage |
378: |---|---|---|---|
379: | Monthly production base and progressive runs | Plan, bands, run definition | R04; monthly base, band breakdown, run charge | C01, C12, C14 |
380: | Fixed annual packages and yearly pool | Annual plan, anchors, fixed-anchor policy | R03/R05; selected packages, pool, unused/excess, rate | C02, C04–C07, C09, C11, C17 |
381: | Purchased capacity | Allowances, quota meters/items, block rates | R06; selected/provided capacity, blocks and charges | C08, C14 |
382: | External AI and shared monthly credit | Dollar-credit allowance, item eligibility, and resource-dollar meter meaning | R07; AI assumption, credit and monthly net | C03, C10, C12, C15, C20 |
383: | Full-year comparison and rounding | Plan periods and book/policy conventions; the repeated-month assumption in section 1 | R02/R08/R09; annual totals and monthly equivalents | C11, C14, C15 |
384: | Missing, invalid, or unavailable information | Source constraints and the input/output requirements in section 4 | R01/R10; issues, statuses, disclosures | C13, C16, C18–C20 |
385: 
386: The no-seat/app fee, account scope, history exclusion, and operating exclusions stated in sections 1–3 are scope invariants: no corresponding input or charge is introduced. No separate workflow or decision-register CSV is required.
387: 
388: ### 7.2 Pricing data and source mappings
389: 
390: Select only the nine supplied CSV files listed in `source-meaning-alignment.md`. Read the bundle identity and schema metadata from the single `price_books.csv` row, and policy metadata from the applicable `plan_pricing_policies.csv` rows; require currency `USD` and status `DRAFT_SIMULATION`. Verify the CSV fingerprint using the convention in `source-meaning-alignment.md` when accepting the bundle. All applicable rows must share the supplied book identity. There is no quote-date selection or fallback to another book. The metadata start date is not a quote-validity input. Reconcile any policy change consistently across the supplied datasets and their meanings; never silently override conflicting source values.
391: 
392: | Parameter | Source selection within this book | Required meaning |
393: |---|---|---|
394: | Currency, rounding, snapshot | One `price_books.csv` row | USD, HALF_UP, precision 2, `NET_MONTHLY_RESOURCES_AND_ANNUAL_EXCESS`, `FIXED_ESTIMATE_SNAPSHOT` |
395: | Paid-plan terms | One `plans.csv` row per paid plan | Monthly base/included runs, annual minimum/term, `ACTIVE_PAID_PLAN` |
396: | Applicable policies | One `plan_pricing_policies.csv` row per paid plan, `ALIGNED_DRAFT_ESTIMATE` | Fixed annual anchors; exact annual pool; package-rate method; selected monthly quota; fixed rates |
397: | On-demand bands | Seven `run_bands.csv` rows ordered by `band_order` | Inclusive contiguous ranges; last upper bound blank/unbounded |
398: | Annual packages | Six `annual_curve.csv` rows ordered by `point_order` | Positive, increasing monthly-equivalent commitments and reference runs |
399: | Included resources | `resource_allowances.csv`: `WORKING_FILE_STORAGE`, `PROGRAMMABLE_TABLE_RECORDS`, `MONTHLY_RESOURCE_DOLLAR_CREDIT`, per plan | Units, period, quantities, fixed/scaled basis, extra-item references, eligibility |
400: | Additional capacity | Allowance item → `resource_skus.csv` → one ready `resource_rates.csv` entry | Purchased quota, credit eligibility, matching units, positive block size, nonnegative monthly price, ROUND_UP_BLOCK |
401: | Quantity meanings | Referenced `meter_definitions.csv` rows | Account-wide qualifying runs and selected total GB/records; resource-dollar basis is unrounded |
402: | AI estimate | Request input; external-AI meaning in `source-meaning-alignment.md` and eligible-resource basis in `meter_definitions.csv` | Monthly USD total; no token lookup, markup, or fabricated rate |
403: 
404: Excluded plan rows, operation/egress allowance rows, token templates, and operational fields listed in source alignment are not required pricing dependencies. Required source integrity and failure effects appear in 7.6. The artifact fingerprint is provenance, not a substitute for semantic validation.
405: 
406: ### 7.3 Quote input fields
407: 
408: | Business label | Logical field | Value | Presence/default |
409: |---|---|---|---|
410: | Typical monthly runs | `monthly_runs` | Integer, 0–1,000,000,000,000 | Required |
411: | Selected storage | `storage_quota_gb` | Decimal GB, 0–1,000,000,000,000, up to 9 fractional places | Required |
412: | Selected table capacity | `table_quota_records` | Integer, 0–1,000,000,000,000 | Required |
413: | Monthly AI cost | `monthly_ai_cost_usd` | Decimal USD, 0–1,000,000,000,000, up to 6 fractional places | Optional; blank becomes zero |
414: 
415: These are engineering-supported input limits. Exceeding them is invalid, never silently clamped or rounded. Trailing fractional zeroes do not affect the precision limit. Numeric integer-valued forms such as `1.0` are whole quantities. All inputs apply to every compared option and month; no selected annual commitment, date, currency, or month-by-month series is accepted by this contract.
416: 
417: For JSON transport, use numeric tokens, parsed losslessly into decimal/integer values; quoted numeric strings, booleans, arrays, and objects are invalid. Omission, `null`, or empty text are blank; whitespace-only text is invalid. A UI may parse a user's typed numeral before constructing the request, without passing it through lossy binary floating-point. Preserve the numerical AI amount, not its original textual formatting. Output monetary values use equally lossless numeric serialization.
418: 
419: The request must be an object containing only these four recognized fields. Reject duplicate JSON field names during parsing rather than accepting the first or last value. An unknown field is `INPUT_INVALID` for that field; a non-object request is `INPUT_INVALID` for `request`. An empty object reports the three missing required fields. Transport syntax errors prevent pricing and identify `request` as invalid; no HTTP-specific protocol is prescribed.
420: 
421: ### 7.4 Quote output fields
422: 
423: Use `options[]` in order `annual_1`, `annual_2`, `on_demand`. A valid request yields all three positions, even when one is unavailable or unpriced. A missing/invalid request yields an empty list.
424: 
425: | Field group | Logical fields | Meaning / presence |
426: |---|---|---|
427: | Overall state | `status`, `issues[]` | Always present. Status: `complete`, `incomplete`, `invalid`, or `partial`; no issues is an empty list. |
428: | Source provenance | `pricing_context.price_book_id`, `.schema_version`, `.policy_version`, `.config_hash` | Present once the shared book is validated; omitted for stopped input validation or an unusable shared book. |
429: | Effective inputs | `assumptions.monthly_runs`, `.storage_quota_gb`, `.table_quota_records`, `.monthly_ai_cost_usd`, `.ai_cost_assumed_zero`, `.months` | Present for valid input; months = 12. Omitted for invalid/incomplete input. The Boolean distinguishes defaulted from explicit zero AI. |
430: | Option identity | `options[].slot`, `.kind`, `.status`, `.reason` | Kind `annual` or `on_demand`; status `available`, `unavailable`, or `unpriced`. Reason only for unavailable/unpriced. |
431: | Annual commitment | `annual_commitment_usd`, `commitment_monthly_equivalent_usd` | Available annual options only, separate from total estimated cost. |
432: | Run quantities | `included_runs`, `estimated_runs`, `excess_runs`, `unused_runs`, `run_period` | Available options; period `annual` or `monthly`. Excess/unused apply only to annual. |
433: | Run prices | `run_charge_usd`, `monthly_base_usd`, `excess_rate`, `run_band_breakdown[]` | Run charge for all available options. Base/bands only on-demand; exact ratio only annual. |
434: | Capacity | `included_storage_gb`, `selected_storage_gb`, `provided_storage_gb`, `included_table_records`, `selected_table_records`, `provided_table_records` | Available options, reflecting each option's own included capacity. |
435: | Purchased increments | `extra_storage_blocks`, `extra_table_blocks` | Nonnegative whole block counts for each available option. |
436: | Monthly resources | `extra_storage_monthly_usd`, `extra_table_monthly_usd`, `ai_cost_monthly_usd`, `resource_credit_monthly_usd`, `net_resource_monthly_usd` | Available options. Credit is a positive deduction; AI and applied credit retain exact precision; net is cents. |
437: | Comparison totals | `annual_total_usd`, `monthly_equivalent_usd`, `monthly_total_usd` | Available options; monthly total only on-demand. All include resources after credit. |
438: | Explanations | `disclosures[]` | For valid input: draft estimate, repeated month, and no approved offer/invoice; add assumed-zero AI explanation only when defaulted. Omitted for invalid/incomplete input. |
439: 
440: All option-level fields in the table live under `options[]`. An issue contains `code`, `message`, and `field` or `slot` when relevant; a shared-book issue needs no field or slot. Inapplicable/unavailable numeric fields are omitted, never zero-filled. Available zero amounts and counts are explicitly zero. Unavailable/unpriced options return only identity, status, and reason.
441: 
442: Each annual `excess_rate` contains `numerator_usd` and `denominator_runs`, using the exact monthly-equivalent anchor ratio. Each on-demand band entry contains `band_order`, `first_run`, optional `last_run`, `run_count`, `rate_usd`, `charge_usd`. Return all seven bands in order, including zero-count entries; omit `last_run` for the unbounded band.
443: 
444: Monetary display rounds charges/credit to cents; underlying AI and applied-credit fields retain precision. Independently rounded displays may differ from the rounded net by a cent. Net and totals follow R09, not subtraction of already rounded displays.
445: 
446: ### 7.5 Rule calculations: inputs, pricing data, and outputs

(Showing lines 369-446 of 726. Use offset=447 to continue.)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:20 AM

I reviewed Sections 7.2–7.4 and confirm the data and field contract. Preserve the fixed USD draft provenance and applicable joins. Accept the four documented numeric fields with their exact limits, using lossless numeric encoding. Preserve all three positions for valid input, the status and issue semantics, distinct blank versus explicit-zero AI, the exact annual rate ratio, and all seven on-demand bands. Omit numeric fields for unavailable or unpriced positions.

Thinking

**Reading relevant sections**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:20 AM

The data and field contract is confirmed. I’ll move to the detailed calculation, rounding and error-handling review.

Agent activity 3 items

read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286.../pricing-requirements-alignment.md · limit: 90, offset: 446

Call ID: call_bfd8e9c4b3b046e59fafa5a01d42a9a6|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af576e6056087d0adcffb39c0a433efArguments

{
  "file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
  "limit": 90,
  "offset": 446
}

Result

<path>/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
446: ### 7.5 Rule calculations: inputs, pricing data, and outputs
447:
448: Each binding implements its corresponding [business rule](#pricing-rules). Source keys and applicability follow 7.2. Use exact decimal arithmetic for amounts and exact rational arithmetic for annual rates.
449:
450: #### Rule R01 — Validate inputs
451:
452: Check all fields under 7.3/7.6. Apply optional AI default only to blank input; record `ai_cost_assumed_zero`. Do not access pricing for incomplete/invalid input. For valid input, copy the effective values to assumptions without changing their numerical precision.
453:
454: #### Rule R02 — Repeat the month
455:
456: Set `months = 12`; annual estimated runs = 12 × monthly runs. Reuse selected capacity and AI amount in every month. On-demand retains monthly runs; each annual option uses annual runs.
457:
458: #### Rule R03 — Select annual options
459:
460: Validate the complete six-point annual schedule and applicable annual policy before choosing. Compare monthly runs to reference monthly runs using 4.2. Sort selected packages by commitment, assigning the smaller to `annual_1`. If only one exists, set `annual_2` unavailable with a reason. A corrupt schedule is not a reason to choose a different subset.
461:
462: #### Rule R04 — On-demand runs
463:
464: For each band with lower bound L and upper bound U, count `max(0, min(monthly_runs, U) - L + 1)`; use monthly runs for U in the unbounded band. Band charge = count × rate. Sum all band charges into monthly `run_charge_usd`; keep the monthly base separate. The base applies even at zero runs.
465:
466: #### Rule R05 — Annual runs
467:
468: Annual commitment = 12 × monthly-equivalent commitment; included runs = 12 × reference monthly runs. Excess = `max(estimated - included, 0)`; unused = `max(included - estimated, 0)`. Rate = annual commitment / annual pool, exactly equal to the stored monthly-equivalent ratio. Multiply excess by that exact rate, then round the annual charge to cents. No monthly pool reset, package change, top extension, or unused-run refund applies.
469:
470: #### Rule R06 — Included and extra capacity
471:
472: For on-demand, included capacity is the fixed allowance. For annual, multiply the base allowance by monthly-equivalent commitment / its USD 500 divisor; preserve exact GB and floor record allowances as their source setting specifies. Every current anchor yields whole record capacity.
473:
474: For each resource separately, let I be included capacity, T selected total, B positive block size, and P monthly block price:
475:
476: - Blocks = `ceil(max(T - I, 0) / B)`.
477: - Provided capacity = `I + blocks × B`.
478: - Monthly extra charge = `blocks × P`.
479:
480: Return the included, selected, provided, block-count, and charge fields. Even when T is below I, provided remains I. Actual observed consumption is not an input.
481:
482: #### Rule R07 — Resource credit
483:
484: Eligible monthly cost = exact supplied AI amount + monthly extra storage + monthly extra records. Applied credit = `min(eligible cost, monthly credit allowance)`. Monthly net resources = eligible cost minus credit, rounded once to cents. Credit is shared, resource-only, and does not accumulate. No allocation among components is required.
485:
486: #### Rule R08 — Totals
487:
488: On-demand monthly total = monthly base + monthly run charge + rounded monthly net resources; annual total = 12 × monthly total. Annual-option total = annual commitment + rounded annual excess charge + 12 × rounded monthly net resources. Monthly equivalent = annual total / 12, rounded to cents. Do not add the annual plan's zero monthly base or treat the commitment as a resource wallet.
489:
490: #### Rule R09 — Monetary rounding
491:
492: Use decimal HALF_UP to two places for annual excess charges, net monthly resources, displayed charges, totals, and monthly equivalents. Preserve exact rate ratios through multiplication and AI precision through credit subtraction. Do not sum separately rounded resource inputs. Rounded monthly net resources, not an unrounded annual resource sum, feed the annual total.
493:
494: #### Rule R10 — Explain results
495:
496: Return the ordered positions and applicable breakdowns under 7.4, including provided capacity, source context, and disclosures. Source failures affect only dependent options as specified below. No unavailable number is represented as a zero or an invented price.
497:
498: ### 7.6 Validation, rounding, and error handling
499:
500: **Input checks and precedence.** Validate transport and request shape first, then all independently checkable fields, before pricing-source access, annual-package selection, or charge calculation. A malformed request yields a request-level issue; for a parseable object, report all independently detected field issues together. Any invalid input makes status `invalid`; otherwise missing required input makes it `incomplete`. Both stop with empty options and no assumptions, context, disclosures, or totals. Reject invalid values without coercion, clipping, dropping unknown fields, or rounding them into the supported range. Blank optional AI alone is valid.
501:
502: | Invalid or missing input category | Concrete triggers and required outcome | Acceptance coverage |
503: |---|---|---|
504: | Transport / request shape | Malformed JSON, duplicate JSON field names, or a non-object request: `INPUT_INVALID` identifying `request`; no pricing-source access. | C16 |
505: | Unknown fields or unsupported request modes | Any extra field, including commitment, date, currency, audience mode, or a separate scenario list: field-identified `INPUT_INVALID`. The four-input contract does not accept these choices. | C16 |
506: | Missing required fields | Omitted, null, or empty-text runs/storage/records: `INPUT_REQUIRED` for each affected field. An empty object reports all three. | C13, C19 |
507: | Wrong field type / blank-like value | Any nonempty text (including numeric text or `abc`), whitespace-only text, Boolean, array, or object in any input: `INPUT_INVALID`. Empty optional AI is a permitted default, unlike whitespace. | C12, C16, C20 |
508: | Nonfinite or negative input | Nonfinite numbers through a non-JSON adapter, or any negative input: `INPUT_INVALID`; NaN/Infinity in JSON fail parsing. | C16 |
509: | Fractional count | Non-whole runs or records: `INPUT_INVALID`; integer-valued `1.0` remains valid. | C16 |
510: | Magnitude or precision violation | Any input above 1,000,000,000,000; storage with more than 9 fractional places or AI with more than 6, ignoring trailing fractional zeroes: `INPUT_INVALID`. | C16 |
511: | Simultaneous problems | Report independently detectable missing and invalid fields together; `invalid` takes precedence over `incomplete`. No alternative is priced from this shared invalid request. | C19 |
512:
513: There are no date, promotion, eligibility, historical-balance, or independent-scenario inputs in this contract, so their validation is not applicable. Capacity below an included allowance, large but supported usage, or a run count between annual anchors is valid; do not reject it because it changes which alternatives are selected. Source defects after valid input are separate from input errors.
514:
515: **Source checks.** Validate the shared book identity/version, USD currency, draft status, supported rounding/snapshot conventions, and bundle identity. Then validate applicable dependency groups: plan/policy uniqueness, required fields, method/eligibility codes, bands, anchor ordering/minimum/term, allowance units/period/scaling, same-book references, quota meter/item basis, readiness/eligibility, and ready rate cardinality, size, unit, and price. Reject contradictions rather than silently using prose to override them. Excluded rows and blank pending AI rates are not applicable dependencies.
516:
517: | Failure | Effect after valid input |
518: |---|---|
519: | Shared book unusable | All three positions unpriced; no pricing context. |
520: | Annual plan, fixed-anchor policy, or full anchor schedule unusable | Both annual positions unpriced; independently valid on-demand remains available. |
521: | On-demand base, applicable policy, or band set unusable | On-demand unpriced; independently valid annual positions remain available. |
522: | A plan's required capacity/credit allowance or dependency unusable | Its selected options unpriced. An already determined unavailable annual position stays unavailable. |
523: | Shared applicable quota item/meter/rate unusable | Every otherwise available option depending on it becomes unpriced, even if requested capacity fits inside the allowance. |
524:
525: Any unpriced position makes overall status `partial`. A deliberately unavailable second annual position alone leaves status `complete`. Preserve assumptions/disclosures for valid input, including partial results. Source checks need not enumerate every cascading fault, but each unpriced position needs an explanation. Return independently priceable options.
526:
527: | Issue code | Trigger |
528: |---|---|
529: | `INPUT_REQUIRED` | Required input is omitted, null, or empty text. |
530: | `INPUT_INVALID` | Malformed transport, duplicate JSON fields, invalid request shape, unknown field, or a nonblank input failing type, finiteness, range, whole-count, or precision requirements. |
531: | `PRICING_UNAVAILABLE` | A required source is missing, duplicated, inconsistent, unsupported, or unusable. |
532:
533: **Precision.** Parse numeric tokens losslessly; use decimal values and rational rates, never binary floating-point for quota ceilings, credit, or monetary rounding. Retain enough precision for maximum supported inputs and intermediate annual products; the input bounds do not clamp derived outputs. Do not round a storage selection onto a block boundary. Serialize output numbers without losing their value; currency formatting belongs to presentation.
534:
535: **Reconciliation.** Provided capacity is at least both selected and included capacity; blocks and excess/unused runs are nonnegative integers. For annual options, at most one of excess and unused is positive. Credit cannot exceed eligible charges or \$50. On-demand annual total is twelve monthly totals; annual-option total is commitment plus annual excess plus twelve monthly nets. The account scope and monthly-reset/yearly-pool semantics defined by the plan and meter data remain unchanged by repeating a typical month.

(Showing lines 446-535 of 726. Use offset=536 to continue.)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:21 AM

I reviewed Sections 7.5–7.6 and confirm the calculations, rounding and error behavior. Validate all independently checkable fields and give invalid input precedence over missing required input. After valid input, unavailable source facts affect their dependent options, with an unusable shared book affecting all three. Use decimal and exact rational arithmetic, and round half-up at the documented net-resource, excess-charge and total boundaries.

Thinking

**Reviewing section 7.7**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:21 AM

The detailed calculations and error handling are confirmed. I’ll check that the acceptance specifications preserve your independent expectations before presenting them for review.

Agent activity 3 items

read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286.../pricing-requirements-alignment.md · limit: 210, offset: 535

Call ID: call_b3905b0ea18b43d6a844aa64eb32c689|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57713e84487d082228b58d0b8490aArguments

{
  "file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
  "limit": 210,
  "offset": 535
}

Result

<path>/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
535: **Reconciliation.** Provided capacity is at least both selected and included capacity; blocks and excess/unused runs are nonnegative integers. For annual options, at most one of excess and unused is positive. Credit cannot exceed eligible charges or \$50. On-demand annual total is twelve monthly totals; annual-option total is commitment plus annual excess plus twelve monthly nets. The account scope and monthly-reset/yearly-pool semantics defined by the plan and meter data remain unchanged by repeating a typical month.
536: 
537: <a id="acceptance-tests"></a>
538: 
539: ### 7.7 Acceptance test specifications
540: 
541: These are independently checked expected outcomes for a future implementation. Use the fixed reference bundle. The **base request** is 3,000 monthly runs, 10 GB, 100,000 records, and explicit AI USD 0. Each case/variant starts independently from that base.
542: 
543: Match positions by `slot` and bands by `band_order`; separately assert ordering. With valid sources, C05/C06/C14 cover three priceable alternatives and C07/C09/C17 cover two, while preserving three positions; C18 covers partial pricing. These are internal sales alternatives with common inputs, not an external audience mode. Apply 7.4–7.6 presence, disclosure, precision, and reconciliation rules to every case. Focused cases below assert the stated values; C14 defines the complete available comparison. Monetary numerals are exact values, not formatted-string assertions. Blank means omitted/null/empty text; zero remains explicit.
544: 
545: #### C01 — On-demand progressive bands
546: 
547: [Business example](#case-c01). Override monthly runs as below; other inputs remain at base. Assert monthly base plus run charge; resources net to zero. Included runs remain 50, and the base remains \$500.
548: 
549: | Runs | Monthly total USD | Runs | Monthly total USD |
550: |---:|---:|---:|---:|
551: | 0 | 500.00 | 50 | 500.00 |
552: | 51 | 505.00 | 300 | 1,750.00 |
553: | 301 | 1,752.50 | 1,000 | 3,500.00 |
554: | 1,001 | 3,501.25 | 5,000 | 8,500.00 |
555: | 5,001 | 8,500.50 | 25,000 | 18,500.00 |
556: | 25,001 | 18,500.30 | 100,000 | 41,000.00 |
557: | 100,001 | 41,000.14 | 1,000,000 | 167,000.00 |
558: | 1,000,001 | 167,000.12 | | |
559: 
560: For 301 runs, band 1 has 250 runs/\$1,250; band 2 has 1 run/\$2.50; all later counts are zero. Repeating this monthly estimate produces the same charge each time, without preserving a previous month's counter or discount.
561: 
562: #### C02 — Annual anchor excess-run rates
563: 
564: [Business example](#case-c02). Base request selects \$24,000 and \$60,000 commitments. Exact rate numerators/denominators are `2000/1000` and `5000/5000`; unit rates are \$2 and \$1 respectively. Add a focused arithmetic check: 100,000 excess runs at the \$600,000 package produce \$17,241.38.
565: 
566: #### C03 — Monthly resource credit
567: 
568: [Business example](#case-c03). Override runs to zero and vary AI with no extra capacity. For both available annual_1 and on-demand, verify:
569: 
570: | AI USD | Applied credit USD | Net resources USD/month |
571: |---:|---:|---:|
572: | 0 | 0 | 0 |
573: | 30 | 30 | 0 |
574: | 49.99 | 49.99 | 0 |
575: | 50 | 50 | 0 |
576: | 51 | 50 | 1 |
577: 
578: At AI \$30, unused credit is \$20 and expires; on-demand monthly total is \$500 and annual_1 annual total is \$24,000. The same \$50 credit applies at every annual anchor, verified with each anchor's exact run quantity and AI \$51. It never reduces base or commitment.
579: 
580: #### C04 — Unlisted annual commitment
581: 
582: [Business example](#case-c04). The reference annual schedule contains exactly \$24,000, \$60,000, \$120,000, \$300,000, \$600,000, \$1,200,000 commitments. A \$42,000 package is absent and must not be synthesized. Base request returns \$24,000/\$60,000. There is no request field for inventing an intermediate commitment.
583: 
584: #### C05 — Annual options around estimated runs
585: 
586: [Business example](#case-c05). Assert selected annual commitments in ascending order:
587: 
588: | Monthly runs | annual_1 USD | annual_2 USD |
589: |---:|---:|---:|
590: | 3,000 | 24,000 | 60,000 |
591: | 10,000 | 60,000 | 120,000 |
592: | 50,000 | 120,000 | 300,000 |
593: | 100,000 | 300,000 | 600,000 |
594: | 500,000 | 600,000 | 1,200,000 |
595: 
596: At 3,000 runs, annual_1 has 24,000 excess runs and \$48,000 run charge; annual_2 has 24,000 unused runs and zero excess charge.
597: 
598: #### C06 — Exact annual quota match
599: 
600: [Business example](#case-c06). Exact matches select these commitments; the matching package has zero excess and zero unused runs:
601: 
602: | Monthly runs | annual_1 USD | annual_2 USD |
603: |---:|---:|---:|
604: | 1,000 | 24,000 | unavailable |
605: | 5,000 | 24,000 | 60,000 |
606: | 17,000 | 60,000 | 120,000 |
607: | 85,000 | 120,000 | 300,000 |
608: | 290,000 | 300,000 | 600,000 |
609: | 1,000,000 | 600,000 | 1,200,000 |
610: 
611: At 5,000, annual_1 has 48,000 excess runs and \$96,000 run charge. A higher price at the lower package does not change ordering or selection.
612: 
613: #### C07 — Low estimated run usage
614: 
615: [Business example](#case-c07). At 500 monthly runs: annual_1 commitment \$24,000; included/estimated/unused = 12,000/6,000/6,000 runs; excess and run charge zero. annual_2 is unavailable with no numeric breakdown; overall status remains complete. At zero runs, unused annual runs are 12,000 and commitment remains \$24,000.
616: 
617: #### C08 — Paid quota blocks
618: 
619: [Business example](#case-c08). Base run count keeps annual_1 at the minimum package. Override selected capacity and assert its resources before credit:
620: 
621: | Selected GB / records | Extra storage / table blocks | Provided GB / records | Extra storage / table USD/month |
622: |---|---|---|---|
623: | 0 / 0 | 0 / 0 | 40 / 400,000 | 0 / 0 |
624: | 40 / 400,000 | 0 / 0 | 40 / 400,000 | 0 / 0 |
625: | 40.1 / 400,001 | 1 / 1 | 41 / 500,000 | 1 / 50 |
626: | 41 / 400,001 | 1 / 1 | 41 / 500,000 | 1 / 50 |
627: | 41 / 500,000 | 1 / 1 | 41 / 500,000 | 1 / 50 |
628: | 41.000000001 / 500,001 | 2 / 2 | 42 / 600,000 | 2 / 100 |
629: 
630: Observed consumption is absent from the contract and cannot change these purchased-capacity charges.
631: 
632: #### C09 — High estimated run usage
633: 
634: [Business example](#case-c09). At 2,000,000 monthly runs: annual_1 commitment \$1,200,000; included/estimated/excess = 12,000,000/24,000,000/12,000,000; rate \$0.10, run charge \$1,200,000, annual total \$2,400,000. annual_2 is unavailable. On-demand's last band has 1,000,000 runs/\$120,000; monthly total is \$287,000. No extended commitment is created.
635: 
636: #### C10 — Combined resource credit
637: 
638: [Business example](#case-c10). Base with 41 GB, 400,001 records, AI \$30: annual_1 storage/table/AI/credit/net = \$1/\$50/\$30/\$50/\$31 monthly; twelve-month net contribution \$372. This is one credit across all eligible resources, not one per item.
639: 
640: #### C11 — Annual excess-rate precision
641: 
642: [Business example](#case-c11). At 17,100 monthly runs, annual_1 selects the \$120,000 commitment: included 204,000, estimated 205,200, excess 1,200, unused 0; exact rate `10000/17000`; annual excess charge \$705.88, not \$708. annual_2 is \$300,000. Do not round the rate first.
643: 
644: #### C12 — Blank AI cost
645: 
646: [Business example](#case-c12). At 301 monthly runs, independently omit AI, set it null, or use empty text. Each gives effective AI zero and `ai_cost_assumed_zero = true`, with a disclosure. On-demand monthly/annual totals are \$1,752.50/\$21,030, credit zero. Pending AI template rates do not block the result.
647: 
648: #### C13 — Missing required estimate input
649: 
650: [Business example](#case-c13). Independently test omission, null, and empty text for each of runs, storage, and records. Each produces `incomplete`, an `INPUT_REQUIRED` issue identifying that field, empty options, and no calculated totals. When all three are blank, report all three issues. Blank optional AI adds no issue.
651: 
652: Preserve named variants C13a (runs omitted), C13b (storage null), and C13c (records empty text); the other blank combinations extend their coverage.
653: 
654: #### C14 — Full three-option comparison
655: 
656: [Business example](#case-c14). Inputs: 3,000 runs, 41 GB, 400,001 records, AI \$30. Status complete, issues empty, months 12, assumed-zero flag false. Context exactly matches the supplied `price_books.csv` identity, schema metadata, and verified CSV fingerprint, plus the applicable policy version from `plan_pricing_policies.csv`. All three options are available with no reason, ordered annual_1, annual_2, on_demand.
657: 
658: | Applicable field | annual_1 | annual_2 | on_demand |
659: |---|---:|---:|---:|
660: | Annual commitment / monthly equivalent USD | 24,000 / 2,000 | 60,000 / 5,000 | absent |
661: | Monthly base USD | absent | absent | 500 |
662: | Included / estimated runs | 12,000 / 36,000 | 60,000 / 36,000 | 50 / 3,000 |
663: | Excess / unused runs | 24,000 / 0 | 0 / 24,000 | absent |
664: | Run period | annual | annual | monthly |
665: | Exact rate numerator / denominator | 2,000 / 1,000 | 5,000 / 5,000 | absent |
666: | Run charge USD | 48,000 | 0 | 5,500 |
667: | Included / selected / provided GB | 40 / 41 / 41 | 100 / 41 / 100 | 10 / 41 / 41 |
668: | Included / selected / provided records | 400,000 / 400,001 / 500,000 | 1,000,000 / 400,001 / 1,000,000 | 100,000 / 400,001 / 500,000 |
669: | Extra storage / table blocks | 1 / 1 | 0 / 0 | 31 / 4 |
670: | Extra storage / table USD/month | 1 / 50 | 0 / 0 | 31 / 200 |
671: | AI / credit / net USD/month | 30 / 50 / 31 | 30 / 30 / 0 | 30 / 50 / 211 |
672: | Annual total USD | 72,372 | 60,000 | 74,532 |
673: | Monthly equivalent USD | 6,031 | 5,000 | 6,211 |
674: | Monthly total USD | absent | absent | 6,211 |
675: 
676: On-demand bands, as `(order, first, last, count, rate, charge)`: `(1,51,300,250,5,1250)`, `(2,301,1000,700,2.50,1750)`, `(3,1001,5000,2000,1.25,2500)`, `(4,5001,25000,0,0.50,0)`, `(5,25001,100000,0,0.30,0)`, `(6,100001,1000000,0,0.14,0)`, `(7,1000001,absent,0,0.12,0)`. Annual options omit band lists. Disclosures cover draft status, repeated month, and no invoice/approved offer; no assumed-zero AI disclosure. All effective input assumptions retain the supplied values.
677: 
678: #### C15 — Half-cent rounding after credit
679: 
680: [Business example](#case-c15). At 1,000 monthly runs with AI \$50.005: annual_1 and on-demand have credit \$50 and net \$0.01/month, contributing \$0.12/year. Annual_1 annual/monthly equivalent = \$24,000.12/\$2,000.01. Preserve AI \$50.005. With AI \$50.004 instead, net is zero; with \$30.005, applied credit is exactly \$30.005 and net zero. These distinguish raw amounts from rounded displays.
681: 
682: #### C16 — Invalid estimate input
683: 
684: [Business example](#case-c16). Independently apply each invalid variant; expect `invalid`, field-identified `INPUT_INVALID`, empty options, and no calculated outputs:
685: 
686: Preserve C16a (runs -1), C16b (storage -1), and C16c (records -1); extend these with the following independent variants.
687: 
688: | Field(s) | Invalid variants |
689: |---|---|
690: | Every input | Negative value; nonempty text such as `"1"`, `"abc"`, `"1,000"`, `"$50"`, or `"NaN"`; whitespace-only text; Boolean; array; object; nonfinite numerical value supplied through a non-JSON adapter |
691: | Runs and records | Fractional quantity such as 1.5; 1,000,000,000,001 |
692: | Storage | 1,000,000,000,000.1; 40.0000000001 (10 fractional places) |
693: | AI | 1,000,000,000,000.1; 50.0000001 (7 fractional places) |
694: 
695: Also independently reject request values `null`, `[]`, `true`, or `5`; malformed JSON such as `{"monthly_runs":}`; and duplicate JSON fields such as `{"monthly_runs":1,"monthly_runs":2,"storage_quota_gb":0,"table_quota_records":0}`. Each identifies `request` with `INPUT_INVALID`. Independently add each extra field `annual_commitment_usd`, `quote_date`, `currency`, `audience`, or `scenarios` to the valid base request; each identifies the unknown field with `INPUT_INVALID`. An empty object produces the three required-input issues under C13.
696: 
697: For every invalid or incomplete input variant in C13/C16/C19, assert no pricing-source lookup or calculation occurs, `options` is empty, and assumptions/context/disclosures/totals are absent. Repeat one invalid request with an unavailable pricing source: return the input error alone, not `PRICING_UNAVAILABLE`. This proves that invalid data is screened before pricing begins.
698: 
699: At the exact upper bound, each field independently remains valid; storage `40.000000001` and AI `50.000001` are valid precision-boundary values. They must not be rounded to fit input limits. NaN/Infinity are invalid JSON; reject at the adapter boundary without pricing if encountered.
700: 
701: #### C17 — Exact minimum annual quota
702: 
703: [Business example](#case-c17). At 1,000 monthly runs: annual_1 included/estimated/excess/unused = 12,000/12,000/0/0, run charge zero, annual total \$24,000. annual_2 is unavailable with a reason and no numeric fields; status complete.
704: 
705: #### C18 — Unavailable on-demand base price
706: 
707: [Business example](#case-c18). Valid base input with an unavailable on-demand base gives partial status and on-demand unpriced; both annual options remain available. Use isolated source-access faults or fixture copies; never alter the delivered reference bundle. For non-fingerprint fixture tests, regenerate the fixture fingerprint so integrity failure does not mask the intended fault.
708: 
709: | Additional independent source fault | Expected effect |
710: |---|---|
711: | Missing/duplicate on-demand plan; overlapping/gapped/negative-rate band | On-demand unpriced; annual options available |
712: | Missing/duplicate anchor, non-increasing anchor quantities, inconsistent annual minimum, interpolation/top-extension policy introduced | Both annual positions unpriced; on-demand available |
713: | Missing annual credit allowance | Both selected annual positions unpriced; on-demand available |
714: | Missing/unready/duplicate ready storage rate; zero block size; broken item/meter reference; record price linked to GB unit | All otherwise available dependent options unpriced; status partial |
715: | Wrong/missing shared book, mixed-book bundle, fingerprint mismatch, unsupported shared rounding policy | All three positions unpriced; context omitted |
716: | Missing pending AI token prices or excluded trial/operations data | No pricing effect; base request remains complete |
717: 
718: Each unpriced position has `PRICING_UNAVAILABLE` explanation and no numeric breakdown. At 500 runs with only the annual credit missing, annual_1 is unpriced, annual_2 remains intentionally unavailable, and on-demand stays available. Mutations represent faults, not alternative commercial offers.
719: 
720: #### C19 — Simultaneous missing and invalid inputs
721: 
722: [Business example](#case-c19). Runs -1 and storage omitted: status invalid, issues identify both `INPUT_INVALID` runs and `INPUT_REQUIRED` storage, options empty. Invalid takes precedence over incomplete. With runs and storage both missing, status incomplete and both required issues are reported. Do not price until corrected.
723: 
724: #### C20 — Explicit zero AI cost
725: 
726: [Business example](#case-c20). Base with explicit AI 0: effective AI 0, `ai_cost_assumed_zero = false`, no assumed-zero disclosure. Available annual totals are \$72,000/\$60,000 and on-demand monthly total \$6,000. This is an explicit estimate, not a statement that actual AI usage is free.

(End of file - total 726 lines)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:22 AM

I reviewed Section 7.7 and confirm the independent acceptance specifications C01–C20 and their variants. Retain the documented expected values, exact precision, ordering and presence assertions, isolated source-fault tests, input-before-source behavior, and full C14 reconciliation. Keep the nine delivered CSVs intact when exercising source faults. Please present the complete requirements for final review.

Thinking

**Registering unchanged action**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:22 AM

The acceptance specifications are confirmed. I’ll present the complete requirements as the separate final review before implementation.

patch_authoring_state · expected_stage_id: build, summary: The user confirmed the acceptance specifications and requested the compl...

Call ID: call_3d807c8343ac40b89495305fbf27d92e|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57743f48887d0b97330e057b64a22Arguments

{
  "expected_stage_id": "build",
  "summary": "The user confirmed the acceptance specifications and requested the complete requirements review.",
  "tasks": {
    "upsert": [
      {
        "id": "requirements",
        "title": "Align Pricing and Acceptance Requirements",
        "goal": "Confirm the complete pricing behavior, boundaries and independent expectations before implementation.",
        "status": "IN_PROGRESS",
        "progress_note": "The pricing details and independent acceptance specifications are confirmed. The complete requirements are ready for final review.",
        "confirmation_required": true,
        "user_confirmed": false,
        "resource_ids": [
          "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
          "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-technical-contract.md"
        ],
        "subtasks": [
          {
            "id": "req-scope",
            "title": "Align scope and terminology",
            "goal": "Confirm quote scope, measurements and terminology.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The scope and terminology are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-model",
            "title": "Align pricing model",
            "goal": "Confirm charges, allowances, eligibility and exclusions.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The pricing model is confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-interface",
            "title": "Align requests and results",
            "goal": "Confirm request and result behavior as separate topics.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The sales inputs and detailed comparison are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-flow",
            "title": "Align pricing rules and flow",
            "goal": "Confirm conditions, ordering, boundaries and stopping paths.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The pricing rules and flow are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-cases",
            "title": "Align examples and limitations",
            "goal": "Confirm independent example outcomes and material limitations.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The independent examples and limitations are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-data",
            "title": "Align pricing data and field contracts",
            "goal": "Confirm pricing data and exact business inputs and outputs.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The pricing data and field contract is confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-rules",
            "title": "Align detailed rules and errors",
            "goal": "Confirm rule bindings, rounding, validations and error behavior.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The detailed calculations, rounding and error handling are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-tests",
            "title": "Align acceptance expectations",
            "goal": "Confirm reproducible cases and independent expected outcomes.",
            "status": "COMPLETED",
            "progress_note": "The independent acceptance specifications are confirmed.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": true,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          },
          {
            "id": "req-final",
            "title": "Review complete pricing requirements",
            "goal": "Confirm the complete requirements and implementation scope before implementation.",
            "status": "IN_PROGRESS",
            "progress_note": "The complete requirements are ready for final review.",
            "confirmation_required": true,
            "user_confirmed": false,
            "resource_ids": [
              "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md"
            ]
          }
        ]
      }
    ]
  },
  "actions": {
    "upsert": [
      {
        "id": "confirm-requirements-final",
        "question": "[pricing-requirements-alignment.md](</conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md#1.%20Purpose%20and%20scope>) — Build Output. Please review the complete requirements, including [pricing behavior](</conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md#4.%20How%20to%20calculate%20a%20quote>) and [acceptance specifications](</conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md#7.7%20Acceptance%20test%20specifications>). Together they specify the internal comparison and its expected results. Does the complete understanding match your business? Confirmation enables implementation; identify corrections.",
        "resolution_mode": "BLOCKING",
        "option_selection_mode": "SINGLE_SELECT",
        "options": [
          "Confirm the complete pricing requirements",
          "Describe corrections to the complete requirements"
        ],
        "acceptance_option": "Confirm the complete pricing requirements",
        "resource_ref": {
          "resource_id": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/pricing-requirements-alignment.md",
          "version": 4
        }
      }
    ]
  }
}

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:22 AM

I reviewed the complete pricing requirements, revision 4, and confirm the internal estimator, its interface and calculation requirements, and independent acceptance specifications. Please implement and verify that scope using the nine fixed sources and supported pricing-engine capabilities. Keep the documented expected outcomes as the verification baseline and surface any concrete capability gaps or mismatches with evidence.

Thinking

**Reading the guide**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:23 AM

The complete pricing requirements are confirmed. I’ll implement against the fixed sources and verify the candidate against your independent cases, keeping any mismatches visible.

Agent activity 2 items

read · /constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/task3/README.md · limit: 2000, offset: 1

Call ID: call_95ef0cb490514d7a8b10380839836817|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af577686b8487d0b1d4aec63b8303f8Arguments

{
  "file_path": "/constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/task3/README.md",
  "limit": 2000,
  "offset": 1
}

Result

<path>/constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/task3/README.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: # Task 3: Implement and verify pricing
2:
3: Read the [implementation work contract](../pricing-behavior.md#task-3-implement-and-verify-pricing)
4: for its Subtasks, Outputs and Done Criteria alongside this guide.
5:
6: This guide owns pricing implementation, compilation, verification and
7: technical repairs. These are native pricing/verification operations through the installed CLI;
8: business Task 3 does not create a new command group or runtime stage. Requirements
9: alignment belongs to [Task 2](../task2/README.md); use its existing
10: [template](../task2/pricing_requirement_alignment_template.md) to reconcile against
11: accepted intent. Use the [results template](test_result_alignment_template.md) for
12: the separate final demonstrated-results review.
13:
14: ## 1. Accept the handoff and start implementation
15:
16: Start only from Task 2's accepted requirements document and implementation scope,
17: with Task 1's accepted sources. Before lengthy contract reading, declaration
18: writing or commands, activate Task 3 and explain the handoff to the user:
19:
20: - Acknowledge that requirements are accepted and implementation/verification starts.
21: - Say this work may take substantial time, normally needs no continuous
22: participation, and the user can attend to other work.
23: - Name later new-business/changed-dependency decisions and final result acceptance;
24: AI whole-document review at item 9 adds no separate user confirmation.
25:
26: Follow the shared [extended-work communication](../README.md#extended-work-communication)
27: for examples, factual progress, waiting and host-capability limits. Merely saying
28: there may be multiple rounds of checks or repairs does not tell the user they can
29: attend to other work. Do not imply autonomous execution continues through a
30: required decision or promise unverified page-close continuity or notifications.
31:
32: ```mermaid
33: flowchart TD
34: A["Accepted requirements and sources"] --> B["Activate Task 3; explain extended work<br/>User can attend to other work"]
35: B --> C["Read contracts for next operation; author and compile policy"]
36: C --> D{"Compilation passes?"}
37: D -->|No| R["Retain diagnostics; repair owning input"]
38: D -->|Yes| Q["Check a small set of accepted quotes<br/>Normal, allowed absence and relevant stopped outcomes"]
39: Q --> T{"Native outcome and business response match?"}
40: T -->|Declaration defect| R
41: T -->|Yes| E["Prepare verification cases; inspect readiness"]
42: T -->|Changed business meaning| N
43: E --> F{"Checks and reconciliation valid?"}
44: F -->|Technical defect| R
45: F -->|Yes| G["Item 9: AI whole-document review and exact accepted bindings"]
46: G --> H{"Current accepted intent and execution authority?"}
47: H -->|Reconcile bindings| G
48: H -->|Yes| I["Execute full verification"]
49: I --> J{"Applicable work passes; accepted skips disclosed;<br/>publication and accounting valid?"}
50: J -->|Technical defect| R
51: J -->|Yes| K["Item 10: completeness audit and latest-document acceptance"]
52: K --> L{"Final document accepted?"}
53: L -->|Awaiting acceptance| K
54: L -->|Yes| M["Task 3 complete; Task 4 packaging"]
55: R -->|Policy| C
56: R -->|Verification inputs| E
57: R -->|Execution or publication| G
58: F -->|Changed business meaning| N["Reopen affected Task 2 alignment"]
59: H -->|Changed reviewed meaning or dependencies| N
60: R -->|Missing business meaning| N
61: L -->|Changed meaning| N
62: N -->|Accepted revised requirements| B
63: N -->|Changed source meaning| O["Reopen affected Task 1 sources"]
64: O --> N
65: ```
66:
67: Establish independent expectations through the accepted
68: [requirements](../task2/README.md#independent-expectations-and-historical-facts),
69: never from candidate observations. Retain every business case in the
70: inventory, with independent provenance and prior attempts, through all operations below.
71: [Expected input rejections](#invalid-input-variants) remain in the active
72: scenario inventory and require actual rejection evidence and accepted response checks.
73:
74: ### Recorded resources and workspace
75:
76: - Use the accepted Task 1 handoff and Task 2 requirements, this guide, the
77: [results template](test_result_alignment_template.md), and the recorded [shared guide](../README.md) for common meanings, units, bounds, result
78: authority, and sandbox transport.
79: - Read only recorded instructions and necessary lookup sections within Build's
80: authoring boundary. A link grants no additional reading or action scope.
81: Resolve missing context through [forward-only corrections](../README.md#forward-only-corrections).
82: - Before authoring declarations, [select the applicable schema entry](#read-the-contracts-and-author).
83: Keep customer work in the authoring workspace and supplied resources unchanged.
84: - Follow sections 2–6 in order. Use conditional features only when confirmed
85: requirements call for them.
86:
87: | Path in shared `WORK_ROOT` | Contents or use |
88: |---|---|
89: | `sources/` | Accepted sources and `SOURCE_PROJECT` for policy compilation |
90: | `policy/` | Policy input |
91: | `compile_changes/` | Retained verification changes |
92: | `verification/` | Verification declarations, checks, evidence, and selected runs |
93: | Root | Compiled `pricing_spec.yaml`, accepted `pricing_requirements_alignment.md` and separate `test_result_alignment.md` |
94:
95: Verification commands use `WORK_ROOT` with project-relative paths. Use YAML for
96: structured declarations, changes, and file results. Keep active filenames stable
97: and retain prior revisions before replacement. Avoid numbered active outputs.
98: Source copies are limited to the unchanged resource staging for
99: [early quote checks](#early-quote-checks) and declared
100: [isolated source variants](#isolated-source-variants).
101:
102: ### Resolve supported issues before escalating
103:
104: Apply this loop to policy compilation, verification readiness, execution, and
105: report checking. Keep dependent actions pending until their gate passes.
106:
107: 1. Retain prior revisions and the actual attempt. Read the envelope and saved
108: output, including errors, factual gaps, owner IDs, and nested diagnostics.
109: Empty transport errors alone do not establish success.
110: 2. Consult the [owning contract](#command-and-declaration-reference), applicable
111: [schema entry](#read-the-contracts-and-author), and [repair route](#repair-routes).
112: Use the [policy command error reference](policy_command_errors.md) for
113: verification codes. Reuse current definitions already read; inspect the failing
114: operation and its dependencies rather than rereading unrelated policy/schema
115: sections. If a finding repeats, identify the unchanged cause before another edit
116: or invocation. Distinguish an error in agent-authored inputs
117: from missing business facts, unavailable data, or an external capability or
118: permission. A failed call alone does not establish which dependency is missing.
119: 3. Apply supported corrections through the owning input or documented recovery
120: operation. Group related corrections before recompiling. The agent owns
121: technical declarations. Preserve fixed sources, independent answers, required
122: cases, and failed attempts. Leave generated specifications, checks,
123: and summaries tool-owned. Derive technical representations from established
124: business meaning, accepted sources and the applicable contracts, retaining their
125: basis. Authoring and testing that representation is agent work; an absent worked
126: example does not make it an unknown business answer. Contracts do not supply
127: missing business facts or authority, and candidate observations cannot supply
128: independent expected answers.
129: 4. Rerun the affected canonical operations and inspect current results. Retry
130: after a correction, changed prerequisite, documented recovery step, or reason
131: to expect new evidence. Once the gate passes, resume the
132: [alignment and execution route](#alignment-and-execution-guide). Reconcile current
133: status and retained blocker claims with the latest authoritative results;
134: replace superseded conclusions in current status while preserving prior attempts.
135: Admission of a declaration does not establish that its expected result is correct.
136:
137: Escalate only when supported investigation or repair establishes a remaining
138: dependency that available interfaces and authority cannot resolve. State the exact
139: missing fact, resource, capability or permission, the applicable repair route and
140: attempts with their observed results, and the external action needed. Keep
141: independent permitted work moving:
142:
143: - Ask the business owner a focused question about the missing or disputed
144: meaning or independent answer, including its business consequence.
145: - Use shared forward-only corrections for missing context or resources. Route
146: changed source meaning to source revalidation and acceptance.
147: - Report unresolved tooling, capability, provisioning, permission, or host
148: dependencies to their owner in the existing authoring document. Include factual
149: diagnostics and the required action.
150:
151: Use existing interfaces and permissions. Recovery grants no Python source access
152: or editing, invented authority, or waiver of evidence, review, or completion
153: requirements. Keep factual tool outputs and use the existing document for status
154: instead of creating a separate blocking report.
155:
156: ### Command and declaration reference
157:
158: Customer authoring uses Bash with `pricing-engine policy <action>` and the
159: bounded `package run_quote` calls described in [early quote checks](#early-quote-checks).
160: The commands below apply directly in the v2 sandbox with resolved absolute mounted
161: paths. Follow the shared process-output contract and each action's write scope.
162:
163: #### Pricing and verification command interface
164:
165: | Action | Responsibility |
166: |---|---|
167: | [`compile`](#2-maintain-and-compile-the-policy) | Check policy input; write policy YAML or diagnostics |
168: | [`compile_verification`](#3-compile-verification-cases-and-check-readiness) | Apply scenario/request operations and check full execution readiness |
169: | [`inspect_verification`](#verification-tools) | Inspect declarations/candidate, families, direct check targets, inventory, and gaps |
170: | [`verify`](#5-execute-verification-and-check-the-report) | Execute unchanged declarations, validate the report in memory, and publish selected-run outputs |
171:
172: All four actions use `pricing-engine policy <action>` in local/CI calls.
173: `compile_verification` can omit `--input` for check-only calls. `verify` requires
174: its documented execution arguments; flags do not infer execution mode.
175: For declared local source fixtures only, use `source profile` on the isolated
176: copy as documented in [isolated source variants](#isolated-source-variants).
177: Task 4 uses `package validate`.
178: Task 3 may use `package run_quote` only for the early implementation checks below;
179: this does not authorize package assembly or finalization.
180:
181: Pricing preserves monetary strings and its existing diagnostics; verification
182: preserves exact numeric Decimal scalars and blocked/error envelopes. Normally
183: returned checks and execution outcomes are described with
184: [verification compilation](#compilation-response) and [execution](#verification-execution).
185: Common argument and error handling remains:
186:
187: | Outcome | Response and publication |
188: |---|---|
189: | Missing/unknown policy action | Default `valid: false` CLI argument diagnostic |
190: | Required/trailing argument error after selecting a verification action | Blocked `CLI_ARGUMENT` |
191: | Caught verification input/storage error | Exit 2; diagnostics appear on CLI stderr and do not automatically write `--output` |
192: | Unexpected verification failure | CLI exit 3 with `INTERNAL`; preserve stderr |
193:
194: Empty stderr or a successful invocation alone establishes neither
195: confirmation nor Task completion.
196:
197: ### Read the contracts and author
198:
199: Before authoring an input, read the recorded existing
200: `<REFERENCE_ROOT>/task3/schema.yaml` [bundle](schema.yaml). Select the relevant
201: entry with the complete bundle's `$defs` and local dependencies; its
202: definitions-library root alone does not select an input type. Follow the schema
203: documentation: field descriptions, required properties, admitted values, defaults,
204: bounds, and conditional requirements. The owning command checks semantic validity
205: after authoring; schema shape does not replace those checks.
206: Keep the complete bundle available for reference resolution, but read the selected
207: entry and its referenced definitions for the current decision. Reuse that context
208: while its revision and meaning remain current; reread affected definitions when a
209: changed contract or diagnostic challenges it. A context handoff should retain exact
210: source locators and unresolved decisions in existing host state, not duplicate the
211: schema or restart the entire read/compile sequence.
212:
213: | Input | Schema entry |
214: |---|---|
215: | `policy/pricing_policy_input.yaml` | `#/$defs/PricingPolicyInput` |
216: | `compile_changes/verification_[ts].yaml` | `#/$defs/CompileVerificationChanges` |
217:
218: The bundle is a syntax resource, separate from customer declarations and generated
219: specifications, with no application runtime dependency. Missing, unreadable, or
220: known incompatible bundles remain blocked under the shared forward-only
221: correction rules. Do not generate a replacement, wrapper, or Python helper, import engine internals, guess
222: keys, or borrow frozen sample resources.
223:
224: After reading the installed bundle and parsing its YAML into `bundle`, entry
225: selection can be represented in memory as follows; this grants no permission to
226: author a helper:
227:
228: ```python
229: policy_input_schema = {
230: "$schema": bundle["$schema"],
231: "$ref": "#/$defs/PricingPolicyInput",
232: "$defs": bundle["$defs"],
233: }
234: verification_changes_schema = {
235: **policy_input_schema,
236: "$ref": "#/$defs/CompileVerificationChanges",
237: }
238: ```
239:
240: Resolve the accepted Section 7 references before translating rules: source
241: bindings in 7.2, field contracts in 7.3/7.4, and rule connections in 7.5. Use the
242: accepted source dictionary for column meanings. Do not fill gaps from a similarly
243: named field, a sample value, generic template prose or candidate output. Reopen
244: missing business meaning through the owning Task; keep mechanical declaration
245: choices with the agent and the schema.
246:
247: Follow the shared [representation conventions](../README.md#representation-conventions)
248: as the default, retaining genuine integration exceptions in the accepted review.
249:
250: Implement the normalization conventions agreed in Section 7 of
251: `pricing_requirements_alignment.md`. Before finalizing input, calculation and output
252: declarations:
253:
254: - Look for representation differences between the aligned documents/data and the
255: engine contracts: dates/clocks, exact decimals, percentages, units, output
256: types and structure, option identity, reason/issue shape and conditional presence.
257: Consult the recorded schema field documentation instead of copying a source's
258: spelling or an illustrative output shape into an incompatible declaration.
259: - Normalize unambiguous representations through the owning supported source/input
260: normalization, expression conversion or response formatter. For example, an
261: established noon boundary can be authored as `12:00:00` where that field requires
262: seconds. Preserve original source files, business meaning and required precision;
263: an ambiguous timezone, unit or meaning returns to its owning Task 2 alignment.
264: - Follow the shared [preparation ownership](../README.md#request-preparation-and-normalization-ownership)
265: when constructing scenario requests. Positive cases use the declared native
266: types; invalid-input cases retain the deliberately invalid raw values. Do not
267: copy source-cell encodings into request fields or put automatic request repair
268: in a test harness. An accepted alternative conversational form and a rejected
269: native representation test different boundaries; identify which is being checked.
270: - Keep normalization explicit and owned once. Preserve required input rejections;
271: do not silently coerce invalid quote inputs or replace missing facts. Compile
272: declarations and check the affected input/output representations before pricing
273: execution; use existing contracts rather than adding a conversion helper.
274: - Before classifying a mismatch as missing engine capability, distinguish an
275: incorrect declaration or serialization, an equivalent supported representation,
276: a real consumer requirement, and a business-rule conflict. Repair mechanical
277: mistakes under existing authority. If a supported shape would change an accepted
278: output contract, propose the smallest reconciliation through the existing
279: alignment review; do not silently rewrite expectations to match observed output.
280: Preserve the original requirement, independent answer and failed evidence in
281: host history. After agreement, update the owning fields, examples and tests
282: together and check the affected paths. Required prices, refusal reasons, missing
283: facts and native verification outcomes cannot be normalized away.
284:
285: Implement the aligned business-relative field names consistently in response
286: bindings and acceptance expectations. For business input-issue locators, use the
287: existing schema-documented `input_issue_path: relative` response setting and
288: relative fields in explicit issue mappings. Preserve the native request envelope
289: and each verification target's actual pointer syntax; do not copy a documentation
290: prefix into a business field or remove a required native wrapper.
291:
292: ### Early quote checks
293:
294: After successful policy compilation, perform these checks before expanding repeated
295: verification declarations; do not wait until the full scenario inventory is encoded.
296: Choose the smallest set of accepted Section 7 examples covering the declaration
297: patterns being introduced, usually two to five requests. Include a normal quote,
298: an allowed omitted/null fact if supported, and a relevant stopped outcome. When
299: applicable, select a case combining independent issues or a valid condition with
300: another invalid operand; a fully populated happy path alone cannot check those
301: branches. One request can cover several patterns. Keep all accepted cases in the
302: inventory; this small set is implementation feedback, not reduced acceptance scope.
303:
304: Use the existing `package run_quote` command under the host's actual
305: implementation execution authority, with accepted source/requirements revisions,
306: the current checked policy and independently prepared expectations for those requests.
307: Complete verification declarations, full readiness and item 9 reconciliation are
308: not prerequisites for these checks. Missing authority or changed accepted meaning
309: still follows the existing owner route; add no approval step or infer consent.
310:
311: Use a host-selected temporary resource directory outside the deliverable package.
312: Stage exact copies of the accepted `SOURCE_PROJECT`'s `schema.yaml`, `sources.yaml`,
313: `catalog_manifest.yaml` and `data/` under `<CHECK_RESOURCES>/pricing/`, alongside
314: the current checked `<WORK_ROOT>/pricing_spec.yaml`. Preserve source-relative paths
315: and accepted bytes; refresh the staged copies when their current revisions change.
316: Do not create application files, alter source data or substitute a failed compilation.
317: Only this temporary resource copy and existing host evidence are writable for the
318: check; the quote command itself reads resources and returns its result on stdout.
319: Existing source-access permissions still apply, including for live sources.
320:
321: ```bash
322: pricing-engine package run_quote --resources "<CHECK_RESOURCES>" --request '<complete native request JSON/YAML>'
323: ```
324:
325: Pass each actual request as one safely quoted argument. Retain the request, selected
326: policy/source revisions, full JSON stdout, stderr and actual process status in host
327: evidence. Inspect both the native outcome and business response: returned types,
328: option/issue identities, field presence and one decisive exposed calculation.
329: For an admitted incomplete quote, check the independently permitted amount as well
330: as its status. Reconcile native publication permissions with the response binding
331: using their schema descriptions; optional admission alone does not permit display.
332: Unavailable evidence is not an observed value. Never derive expected answers from
333: the result or invent zero for a missing descriptive fact. Repair established
334: declaration errors and repeat only the affected check before expanding the suite.
335: A native price or zero exit status does not establish a correct business response:
336: check required keys, null versus omission, wire types, permitted amounts, issue
337: identity/order and relevant source ownership against the independent example.
338: Use the selected response models' field descriptions for availability requirements;
339: do not translate the word “required” mechanically from an illustrative JSON shape.
340:
341: When one declaration pattern fails, inspect its sibling uses in the current policy
342: and verification inputs, correct the common authoring cause together, and rerun only
343: the affected examples. Reuse the corrected structural pattern, not its company-specific
344: references, units or expected values. Record the cause and affected cases in existing
345: Task progress/evidence; do not create another rule catalog or retry an unchanged guess.
346: If the same cause survives a correction, inspect its owning contract and exact
347: native findings before changing more fields or expanding tests.
348: A blocked pattern does not stop unrelated ready work. Retain its unmet cases
349: explicitly while continuing independent supported patterns; never count them as PASS.
350:
351: These are implementation feedback, not verification PASS, an additional workflow
352: phase or a required preview report/receipt. They cannot qualify packaging, replace
353: the complete case inventory or relax any `policy verify` or final handoff gate.
354:
355: ### Keep request requirements independent of pricing placement
356:
357: Own source-free request relationships in the existing request-prerequisite
358: controls, even when pricing uses nested, conditional or correlated populations.
359: Use the schema-documented identity, explicit required-member and ordering
360: contracts when their declared scope matches the accepted rule. Preserve actual
361: input order, original member paths, conditional applicability and missing versus
362: invalid classification. An allowed-value enum alone does not require every value
363: to occur; a strict ordering rule alone does not establish a start, cadence or
364: complete calendar. Keep one canonical control for each obligation rather than
365: copying the same predicate into admission and pricing. Preserve independent
366: expectations and native-path correspondence when moving an existing owner.
367: Distinguish continuous interval coverage from an exact roster of required periods.
368: A coverage gap does not by itself enumerate missing calendar months. Define the
369: required period identities once and use supported population/membership rules;
370: do not duplicate the same rule into twelve monthly predicates. Preserve boundary
371: date roles and explain any unsupported roster calculation instead of disguising
372: it as coverage or changing dates' business meaning.
373: Enforce the roster at admission only when the accepted rule rejects that request;
374: partial-price completeness belongs in ordinary business controls.
375:
376: ### Source failure ownership
377:
378: Reconcile accepted source-failure effects with the existing source-access
379: declarations before response composition. A universally required reference table
380: can establish quote validity even when no calculation reads its values; a
381: dependent failure scope without a consumer cannot enforce that obligation.
382: Use the declared global scope for an unconditional whole-quote prerequisite,
383: and preserve dependent or partitioned scope where unused records must remain
384: isolated. Follow the schema's acquisition and dependency restrictions. When an accepted
385: business guard gates later sources, place the complete dependent selection,
386: capture, calculation and publication cone inside that existing guarded owner;
387: guarding only a final total leaves its producers active. Keep source-free input
388: checks and independently required book facts with their own owners. Moving a
389: pricing flow does not authorize moving its request prerequisites behind source
390: work, duplicating those predicates, or manufacturing fallback values. For a
391: conditional lookup, such as a next tariff break, distinguish an inapplicable
392: branch from an applicable branch whose reference data is missing. Use the
393: existing guarded row owner for applicability; an optional selection is not a
394: substitute for that guard. Keep its selected-field captures inside the same
395: boundary, and preserve required lookup failure when the branch is active. Compare
396: required-table defects, used-record defects, unused-record defects and rejected
397: inputs together; do not map a successful result to an error in the response to
398: compensate for an unexpressed source obligation.
399:
400: Distinguish a source required for every price from a failure that must stop all
401: native work. If the accepted failure response still requires derived input facts,
402: keep those source-free facts in their own publication group. Existing dependent
403: acquisition, explicit source prerequisites and a pricing-population guard on the
404: actual book-selection state can stop dependent pricing while retaining those
405: facts. This does not make the book optional: every dependent price still requires
406: it, and source diagnostics remain visible. Do not replace unavailable source
407: metadata with constants, continue unnecessary price branches after a failed
408: prerequisite, or apply this arrangement where the contract requires a global stop.
409:
410: ### Qualifying declared workload capacity
411:
412: Use the policy's `workload_budget` field documentation to configure the accepted
413: application workload. Exercise an ordinary request and the documented maximum
414: through the actual packaged command with complete outputs and required evidence.
415: A default-budget refusal and an impractical execution cost are different findings:
416: record the actual native limit, process outcome, output size, latency and memory.
417: An explicit budget may change capacity only; preserve pricing, source contracts,
418: requests and independent answers, and verify the complete candidate package.
419: Passing a configured maximum does not establish an unstated performance target or
420: increase verification-suite retention. Keep unresolved resource costs visible.
421:
422: ### Comparing independent offers
423:
424: When accepted requirements compare independently available prices, declare that
425: calculation under the policy's explicit terminal `offer_comparison` owner. Follow
426: its field documentation and the existing row-flow, capture and publication schema.
427: Reuse the offers' permitted native amounts and existing arithmetic; do not price
428: again in a response binding or a helper. Retain the specified subtraction order,
429: including a legitimate zero or negative comparison.
430:
431: The native shared and contributing-offer decisions must qualify before comparison
432: captures run. Unavailable prices leave the comparison absent, while an applicable
433: comparison failure remains failed work without invalidating healthy offer prices.
434: Project the permitted child publication through the existing single-row response
435: binding with the accepted conditional presence rule. The terminal result is
436: complete-only; outer requiredness and unavailable-value behavior remain explicit.
437: Check healthy pairs,
438: commercial absence, each local/shared source failure and comparison failure;
439: complete individual offers alone do not prove the comparison obligation passed.
440:
441: ### Nested pricing and business response views
442:
443: Choose input presence rules from the accepted contract separately from length
444: and type rules. When an empty required array explicitly means missing work,
445: use the existing `empty_array` normalization mode; a positive minimum length
446: alone represents a different rejection. Keep nonempty malformed arrays invalid,
447: and do not apply that convention to legitimate empty optional work.
448:
449: When accepted requirements need nested usage or resource months, author the
450: supported recursive row declarations from the recorded schema. Keep each
451: population, local item/capture boundary, rounding group, and monthly credit in
452: pricing declarations. Retain explicit bounds and every applicable descendant;
453: do not flatten or duplicate the accepted request merely to bypass a capability.
454: Permitted complete publication groups can retain known fees while whole-row
455: pricing and strict reductions remain incomplete.
456:
457: Use the optional response declaration when the accepted application contract
458: needs a business view. Follow its schema models and field documentation with
459: complete `$defs`. Responses copy permitted publications and validated input
460: facts under the selected contract from the same execution; they do not select rates, regroup charges, round
461: prices, or grant release. Keep complete totals unavailable when their required
462: pricing is unsettled, and preserve known zero separately from unavailable null.
463:
464: Before authoring the response, classify each accepted field by what establishes
465: its meaning: fixed application metadata, admitted input, or a computed pricing
466: fact. A required disclosure such as "estimate, not bill" does not require a
467: successful pricing row. Use the existing fixed response composition for that
468: metadata instead of manufacturing a singleton pricing population to emit it.
469: Admitted assumptions retain their input meaning when pricing is unavailable;
470: they must not borrow a source-dependent price's availability.
471: Source metadata likewise needs its own actual source and publication owner;
472: failure of an unrelated price must not erase an independently permitted book
473: identity. Conversely, a valid input echo cannot establish an unavailable source
474: version or price.
475:
476: Keep conditional disclosures tied to their actual native Boolean facts and
477: owning scope. When the requirement limits them to complete pricing, retain that
478: completeness condition as well. Use whole-container availability for a context,
479: amount object or line list that must be absent when pricing is unavailable;
480: an object of null children is still present. Apply the same accepted absence
481: rule to scalar bindings through their existing unavailable convention; present
482: null, known zero and known false are distinct outcomes. Review declaration helpers
483: as well: choose unavailable behavior from each field's accepted contract instead
484: of imposing one null convention on every generated binding. Check the actual
485: absence of fields on the source-failure path; correct healthy amounts do not
486: establish the failure response shape. Follow the selected response schema
487: models for exact composition, item types, conditions and omission rules. Do not
488: use a qualification Boolean as readiness: a determined false qualification still
489: needs its explanation when that explanation is required by the contract. This is
490: response ownership, not permission to weaken controls, bypass source failure or
491: invent a zero price. Missing application fields still need explicit declarations.
492:
493: When accepted top-level field presence follows the application's final outcome,
494: use `ResponseProfile.field_outcomes` from the active schema. For example, source
495: context may be required for both a complete quote and a commercial refusal, but
496: absent when pricing cannot be determined. Reuse that final decision rather than
497: rebuilding source-selection and descendant-completeness predicates in pricing
498: values. This presence restriction only removes already-projected fields; normal
499: binding permissions and required-read checks still apply. Retain publication
500: guards for facts with their own independent conditions. Check a required-source
501: failure and a commercial refusal separately, since a complete-only guard would
502: incorrectly hide context in the refusal.
503:
504: Check this ownership against independent healthy, rejected-input and source-fault
505: expectations together. Assert required disclosure content and complete container
506: presence/absence, not merely that a key exists. Preserve unrelated failure cases
507: and distinguish a source-semantic defect from a response that misrepresents an
508: already observed failure before selecting a repair.
509:
510: Add independent response-target assertions using the expectation model's target,
511: type, pointer, precision, and null conventions. Retain the applicable native release
512: and applicable native assertions. A response assertion or business label cannot
513: replace native obligations. Missing projection is unavailable evidence, not an
514: object containing expected nulls. Verification prices once, keeps enabled
515: response observations in memory, and binds their exact content and profile to
516: the existing result check. Normal publication remains metadata, summary, and the
517: result check; no separate response file or full-report store is introduced.
518: Legacy diagnostic comparisons retain the fixed verification disclosure boundary.
519: An evaluated response-target presence assertion in that profile may display only
520: its canonical observed state (`present`, `null`, `absent`, `uncertain`, or `error`)
521: when the invocation has an available response observation. This diagnostic exception
522: exposes no response payload or native/response-alias values.
523:
524: The separate bounded `#review-case-{id}` appendix is restricted local-operator review
525: evidence. It can expose the actual compiled permitted business response alongside
526: its request and complete assertion inventory; it does not disclose arbitrary private
527: native facts or change the legacy comparison profile. The host controls artifact
528: access/redaction. Failed or missing projection remains unavailable, never an expected
529: null or absent pointer. `REVIEW_COMPARISON_UNAVAILABLE` blocks evidence validation
530: when a failed comparison cannot be disclosed sufficiently for the proposed business
531: exception; a hidden mismatch cannot receive informed exception approval. Do not
532: re-read sources or evaluate expressions to reconstruct withheld evidence.
533:
534: ### Sandbox policy and verification calls
535:
536: Use Bash with `pricing-engine policy <action>`; the narrow
537: [early quote check](#early-quote-checks) uses `package run_quote`. Pricing actions use
538: `SOURCE_PROJECT`; verification uses the shared `WORK_ROOT`, never a purpose
539: subdirectory. Bash runs in `/scratch`; use absolute paths for `--project` and
540: other workspace-root arguments, retaining engine-defined project-relative flags.
541:
542: Write only the destinations listed for the selected action. Fixed CSVs and prior
543: accepted evidence remain unchanged; preserve earlier revisions before replacement.
544: These destinations are workflow constraints, not tool allowlist parameters.
545:
546: Exact arguments and write destinations appear with their owning action:
547: [early quote checks](#early-quote-checks),
548: [compile](#compile-sandbox-call),
549: [verification authoring and inspection](#verification-authoring-sandbox-calls),
550: [verify](#verify-sandbox-call).
551:
552: ## 2. Maintain and compile the policy
553:
554: Maintain one current `policy/pricing_policy_input.yaml` using the schema's
555: `PricingPolicyInput` and its referenced declarations.
556:
557: - Map declarations to captured requirements and established evidence. Use
558: current operation shapes and supported bound patterns. Matching names alone
559: do not establish correctness.
560: - Use optional `commercial_terms` only when its schema-defined complete
561: root-level boundary applies. Keep confirmed business meaning in alignment and
562: executable declarations, and effective selected records consistent across
563: calculations and controls.
564: - Preserve quantity, rate, and ratio meanings, units, money phases, quantization,
565: and required components. Apply the shared
566: [meaning roles and quantity unit fallback](../README.md#meaning-roles) to
567: inputs, literals, and declared outputs without changing values or explicit
568: conversion rules.
569: - Repair owning declarations without weakening requirements or replacing them
570: with prose defaults. If a diagnostic recurs, inspect the operand/dependency
571: chain and prior changes. For source changes, follow shared
572: [meaning compatibility](../README.md#meaning-compatibility) and
573: [forward-only corrections](../README.md#forward-only-corrections).
574:
575: ### Authoring policy input
576:
577: Follow the schema's distinction between permissive authoring input and strict
578: executable policy, then compile the complete input.
579: Follow the active input schema's presence and explicit default contracts.
580: Keep omitted facts distinct from supplied null or zero; do not add a normalization
581: option merely to preserve the typed request's existing absence behavior.
582: For a repeated calculation across periods or categories, use one existing
583: population/row-flow rule with stable item identities and shared rate selections
584: at their valid owner. Keep only genuine business exceptions separate. Reuse
585: existing named patterns where their contracts fit; retain per-item missingness,
586: guards, rounding and publication permissions rather than expanding the same formula
587: into a separate declaration for every month.
588:
589: ### Policy compilation
590:
591: The sole request admission contract is `typed_v2`. Omission selects it and
592: compiled declarations record it explicitly; `legacy_v1` is rejected. Do not remove
593: the selector to recover numeric-string coercion, implicit zero defaults, unknown
594: field filtering, or source-first request validation. Use the active schema for
595: accepted native tokens and explicitly declared presence rules. Existing packages
596: that depended on retired semantics require fresh authoring and verification.
597: When reusing older artifacts, review their required/optional fields, defaults,
598: coercion and rejection/output assumptions against accepted intent and the current
599: schema before reuse. Update owning declarations explicitly and retain original
600: requests, independent answers and failures. Never remove required fields, insert
601: zero for unknown facts or change expected codes just to make an old artifact pass.
602:
603: Compile against accepted sources before preparing verification declarations.
604:
605: ```bash
606: pricing-engine policy compile --project "<SOURCE_PROJECT>" --input "<WORK_ROOT>/policy/pricing_policy_input.yaml" --output "<WORK_ROOT>/pricing_spec.yaml"
607: ```
608:
609: - **Success.** Writes the bare canonical Policy to `pricing_spec.yaml`, the sole
610: machine-readable pricing authority. The compact stdout summary carries
611: `command`, `project`, `input`, output `spec`, `contract_valid`, `spec_sha256`,
612: policy identity and `source_validation`. Keep returned metadata separately.
613: - **Failure.** Replaces the same path with `valid: false` and `diagnostics`.
614: Policy loaders reject this output. Derived documentation and candidate
615: selection stay pending. An older success cannot serve as the current policy.
616: Retry from the maintained input without requiring a valid existing output.
617: - **Scope.** Checks structure, source compatibility, evidence, and expression dependencies.
618: Collects independent source, optional Request, policy, and expression findings
619: in order. Failed prerequisites block dependent checks, and malformed documents
620: or expressions may stop their atomic validator. Partial policies and plans
621: cannot qualify.
622: - **Authority.** Retains `operator_confirmation: not_granted`. Compilation
623: neither invents rules nor establishes alignment or business correctness.
624: Candidate selection and revision comparison consume YAML. Commands neither
625: generate nor parse `pricing_requirements_alignment.md`; separately referenced text evidence
626: may be Markdown.
627:
628: ### Compile sandbox call
629:
630: Use the command above with the [shared sandbox conventions](#sandbox-policy-and-verification-calls).
631: The only write destination is `<WORK_ROOT>/pricing_spec.yaml`, including failure
632: diagnostics. Retain prior bytes before replacing them and inspect both the
633: returned result and the written output.
634:
635: ### Resolve check issues and author answers
636:
637: Follow the [issue-resolution loop](#resolve-supported-issues-before-escalating).
638: Inspect each diagnostic's `code`, `message`, `location`, `details`, and available
639: `remedy`. Review all returned diagnostics together; independent checks can run
640: after an earlier error. If `DOCUMENT_BOUND` reports `collection_complete: false`,
641: repair the reported prefix and rerun to obtain remaining findings. Repair
642: representation when established meaning determines the fix; route missing or
643: disputed meaning to its owner with the affected rule and consequence, accepting
644: unknown answers and grouping related questions.
645:
646: Record each actual answer and evidence, then update the owning input
647: without changing unaffected rules or unrelated unresolved facts. When an operator
648: answer establishes an inferred field or literal meaning, correct its declaration as needed,
649: set `origin: operator`, `status: established`, and the actual reference, and close
650: only that question. Apply the answer to the affected alignment unit and its dependencies. Rerun compilation
651: until all current issues are resolved; the maintained input needs no valid old
652: output. Use the [repair routes](#repair-routes) for dependent refreshes.
653:
654: ### Inspect compilation
655:
656: Configuration diagnostics use document-relative dotted `location` paths and
657: zero-based indexes, such as `values.total.expression.args.1.ref`; `$` means the
658: whole object. `message` explains the failure, `remedy` gives the repair action,
659: and `details.current_value` records the offending value. Details may include
660: available identifiers, meanings, bounds, and related locations. Row-flow findings
661: point to authored declarations rather than generated names. Multiple issues retain
662: lossless `details.path` components and `details.value_present`, distinguishing a
663: missing field from explicit null. Diagnostic values are evidence, not defaults.
664:
665: Compilation checks source authority and evidence on actual inputs, literals,
666: row fields, and declared running totals. `origin: inference` cannot have
667: `status: established`. Resolve disputed meanings using actual governing evidence;
668: independent source and expression findings remain applicable.
669:
670: After technical repairs, compare requirements, selectors, source meanings, units,
671: authority, fallbacks, controls, and publications with the retained prior revision. Changed/deleted
672: conditions, ordering, controls, outputs, or source constraints need stated commercial
673: consequences and applicable confirmation; successful checks do not establish parity.
674:
675: ### Classify policy gaps
676:
677: Before changing declarations, classify the policy gap:
678:
679: | Classification | Meaning |
680: |---|---|
681: | `direct` | Natively expressible rule |
682: | `supported decomposition` | Expressible using bounded row populations, source collections, selections, or existing financial operations |
683: | `unsupported` | Required operation absent from the expression contract |
684: | `missing authority` | Source/request binding unestablished |
685: | `incomplete policy` | Required input, guard, control, or publication absent |
686:
687: ### Pricing expression reference
688:
689: Use the supplied Task 3 execution schema for exact expression syntax. These contracts own
690: operation semantics and examples within confirmed project scope.
691:
692: #### Prior business facts
693:
694: Use accepted sources or declared native inputs for prior business facts required
695: by a calculation. Retain the accepted authority, ordering and missing-data
696: behavior. Raise unsupported requirements through the existing feasibility and
697: review process.
698:
699: #### Source-backed collections
700:
701: Row-flow populations may be produced directly from an accepted source with
702: `row_flows.*.population.from.kind: source`; do not repeat source populations as
703: request input. Follow `Population` and `SourceCollection` in the supplied schema
704: for field projection, required membership, ordering, bounds and identity.
705: For Cloud Tables the engine sends supported filters and ordering to the API,
706: collects every matching page and applies remaining native predicates/order rules.
707: Local sources use their captured rows. The engine validates required fields,
708: primary keys and relevant relationships in the resulting scope, then executes
709: those rows through the ordinary row flow. A `SourceCollectionReceipt` retains the source,
710: owning `row_flow`, selected primary keys, filter expression, ordering, bound, duplicate policy, row count and snapshot
711: evidence. Empty collections are represented explicitly and never confused with
712: missing or invalid source data. Collection order is declared by source fields;
713: file order is not a business rule.
714:
715: Source collections can be used in a row scope. Correlation expressions may use
716: the current request and the parent row (`item_field_get`), allowing a
717: bounded parent-to-child source lookup. Unknown fields, duplicate primary keys,
718: and collection overflow fail compilation or execution with diagnostics rather
719: than dropping rows.
720:
721: #### Expression models and canonical operation names
722:
723: Follow the operation-specific expression definitions in the supplied schema
724: for canonical names, operands, options, and conditional field requirements.
725: Unsupported operations fail at their authored location; use the schema and actual
726: diagnostics to correct the owning input. Serialization preserves explicitly
727: supplied options and omits unrelated defaults.
728:
729: Expression names do not rename policy sections or dependency/evidence tokens:
730: `input:quantity`, `selection:terms`, and `row_count:lines.active` retain their
731: existing meaning. `source_row_get` reads an already normalized row; CSV loading,
732: row filtering, ordering, and fallback remain in the catalog and selection flow.
733:
734: Data reads resolve `ref` only within their declared domain: caller inputs, calculated values,
735: aggregates, the current source row, or a named selection's effective row/receipt.
736: `selection_state_is` tests the receipt state directly; `selection_state_get`
737: preserves uncertain/error receipt states. Neither turns a held selection or blank
738: cell into an effective source fact. Record queries and row reductions retain
739: their completeness, ordering and population bounds. Source filtering, ordering
740: and receipts remain declared by selections and source collections; expression
741: reads add no CSV or database retrieval capability.
742:
743: Expression leaves:
744:
745: ```yaml
746: {op: input_get, ref: quantity}
747: {op: value_get, ref: total}
748: {op: source_row_get, ref: sku} # selection row scope only
749: {op: selection_field_get, ref: offer_terms, field: rate} # effective row only
750: {op: selection_state_get, ref: offer_terms}
751: {op: literal, literal: '0.35', schema: {type: string, format: pricing-decimal, x-pricing: {role: ratio, scale: ratio}}, evidence: {origin: source_owner, reference: contract.md, status: established}}
752: ```
753:
754: Use the relevant schema expression definition for composition and operand order.
755: The examples illustrate business interpretation, not a parallel operation catalog.
756:
757: #### Bounded list sorting
758:
759: Bounded input and computed lists can supply row-flow populations. Source populations
760: retain their accepted-source production and receipt contracts. Follow `JsonSchema`
761: and the sort expression in the supplied schema for recursive items, fixed-object
762: properties, bounds, keys and direction. Sorting produces a new list without
763: changing the operand. For example:
764:
765: ```yaml
766: inputs:
767: type: object
768: properties:
769: scores:
770: type: array
771: x-pricing:
772: role: collection
773: items:
774: type: string
775: format: pricing-decimal
776: x-pricing:
777: role: number
778: maxItems: 100
779: description: Candidate scores to rank.
780: x-evidence:
781: origin: source_owner
782: reference: scoring-contract.md
783: status: established
784: required:
785: - scores
786: additionalProperties: false
787: values:
788: ordered_scores:
789: expression:
790: op: sort
791: args:
792: - op: input_get
793: ref: scores
794: direction: desc
795: ```
796:
797: When sorting candidate objects, retain each complete object and the input order
798: of equal-key items. For example:
799:
800: ```yaml
801: inputs:
802: type: object
803: properties:
804: candidates:
805: type: array
806: x-pricing:
807: role: collection
808: items:
809: type: object
810: properties:
811: candidate_id:
812: type: string
813: x-pricing:
814: role: identifier
815: scope: candidate
816: score:
817: type: string
818: format: pricing-decimal
819: x-pricing:
820: role: number
821: required:
822: - candidate_id
823: - score
824: additionalProperties: false
825: maxItems: 100
826: description: Candidate identities and scores.
827: x-evidence:
828: origin: source_owner
829: reference: scoring-contract.md
830: status: established
831: required:
832: - candidates
833: additionalProperties: false
834: values:
835: ordered_candidates:
836: expression:
837: op: sort
838: args:
839: - op: input_get
840: ref: candidates
841: key: score
842: direction: desc
843: ```
844:
845: The complete list is rejected for a wrong container, an over-bound list, an
846: invalid item value or an undeclared object field; no valid-looking prefix is used.
847: A missing required non-key field remains missing on the retained item. A sort key
848: must be present and valid. Whole-value publication and independent expected
849: answers still require their complete declared value.
850: Follow the sort definition for key applicability. Missing, uncertain, and error
851: operands propagate unchanged.
852: Sorting consumes bounded work and preserves dependencies, evidence, exact
853: Decimal values, and stable equal-key order.
854:
855: Lists may contain supported scalars, fixed objects or further homogeneous lists.
856: Sorting admits the numeric/temporal shapes documented by `SortExpr`; generalized
857: list storage does not supply custom comparators, nested sort keys or null placement.
858: A bounded list expression, including `sort` or `value_get`, can be a row-flow
859: population. Filtering, map, take, Top-K, indexing and concatenation are separate
860: capabilities. Publish a sorted list with its exact recursive meaning.
861:
862: #### Percentage conversion
863:
864: Follow the percentage-conversion definitions for operand requirements. Their
865: business calculations are:
866:
867: | Operation | Input scale | Calculation | Output scale |
868: |---|---|---|---|
869: | `percent_to_ratio` | `percentage_points` | Divide by 100: `15` becomes `0.15` | `ratio` |
870: | `ratio_to_percent` | `ratio` | Multiply by 100: `0.15` becomes `15` | `percentage_points` |
871:
872: Scope, phase, dependencies, selection provenance, evidence, and unresolved
873: presence states are preserved. `ratio_to_percent` accepts zero, negative ratios,
874: and ratios above one without clamping; `-0.2624` becomes `-26.24`, and `2` becomes
875: `200`. A percentage-point operand or a non-ratio fact fails its analysis with
876: `RATIO_SCALE`. Supply an established normalized ratio and convert once; the
877: operation does not authorize relabelling a number, monetary amount, or physical
878: quantity as a ratio. The inverse conversion retains its existing `PERCENT_SCALE`
879: diagnostic.
880:
881: Arithmetic requires normalized ratios. Multiplying a ratio by a dimensionless
882: number of `100` preserves `scale: ratio`; use `ratio_to_percent` when a calculated
883: value needs percentage-point meaning. Conversion uses the existing Decimal
884: precision of 38 and adds no quantization. Apply `quantize` after conversion to
885: round in percentage points:
886:
887: ```yaml
888: op: quantize
889: args:
890: - op: ratio_to_percent
891: args:
892: - {op: value_get, ref: normalized_movement}
893: places: 3
894: rounding: HALF_EVEN
895: ```
896:
897: For `normalized_movement = 0.1125749`, conversion alone yields `11.25749` and this

(Output capped. Showing lines 1-897. Use offset=898 to continue.)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:52 AM

Continue Task 3 from the saved, compiling draft and the accepted requirements revision 4. Focus this turn on finishing the required three-position comparison response, including independent option ownership and the expected minimum-anchor unavailable slot. Exercise the actual response for the full C14 comparison and C17. Continue with the documented source-fault and input-rejection behavior as supported. Preserve the accepted requirements and independent expected results. If a specific requirement cannot be represented after testing the supported capability, document the exact observed failure, commands, affected cases, and what would unblock it.

Thinking

**Inspecting C17 requirements**

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:52 AM

I’ll work from the accepted requirements and saved draft, then exercise the requested comparison cases against the actual response.

Agent activity 5 items

read · /constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/task3/schema.yaml · limit: 180, offset: 4337

Call ID: call_fbe6dcc96d6d4e41ab3563f42708c421|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57e50b0c087d087dfb6dc897d582dArguments

{
  "file_path": "/constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/task3/schema.yaml",
  "limit": 180,
  "offset": 4337
}

Result

<path>/constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/task3/schema.yaml</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
4337:   PolicyInput_ResponseOffer:
4338:     additionalProperties: false
4339:     description: One semantic offer slot backed by its independent native row scope.
4340:     properties:
4341:       flow:
4342:         description: Declared independent root offer flow. Its one native occurrence
4343:           owns availability, permitted price publications and all descendants; a missing
4344:           occurrence retains an unpriced semantic slot rather than disappearing.
4345:         pattern: ^[a-z][a-z0-9_]*$
4346:         title: Flow
4347:         type: string
4348:       offer_code:
4349:         description: Stable semantic offer identity retained even when its required
4350:           catalog row is unavailable. Distinct across this complete offer set.
4351:         minLength: 1
4352:         title: Offer Code
4353:         type: string
4354:       display_name:
4355:         description: Established semantic fallback name when validated catalog presentation
4356:           is unavailable. This metadata supplies no numeric amount or price authority.
4357:         minLength: 1
4358:         title: Display Name
4359:         type: string
4360:       display_name_publication:
4361:         anyOf:
4362:         - pattern: ^[a-z][a-z0-9_]*$
4363:           type: string
4364:         - type: 'null'
4365:         default: null
4366:         description: Optional permitted text publication in the offer scope containing
4367:           validated catalog presentation. Its present value replaces display_name;
4368:           unavailable presentation retains the semantic fallback.
4369:         title: Display Name Publication
4370:       identity:
4371:         anyOf:
4372:         - $ref: '#/$defs/PolicyInput_ResponseOfferIdentity'
4373:         - type: 'null'
4374:         default: null
4375:         description: Optional public identity projection of this same semantic offer
4376:           slot. Code, optional existing display name and fixed text metadata persist
4377:           for available/unavailable/unpriced slots; input rejection still returns
4378:           no slots. Status, reason and root outcome/issues remain native-owned and
4379:           unchanged. Omission preserves offer_code/display_name presentation and existing
4380:           serialization. All business and financial fields below remain available-only.
4381:       fields:
4382:         additionalProperties:
4383:           $ref: '#/$defs/PolicyInput_ResponseBinding'
4384:         description: Typed response fields read only for a natively available offer
4385:           whose shared and local scope has no mapped invalid/incomplete business finding,
4386:           using the existing bindings in that offer's row scope. Never read private
4387:           values or recover withheld amounts. Identity, status and reason members
4388:           are protected.
4389:         minProperties: 1
4390:         propertyNames:
4391:           minLength: 1
4392:         title: Fields
4393:         type: object
4394:       required:
4395:         description: Distinct named available-offer fields that must be present and
4396:           nonnull. An unavailable required binding fails projection; it cannot silently
4397:           produce an available partial price. Nested required members retain their
4398:           existing binding checks.
4399:         items:
4400:           minLength: 1
4401:           type: string
4402:         title: Required
4403:         type: array
4404:     required:
4405:     - flow
4406:     - offer_code
4407:     - display_name
4408:     - fields
4409:     title: PolicyInput_ResponseOffer
4410:     type: object
4411:   PolicyInput_ResponseOfferIdentity:
4412:     additionalProperties: false
4413:     description: Public identity metadata for the existing native semantic offer slot.
4414:     properties:
4415:       code_field:
4416:         description: Required public member for the slot's existing semantic offer_code.
4417:           Renames its presentation without changing native identity, availability,
4418:           issue attribution or source ownership.
4419:         minLength: 1
4420:         title: Code Field
4421:         type: string
4422:       display_name_field:
4423:         anyOf:
4424:         - minLength: 1
4425:           type: string
4426:         - type: 'null'
4427:         default: null
4428:         description: Optional public member for the slot's existing permitted catalog
4429:           display name or semantic fallback. null omits the name member; it does not
4430:           suppress source validation or change native facts.
4431:         title: Display Name Field
4432:       metadata:
4433:         additionalProperties:
4434:           minLength: 1
4435:           type: string
4436:         description: Fixed nonempty text metadata retained in every admitted slot
4437:           state, such as an established business kind or audience. No calculations,
4438:           numeric constants, input/source reads or permission declarations. Code,
4439:           optional name, metadata and available-only body members must be distinct;
4440:           status and reason remain protected.
4441:         propertyNames:
4442:           minLength: 1
4443:         title: Metadata
4444:         type: object
4445:     required:
4446:     - code_field
4447:     title: PolicyInput_ResponseOfferIdentity
4448:     type: object
4449:   PolicyInput_ResponseOfferLabels:
4450:     additionalProperties: false
4451:     properties:
4452:       invalid:
4453:         default: invalid
4454:         minLength: 1
4455:         title: Invalid
4456:         type: string
4457:       incomplete:
4458:         default: incomplete
4459:         minLength: 1
4460:         title: Incomplete
4461:         type: string
4462:       partial:
4463:         default: partial
4464:         minLength: 1
4465:         title: Partial
4466:         type: string
4467:       complete:
4468:         default: complete
4469:         minLength: 1
4470:         title: Complete
4471:         type: string
4472:     title: PolicyInput_ResponseOfferLabels
4473:     type: object
4474:   PolicyInput_ResponseOfferSet:
4475:     additionalProperties: false
4476:     description: 'Complete ordered business offer presentation over native availability.
4477: 
4478: 
4479:       Input findings preserve original locators and are presented in declared input
4480: 
4481:       field order by default, with numeric original list positions and lexical unknown
4482:       keys.
4483: 
4484:       This presentation order never changes prerequisite evaluation or native facts.'
4485:     properties:
4486:       field:
4487:         default: options
4488:         description: Protected response member for the complete ordered offer list.
4489:           Input-invalid or incomplete invocation returns an empty list; a valid request
4490:           retains every configured semantic slot.
4491:         minLength: 1
4492:         title: Field
4493:         type: string
4494:       on_input_rejection:
4495:         default: empty
4496:         description: 'Presence of the offer-list member after actual input rejection:
4497:           empty list by default, or omit. Does not hide status/issues or change admission,
4498:           source access or native rejection evidence.'
4499:         enum:
4500:         - empty
4501:         - omit
4502:         title: On Input Rejection
4503:         type: string
4504:       status_field:
4505:         default: status
4506:         description: Public field for every slot's availability. A mapped invalid/incomplete
4507:           business finding in its shared or local scope makes an otherwise natively
4508:           available slot unpriced; native release and sibling permissions remain unchanged.
4509:           Presentation only; cannot collide with identity, reason or body members.
4510:         minLength: 1
4511:         title: Status Field
4512:         type: string
4513:       status_labels:
4514:         additionalProperties:
4515:           minLength: 1
4516:           type: string

(Showing lines 4337-4516 of 7874. Use offset=4517 to continue.)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 8:53 AM
The C17 diagnostic confirmed the available prices but returned native incomplete. Please make one focused implementation change now: use the supported guarded row owner for the inapplicable second annual option, with that option's complete selection, capture, calculation and publication cone inside the guard. The first annual option and on-demand must stay independently evaluable. The Task 3 guide's Source failure ownership section describes this case. Apply the supported change in the existing draft, then compile and rerun C17 and C14. This turn can stop after saving that increment and its evidence. If the change is blocked by a concrete native diagnostic, retain that diagnostic and state the specific limitation.
Thinking
**Reading the guide**
AssistantNov 12, 2026, 8:53 AM
I’ll check the documented guard pattern against the existing draft, then apply and test the focused change.
Agent activity 5 items
bash · command: grep -n -i -A 70 -B 4 'Source failure ownership' /constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/referen...
Call ID: call_6494e61e40e54e2486eefc53d562cd27|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af57e8181dc87d096efbaa217eb05b7Arguments
{ "command": "grep -n -i -A 70 -B 4 'Source failure ownership' /constructs/projects/agent-guided-pricing/references/task3/README.md", "description": "Locate guarded offer ownership guidance", "timeoutMs": 10000, "workdir": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0" }

UserNov 12, 2026, 9:22 AM

Continue the same Build from the repaired saved files. C17 now returns a complete public comparison with annual_2 unavailable, and C14 retains the expected three totals. Read steps/verification/implementation-repair.md and the actual steps/verification/check_run.yaml first. The compiled pricing_spec.yaml, revalidated sources/sources.yaml, and 208-case verification/verification_spec.yaml are already in the existing work directory. The independent acceptance answers, raw CSVs and accepted requirement revision are preserved. The source declaration repair scopes runtime checks to applicable rows and independent options. Please reconcile these saved files to Task 3, index their current revisions, and present the exact combined policy/scenario execution review for the existing verification workflow. The user authorizes executing the exact current verification candidate and wants full packaging once it qualifies. Any failures remain visible, and there are no agreed exceptions or skips.

AssistantNov 12, 2026, 9:22 AM

I’ll inspect the saved repair and verification results first, then reconcile them with the existing Task 3 workflow.

Agent activity 16 items

read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286...ification/implementation-repair.md · limit: 2000, offset: 1

Call ID: call_70a508fd92af4cac9f520a2ef753b839|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af5856df97887d0bc9e3c38f03f0426Arguments

{
  "file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/verification/implementation-repair.md",
  "limit": 2000,
  "offset": 1
}

Result

<path>/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/verification/implementation-repair.md</path>
<type>file</type>
<content>
1: # Aoodle AI implementation repair and verification scope
2: 
3: The previous draft used predecessor and successor annual calculations as required
4: quote-wide publications. At exactly 1,000 runs per month the predecessor did
5: not exist. That absence made the native result incomplete and no business
6: comparison was projected.
7: 
8: The repaired policy uses independent native flows for annual_1, annual_2, and
9: on_demand. Annual_1 owns the selected lower anchor or the minimum anchor.
10: Annual_2 has an explicit commercial availability check and publishes no price
11: when the second package does not apply. The public C17 comparison is complete,
12: with USD 24,000 for annual_1 and annual_2 marked unavailable. C14 preserves the
13: three expected annual totals and the complete option breakdowns.
14: 
15: The quote-time source mappings now validate the paid offers in independent
16: partitions. They apply shared price-book integrity checks to applicable records
17: and keep selected meter, SKU, allowance, and rate checks within their dependent
18: offers. The original nine CSVs, business source interpretation, accepted pricing
19: requirements, and independently specified outcomes are the basis for the repair.
20: 
21: The native verification specification contains 208 structured requests from
22: families C01 through C20 and isolated fixture copies. The malformed JSON, duplicate
23: JSON member, and non-object request variants require the package transport parser.
24: The independent transport probes preserve the original raw request bytes. Native
25: assertions on early source errors require the complete admitted assumptions,
26: including the optional AI amount and its default flag. Candidate evaluation
27: must preserve any observed mismatch. No exceptions or skipped checks are agreed.

(End of file - total 27 lines)
</content>

UserNov 12, 2026, 9:29 AM
The authorized engine run has finished in the same work directory. Read steps/verification/run-c17-repair-cli.yaml and steps/verification/technical-issue-report.md. C17 passed 6/6 and C14 passed. The native suite completed 208 cases with 205 PASS, 3 FAIL and evidence-validation PASS. Three C18 source-condition failures withhold all prices correctly but omit the admitted AI amount and assumed-zero flag. The checked artifact and summary are in steps/verification/run-c17-repair/. Please record these exact outcomes in the current Task 3 state and index the repair, verification receipt and issue report. If an existing supported declaration preserves all assumptions without making local source faults suppress healthy offers, apply and verify it. Otherwise leave packaging pending with this concrete technical blocker. No verification exception or skip is approved.
Thinking
**Reading**
AssistantNov 12, 2026, 9:30 AM
I’ll inspect the run receipt and issue report, then record the exact results and check the supported response-preservation options.
Agent activity 16 items
read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286...rification/run-c17-repair-cli.yaml · limit: 300, offset: 1
Call ID: call_3c856f79ebe14c5cb1516f491e082c34|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af5871bbafc87d0bd367a359049ea8eArguments
{ "file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/verification/run-c17-repair-cli.yaml", "limit": 300, "offset": 1 }
UserNov 12, 2026, 10:18 AM
I fixed and installed the pricing engine C18 support (7fafc294) and authorized retrying this same simulation through packaging. The repaired candidate and completed exact evidence are already present in steps/. Please continue Build in the existing authoring state. The policy now uses admitted default and admitted_missing inputs for the two AI assumption fields. The accepted source and requirements documents and fixtures were preserved. The exact new candidate policy SHA-256 is 4d997c1cc525a3d9c9f5bb2b543b0b3f54dcfceb97cd4bc6d41c0a46bb7b763d. Read steps/verification/run-c18-retry-cli.yaml, the top of its result check, and the first few lines of steps/test_result_alignment.md; the latter includes the full 208-case review and checked case links. The 208 cases / 2011 assertions and evidence validation all passed with no exceptions/skips. The native verification spec already reflects the candidate; no rerun or policy rewrite is needed. Re-register the changed candidate artifacts and current evidence, register steps/test_result_alignment.md, and create the explicit Build results-review acceptance Action bound to the exact review resource and current evidence. Update the verification subtasks through the final review in progress. Return the Action promptly so I can submit the exact acceptance and proceed to Task 4. Use the current saved files and avoid reading the multi-megabyte full summary.
AssistantNov 12, 2026, 10:18 AM
I’ll verify the saved retry receipt and review document, then register the current evidence and open the required results review.
Agent activity 10 items
read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286...erification/run-c18-retry-cli.yaml · limit: 100, offset: 1
Call ID: call_983719644d9849ec95e3a5fcaf21af45|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af5927f0b7887d0a2fbe4581fed8e18
UserNov 12, 2026, 10:21 AM
I confirm the verification results understanding and accept the exact registered steps/test_result_alignment.md version 1 (SHA-256 1a8d1ce975347764780a1c021bd69bb8be6ac77453f92b01e26248103c07dcf8), bound to verification/run-c18-retry and its result check and metadata. All 208 cases and 2,011 assertions matched, with evidence validation PASS and no exceptions or skips. Complete Task 3 and proceed to the checked package in this same Build. The current inspection verification/inspection-c18-retry.yaml has zero gaps; verification/reconciliation-c18-retry.md reconciles accepted intent with the current run. Register those artifacts and complete the reconciliation subtask. The package has already been assembled at steps/application; read steps/application_readiness.md, steps/verification/package-layout.yaml, and the compact count/digest from steps/verification/package-execution.json (25 checks PASS and byte-identical inventory). Use these actual checked files, register the application directory as a Build artifact with solution_software_type application and is_runtime_dependency true, and register the readiness and package evidence as non-runtime artifacts. Mark the completed packaging preparation and call prepare_authoring_delivery for runtime manual, package receipt, and exact final acceptance Action. Keep Build open for that Action. No need to rebuild, rerun verification, read huge logs, or publish.
Thinking
**Reading batches**
AssistantNov 12, 2026, 10:21 AM
I’ll reconcile the accepted results with the saved package checks, then prepare the application for final review if those checks support it.
Agent activity 17 items
read · /conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d14286...cation/reconciliation-c18-retry.md · limit: 200, offset: 1
UserNov 12, 2026, 10:24 AM
I diagnosed the exact stale resource by comparing every current indexed file to its live SHA-256. The sole stale file is steps/verification/check_run.yaml, which was regenerated for the C18 candidate. The Clarify scope history is unrelated: require_stage_ready checks the current resource index. Re-register that existing Build artifact with the same artifact_uri, artifact_file_path, name, description, and non-runtime flag using patch_authoring_state.index.add_artifacts. This refreshes the exact current digest without touching any confirmed review or past history. All four Tasks are already completed and the package files are checked. Then call prepare_authoring_delivery again and return the runtime-generated final acceptance Action and passed receipt. Do not rerun the pricing checks or change any package files except the runtime-owned manual preparation.
AssistantNov 12, 2026, 10:24 AM
I’ll refresh the readiness-check registration and retry delivery preparation without changing the checked package.
Agent activity 3 items
patch_authoring_state · expected_stage_id: build, index: {"add_artifacts":[{"artifact_uri":"/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d142...
Call ID: call_8cfc558728084bfd8feddf42a402dd48|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af593c9653487d0b217110341910761Arguments
{ "expected_stage_id": "build", "index": { "add_artifacts": [ { "artifact_uri": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/verification/check_run.yaml", "artifact_file_path": "/conversation/authoring/f0f75141bd7d1428682a461043c35cc0/steps/verification/check_run.yaml", "artifact_name": "Verification readiness check", "artifact_description": "Saved scenario compilation and inventory; not execution evidence.", "stage_id": "build", "is_runtime_dependency": false } ] } }
UserNov 12, 2026, 10:25 AM
I accept the completed work for this simulation, including the exact current application package and manual, the readiness review, and fixed delivery 00d29c45a497dffd328b94f00d6bc7c4. The final runtime package check is PASSED with validation_id delivery-validation:c73b6f95594810ab5aa05853513216e5. I checked the final package inventory and only the expected manual field changed in manifest.yaml. Finish Build by calling advance_authoring_stage with expected_stage_id build, this delivery_id, and a PASS review containing observed evidence for each declared check: source-check from the accepted source interpretation and sources/validation.yaml; requirements-check from the confirmed pricing requirements and cases; verification-check from the confirmed results and run-c18-retry (208/208 cases, 2011/2011 assertions, evidence PASS); and package-check with the exact runtime validation_id above plus the package layout/execution evidence. This is acceptance of local simulation delivery only. Do not deploy or publish.
AssistantNov 12, 2026, 10:25 AM
I’ll complete Build using the accepted delivery and its recorded validation evidence.
advance_authoring_stage · expected_stage_id: build, delivery_id: 00d29c45a497dffd328b94f00d6bc7c4, review: {"status":"PASS","check_re...
Call ID: call_4c6c2cbc047b44eb91802f22e6490a97|fc_0f69f22adf39f178016af59415736087d0903a4449ddc502f3Arguments
```
{
  "expected_stage_id": "build",
  "delivery_id": "00d29c45a497dffd328b94f00d6bc7c4",
  "review": {
    "status": "PASS",
    "check_results": [
      {
        "check_id": "source-check",
        "passed": true,
        "evidence": "The source interpretation was explicitly confirmed and sources/validation.yaml reports valid, catalog complete and semantic readiness."
      },
      {
        "check_id": "requirements-check",
        "passed": true,
        "evidence": "The complete pricing requirements and independent acceptance specifications were explicitly confirmed at revision 4."
      },
      {
        "check_id": "verification-check",
        "passed": true,
        "evidence": "The confirmed C18 retry verification reports 208 of 208 cases and 2,011 of 2,011 assertions passing, evidence validation PASS, with no skips or exceptions."
      },
      {
        "check_id": "package-check",
        "passed": true,
        "evidence": "The final application package receipt passed; package layout and packaged execution evidence also report successful checks.",
        "validation_id": "delivery-validation:c73b6f95594810ab5aa05853513216e5"
      }
    ],
    "findings": []
  }
}
```

Loading chat history…