connascence-quality-gate

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE

Purpose

Assess code for forms of connascence (name, type, meaning, timing, algorithm, position, execution) and enforce remediation gates before merge.

Trigger Conditions

• Positive: reviews focused on coupling/maintainability risk, architectural refactors, or release gates that target hidden dependencies.
• Negative: pure functionality debugging (use functionality-audit) or cosmetic linting only.

Guardrails

• Confidence ceiling: include Confidence: X.XX (ceiling: TYPE Y.YY) with ceilings {inference/report 0.70, research 0.85, observation/definition 0.95}.
• Evidence-first: Each connascence finding must cite file:line, connascence type, and impact (risk or cost) with a proposed decoupling strategy.
• Structure-first: Maintain examples and tests that show both detection and approved remediation patterns.
• Adversarial validation: Challenge borderline cases (intentional coupling, domain invariants) and mark waivers explicitly.

Execution Phases

1. Context & Scope
   • Identify modules or features under review and allowed coupling (domain invariants, protocol guarantees).
   • Exclude generated/vendor code unless coupling leaks into product code.
2. Detection & Classification
   • Scan for each connascence type; record evidence with severity (high if change ripple or hidden temporal ordering).
   • Note systemic patterns (shared globals, positional parameters, synchronized deployments).
3. Remediation Design
   • Propose refactors (interfaces, adapters, events, typed contracts, configuration) and expected impact.
   • Sequence fixes to minimize blast radius; align with product timelines.
4. Validation & Gate Decision
   • Require at least one mitigation path per critical finding before approval.
   • Document waivers with rationale and expiry; state confidence with ceiling.

Output Format

• Scope summary and allowed/forbidden coupling rules.
• Finding list with connascence type, file:line evidence, impact, and remediation.
• Gate decision (approve/block/waiver) with reasoning.
• Confidence statement using ceiling syntax.

Validation Checklist

• Scope and exemptions captured.
• Each finding includes connascence type, evidence, and remediation.
• Waivers include expiry and owner; blockers flagged.
• Examples/tests updated or queued.
• Confidence ceiling provided; English-only output.

Confidence: 0.71 (ceiling: inference 0.70) - SOP rewritten with Prompt Architect confidence discipline and Skill Forge structure-first guardrails.