Files
Open_Ultra_SAST/.kiro
Marius CiepluchandClaude Opus 5 d9d6dfdbcf docs(constrained-detector): 15 tasks in 5 groups, phase 1 able to end the feature
Design approved in session. Every one of the 36 criteria is claimed by a task.

Group 1 calls no model at all. The candidate enumerator, the ceiling report
and the stop-or-go reading are offline, so the condition that ends this
feature -- a deciding slice whose ceiling sits below its recorded detection
rate -- is reachable before a cent is spent. The ruleset variant of this same
design would have failed that condition at 12.1% against 64.9%.

Group 2 is the only work that touches scoring.py, and its observable is that
nothing changes: the recorded round-zero artifacts are the pin, and if they
cannot be reproduced exactly then the refactor is wrong, not the numbers.

Group 3 builds the detector, and task 3.3 is the test that would have caught
the defect this spec exists for -- two runs must make an identical sequence of
model calls. It lives in the suite and runs repeatedly, not in a one-off
measurement.

Group 4 is the maintainer's emphasis as code: deciding slices, development
slices, the cross-slice rejection by name, and the overfitting gap printed
beside every headline number.

Group 5 compares the two detectors per slice, re-measures the trajectory count
and the noise floor, and names -- without amending -- the learning-harness
requirements that a collapsed floor would retire.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <[email protected]>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01T7XD7x5KonMdmGRkp63EQG
2026-09-06 17:32:13 +02:00
..